CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 4 octobre 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 } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .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 } .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 } .s7ACB8D74 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s25B97BCD { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; 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 } .s6CF83D49 { margin-left:11.67pt; 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 } .sB217F55D { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:8pt } .sA0B2759 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:0.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-0.45pt; text-align:justify; font-size:8pt } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sC4A995C6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:0.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-0.45pt; 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 } .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 4 October 2018   THIRD SECTION Application no. 19775/18 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich YEFIMOV against Russia and 5 other applications (see list appended) STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicants are Russian nationals. The relevant details concerning each applicant are set out in the appended table. A.     Summary of the circumstances of the cases In the course of the criminal proceedings against them the applicants were confined in metal cages before the courts. The relevant details pertaining to each of the applicants, such as the names of the courts concerned, the dates of the relevant judgments and the frequency of the instances of confinement in metal cages, are set out in the appended table. B.     Relevant domestic law and practice and relevant international material and practice For a summary of relevant domestic law and practice and relevant international material and practice see Svinarenko and Slyadnev v.   Russia [GC], nos.   32541/08 and 43441/08, §§   53-76, ECHR 2014 (extracts). COMPLAINTS The applicants complain that their confinement in metal cages in courtrooms during the criminal proceedings against them amounted to treatment proscribed by Article 3 of the Convention.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Were the applicants subjected to degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, on account of their confinement in metal cages during the criminal proceedings against them (see Svinarenko and Slyadnev v.   Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, §§   113-39, ECHR 2014 (extracts))?   2.     The Government are furthermore invited to provide the Court with up-to-date information as regards the current situation concerning metal cages in the courts of general jurisdiction of the Russian Federation. In particular, what measures did the Government undertake or plan to undertake in order to address the situation identified in Svinarenko and Slyadnev case? In particular:   (a)     Have there been any changes in the rules regulating the design and layout of courthouses for courts of general jurisdiction?   (b)     How many courtrooms were refurbished in order to remove metal cages or replace them with other security arrangements?   (c)     How many courtrooms, as a percentage ratio, still need to be refurbished in order to remove metal cages or replace them with other security arrangements?   (d)     Is there a specific schedule or plan for the removal or replacement (with other security arrangements) of the remaining metal cages in courtrooms?   (e)     Have there been any changes in the practice of using metal cages in courtrooms to take account of the level of danger posed by a person to be subjected to such treatment or the type of the court hearing in question (public/closed)?   APPENDIX No. Application no. Lodged on Applicant name Date of birth Place of residence Representative name and location Name of the court Date of the relevant judgment Number of instances of confinement in a metal cage   19775/18 09/04/2018 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich YEFIMOV 05/11/1958 St Petersburg   Konstantin Sergeyevich KUZMINYKH St Petersburg Vsevolzhsk Town Court of the Leningrad Region 09/03/2018 One   20509/18 03/04/2018 Asgat Khasanovich KHAFIZOV 04/05/1985 Chistopol   Igor Nikolayevich SHOLOKHOV Kazan Military Court of the Privolzhskiy Garrison 08/12/2017 Multiple instances between 5   September 2017 and 8   December 2017   21017/18 06/04/2018 Dmitriy Igorevich RADNEV 22/08/1986 Nizhniy Novgorod     Justice of the Peace of the 1st Court Circuit of the Chistopolskiy District of the Republic of Tatarstan 11/12/2017   Three instances between 20   November and 11 December 2017   23182/18 03/05/2018 Nikolay Nikolayevich BORISENKO 26/03/1973 Chita     Zabaikalskiy Regional Court 21/02/2018 Several instances between 15   January and 8 February 2018   23267/18 04/05/2018 Lyubov Vitalyevna MALOFEYEVA 05/04/1987 Smolensk   Fedor Aleksandrovich DARYENKO 17/10/1980 Smolensk     Zadneprovskiy District Court of Smolensk 24/07/2017, 20/09/2017, 17/10/2017, 1/12/2017   Smolensk Regional Court 02/08/2017, 29/09/2017, 25/10/2017         Several instances between 24   July and 1 December 2017   24423/18 02/05/2018 Andrey Gennadyevich SUSARIN 14/01/1981 Kazan     Novo-Savinovskiy District Court of the Republic of Tatarstan (from 20/09/2017 onwards)   Supreme Court of the Republic of Tatarstan 03/04/2018 Multiple instances       Once