CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 7 septembre 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s72C8F48C { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:36.6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-15.05pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .sC8636342 { border:0.75pt solid #808080; border-collapse:collapse } .sF5C9E8B1 { height:46.3pt } .sD1CDDC62 { border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .s2490CDBC { border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .s8DB21C27 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .s26ADB50A { border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sFD306575 { height:35.55pt } .s2F4AF114 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s87680A70 { margin-left:11.67pt; text-align:center; padding-left:6.18pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold } .s898DAE93 { border:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s299B0C57 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:0.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-0.45pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sB71F2881 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s87D0C75D { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sC2958733 { border:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .s94117A4F { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sBCA334AF { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s7CB6920E { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s62945D10 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   Communicated on 7 September 2018   THIRD SECTION Applications nos. 6809/18 and 15258/18 Anatoliy Yuryevich ZHUKOV against Russia and Igor Dmitriyevich BOCHAROV against Russia (see list appended) The applicants are Russian nationals living in different regions of the Russian Federation. The facts of the cases, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. A.     The circumstances of the cases Between 2016 and 2017 the applicants were confronted with the police officers during a police inquiry and road traffic situation. The confrontation led to the applicants being arrested and taken to the police premises. The police officers acknowledged that they used physical force and/or special means (handcuffs) against the applicants. According to the applicants, the degree of the force used against them was disproportionate to their resistance. The applicants’ injuries of different types and severity are confirmed by medical certificates. The police officers also sustained injuries. The applicants’ complaints about the police ill-treatment were rejected on the ground that their injuries were caused to them only in response to their resistance. They were subsequently prosecuted for and convicted of use of violence against police officers. The applicants’ personal details as well as other relevant information about the circumstances of their respective arrests and their attempts to complain about ill-treatment at domestic level are summarised in the Appendix. B.     Relevant domestic law and practice 1.     The Police Act Sections 18-20 of the Police Act 2011 (Federal Law no. 3-FZ of 7   February 2011) provide that -     a police officer may use physical force, special means or a weapon, -     when using physical force, special means or a weapon a police officer shall act depending on the situation, character and degree of dangerousness of the person, character and degree of resistance offered, at the same time the police officer shall endeavour to minimize the damage caused, -     a police officer is empowered to use physical force, including martial arts, to stop a criminal or administrative offence from being committed, arrest persons who have committed a criminal or administrative offence or overcome resistance to a lawful order, if non-violent methods are insufficient to ensure the discharge of his police duties; -     a police officer shall ensure that a person injured receives first aid, -     where the physical force used results in damage to health, and where special means or a weapon are used, a police officer shall submit a report about the use of physical force, special means or a weapon to his supervisor within twenty-four hours. The Police Act 1991 (Federal Law no. 1026-I of 18 April 1991) and respective by-laws contained similar provisions. 2.     Other by-laws The Instruction on the police officers’ execution of their obligations and rights in the police departments of the Ministry of the Interior after the persons are taken to the police custody (approved by the order no. 389 of the Ministry of the Interior of the Russian Federation on 30 April 2012) provides that -     a police officer on duty in the police custody shall inform his superior about all the cases when a person arrested and taken to the police custody has visible wounds, injuries or is in a state that requires urgent medical intervention; -     a police officer shall call an ambulance or take a person to a nearby hospital; -     a police officer shall find out the reasons and circumstances of the injuries sustained by the person concerned. In case the person concerned reports about violent actions that resulted in his injuries then the police officer shall receive a criminal complaint from the person, if not, then he shall draw up a reasoned report and register it in the Register of the criminal complaints. The instruction repeated the rules that were in force before its adoption. COMPLAINTS The applicants complain under Article 3 of the Convention about the excessive force used in the course of their confrontation with the police and about the lack of an effective investigation in this respect. The applicants also complain under Article 13 of the Convention that they did not have an effective domestic remedy at their disposal. COMMON QUESTIONS 1.     Having regard to the injuries found on the applicants after their confrontation with the police or the time spent by them in State custody, were the applicants subjected to torture, or inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention (see Kuzmenko v. Russia , no.   18541/04, § 43, 21 December 2010; Yudina v. Russia , no. 52327/08, §§   69-70, 10 July 2012; Borbála Kiss v. Hungary , no. 59214/11, § 36, 26   June 2012; Réti and Fizli v. Hungary , no. 31373/11, § 34, 25 September 2012; Darraj v. France , no. 34588/07, § 43, 4 November 2010; Douet v.   France , no. 16705/10, § 37, 3 October 2013; Dembele v. Switzerland , no.   74010/11, § 47, 24 September 2013; and Shishkovi v. Bulgaria , no.   17322/04, § 32, 25 March 2010)?   2.     Did the authorities carry out an effective official investigation into the applicants’ allegations of ill-treatment in the course of their confrontation with the police officers and/or arrest as required by Article 3 of the Convention (see Labita v.   Italy [GC], no.   26772/95, § 131, ECHR 2000 ‑ IV, and Lyapin v. Russia , no.   46956/09, §§   125-40, 24 July 2014)?   3.     Did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy or a combination of remedies for their complaints under Article 3 of the Convention, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?   APPENDIX No. Application no. Lodged on Applicant name date of birth place of residence Represented by Details about arrest, location of the police station, arrest record (if applicable) Report drawn up by the police officers about the circumstances of the arrest and use of force Medical evidence: date of examination, document type (date of the document) (description of injuries)   Applicants’ complaints about ill ‑ treatment to the domestic authorities (first complaint, latest refusal to open a criminal case and reasons for refusal, the latest domestic courts’ decision under Art. 125 CCP and reasoning) Date when criminal proceedings against the applicant into the use of violence against police officers were opened Applicants’ trial and appeal courts’ judgments and the results of the examination of their allegations of ill ‑ treatment, if any   6809/18 12/01/2018 Anatoliy Yuryevich ZHUKOV 17/06/1985   Ivanovo   Aleksey Nikolayevich LAPTEV 05/11/2016 (around 10 p.m.)   Arrest at the applicant’s flat by the police officers   Police station no. 4, Ivanovo ( ОП-4 УМВД России по Фрунзенскому району г. Иваново )   06/11/2016 (around 00.50 a.m.) Taken to the hospital where he underwent a surgery No information No medical acts in the case file. As follows from the authorities’ decisions:   27/02/2017 Extract from forensic medical examination report no. 415   (fracture of the sixth left rib followed by the rupture of the left lung)   30/03/2017 Extract from forensic medical examination report no. 776   (injury caused by the continuing pressure of a hard blunt object) 22/11/2016 First complaint to the investigative committee   04/05/2017 Refusal to open a criminal case   (the applicant aggressively resisted, disobeyed lawful orders of the officers to follow to the police station, struck on officer’s head, the applicant was handcuffed, the force used against the applicant was reasonable and adequate)   31/05/2017 Frunzenskiy District Court in Ivanovo   (the police officers acted in accordance with law, the use of force was not disproportionate)   12/07/2017 Ivanovskiy Regional Court   (upheld the reasoning of the first instance court) Not indicated 24/05/2017 Frunzenskiy District Court in Ivanovo   Convicted of the use of violence against a public officer   31/07/2017 Ivanovskiy Regional Court (upheld the conviction) No. Application no. Lodged on Applicant name date of birth place of residence Represented by Details about arrest, location of the police station, arrest record (if applicable) Report drawn up by the police officers about the circumstances of the arrest and use of force Medical evidence: date of examination, document type (date of the document) (description of injuries)   Applicants’ complaints about ill ‑ treatment to the domestic authorities (first complaint, latest refusal to open a criminal case and reasons for refusal, the latest domestic courts’ decision under Art. 125 CCP and reasoning) Date when criminal proceedings against the applicant into the use of violence against police officers were opened Applicants’ trial and appeal courts’ judgments and the results of the examination of their allegations of ill ‑ treatment, if any   15258/18 20/03/2018 Igor Dmitriyevich BOCHAROV 15/06/1966   Lgov   Igor Nikolayevich SHOLOKHOV 23/10/2016 (around 10 p.m.)   Arrest outdoors by two traffic police officers on suspicion of having committed a road traffic offence   Zheleznodorozhnyy police department, Kursk ( Железнодорожный отдел полиции г.   Курска )   24/10/2016 (at 1.35 a.m.) Taken to the hospital   08/11/2016 Discharged from the hospital No information 11/11/2016 Forensic medical examination act no. 767/2 (16/11/2016)   (examination conducted on the basis of the documents, bruises on the chest and soft tissues of the face, closed fracture of the nose, bruises in the groin area)   09/01/2017 Forensic medical examination act no. 16/2 (13/01/2017)   (examination conducted on the basis of the documents, described injuries are similar to those contained in the first forensic medical examination act) 08/11/2016 First complaint to the investigative committee   23/11/2016 Refusal to open a criminal case   (police officers did not act unlawfully, the applicant did not comply with the police officers’ orders, threatened to Officer D., the applicant was handcuffed, he could have been injured when a police officer repressed the applicant’s unlawful actions)   19/07/2017 Kurskiy Regional Court   (dismissed the applicant’s complaint as the applicant had already been convicted) 23/11/2016 05/07/2017 Kirovskiy District Court   Convicted of the use of violence against a public officer   20/09/2017 Kurskiy Regional Court   (dismissed the appeal with reference to the refusal to open a criminal case against the police officers)