CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 28 octobre 2022

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s72F8249F { font-family:Arial; display:none } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s598389F7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:10pt } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Published on 21 November 2022   FIRST SECTION Application no. 20518/17 Rustem Mamutovych VAITOV and Others against Russia and 40 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 28 October 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications originate from the conflict between Ukraine and the Russian Federation when the Russian Federation asserted jurisdiction over Crimea in 2014. The applications concern criminal proceedings instituted against the applicants in connection with their alleged participation in the activities of Hizb   ut-Tahrir al-Islami (the Party of Islamic Liberation – hereinafter “Hizb   ut-Tahrir”). On 14 February 2003 the Supreme Court of the   Russian Federation   found fifteen organisations, including   Hizb   ut-Tahrir, to be terrorist organisations and prohibited their activity in the territory of Russia. After the assertion of the Russian jurisdiction over Crimea, these legal provisions began to be applied on the territory of the peninsula as well. On various dates Russian courts in Crimea ordered the applicants’ pre ‑ trial detentions, which were prolonged on a number of occasions. In some applications the applicants were found guilty of the charges and sentenced to various periods of imprisonment. In application no. 19835/21 the applicant was acquitted after almost three years of detention. Referring, inter alia, to Article 3 of Protocol no. 4 the applicants in all applications, except for applications nos. 20518/17, 46414/17, 4705/20, 51619/20 and 2122/21, complain that during the criminal proceedings they were transferred from detention facilities located on the territory of Crimea to detention facilities in the Russian Federation. Thus, the applicants state that they, being Ukrainian nationals, were expelled from the territory of their State. Moreover, referring to Article 14 of the Convention in conjunction with Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention and Article 3 of Protocol no. 4 thereto Most applicants allege that they were treated as Russian nationals notwithstanding the fact that they were in fact Ukrainian nationals residing on “the occupied” territory and they allege that this represented a discriminatory treatment. The applicant in the application no. 4705/20 alleges that he was subjected to discrimination on the ground of his Tatar ethnicity. The applicants in applications nos. 20518/17, 46414/17, 7932/18, 4705/20, 27630/20, 51619/20 and 2122/21 allege violations of Article 6 of the Convention. In applications nos. 20518/17, 7932/18, 4705/20, 27630/20 and 2122/21 the applicants complain, inter alia , that the courts examining their cases were not independent and impartial tribunals established by law within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. Moreover, the applicants in applications nos. 46414/17, 4705/20, 27630/20 and 2122/21 rely on Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention and allege that that their convictions have been based on statements by anonymous witnesses. In applications nos. 20518/17, 7932/18, 4705/20, 27630/20 and 51619/20 the applicants complain that Russian legislation, namely the legal provisions concerning Hizb   ut-Tahrir, could not be applied on the territory of Crimea and that this organisation is not prohibited in Ukraine. They rely on Article 7 of the Convention in this regard. Furthermore, the applicants in applications 20518/17, 46414/17, 7932/18, 4705/20, 27630/20, 51619/20, 19835/21, 37298/21, 38875/21 and 42153/21 allege numerous violations of Article 5 of the Convention on the grounds of, inter alia , the alleged lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for their detention, excessive length of detention and failure of the courts to carry out a speedy review of the lawfulness of their detention. Moreover, referring to Article 13 of the Convention in conjunction with Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention, the applicant in application no. 51619/20 also alleges that being under Russian jurisdiction, he had no effective remedies in respect of the alleged violations. In two applications, namely nos. 7932/18 and 27630/20, the applicants allege that their detention and imprisonment on the territory of Russia, far away from their homes in Crimea, violate their right to respect for their family life under Article 8 of the Convention. Lastly, the applicants in applications nos. 7932/18 and 51619/20 complain that their detentions and subsequent convictions were aimed at suppressing opposition to “the occupying power”, in breach of Article 18 of the Convention.   QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICANTS AND THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT 1.     Have the applicants complied with the admissibility requirements set forth in Article   35   §   1 of the Convention?   2.     In applications nos. 20518/17, 46414/17, 51619/20, 37298/21, 38875/21 and 42153/21, were the applicants deprived of their liberty in breach of Article   5 §   1 of the Convention? In application nos. 7932/18 and 4705/20, can the applicants’ prison sentences be considered a deprivation of liberty in breach of Article 5 § 1 (a) of the Convention?   3.     Was the length of the applicants’ pre-trial detention in applications nos. 20518/17, 46414/17, 51619/20, 27630/20, 37298/21, 19835/21, 38875/21 and 42153/21 in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article   5 §   3 of the Convention?   4.     Did the length of the proceedings in applications nos. 27630/20 and 19835/21, by which the applicants sought to challenge the lawfulness of their detention, comply with the “speed” requirement of Article   5 §   4 of the Convention?   5.     Did the applicant in application no. 7932/18 have an effective and enforceable right to compensation, as required by Article 5 § 5 of the Convention, in respect of his detention allegedly in breach of Article 5 § 1?   6.     Having regard to the allegations made by the applicants in applications nos. 20518/17, 46414/17, 7932/18, 4705/20, 27630/20, 51619/20 and 2122/21, did the applicants have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against them by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In this connection, in applications nos. 46414/17, 4705/20, 27630/20 and 2122/21, were the applicants’ rights guaranteed by Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention respected in so far as the identity of some witnesses who testified against them remained undisclosed during the trial?   7.     Did the relevant provisions on the basis of which the applicants in application nos. 20518/17, 7932/18, 4705/20, 27630/20 and 51619/20 were convicted fulfil the qualitative requirements as have been set out in the Court’s case-law under Article 7 of the Convention (see Scoppola v.   Italy   (no.   2)   [GC], no. 10249/03, § 99, 17 September 2009)?   8.     As regards applications nos. 7932/18 and 27630/20, were the applicants’ transfers to Russian detention facilities compatible with the guarantees of Article 8 of the Convention?   9.     Are there any effective remed i es within the meaning of Article 13 of the Convention in respect of the applicant’s complaints under Articles 5 and   6 of the Convention in application no. 51619/20?   10.     In respect of applications nos. 7932/18, 14363/20, 14597/20, 14670/20, 14736/20, 27630/20, 33964/20, 45090/20, 46998/20, 47142/20, 19835/21, 20233/21, 20238/21, 20241/21, 27648/21, 37298/21, 37597/21, 37604/21, 38077/21, 38079/21, 38084/21, 38088/21, 38756/21, 38820/21, 38875/21, 38887/21, 38890/21, 38891/21, 39173/21, 39177/21, 42153/21, 42302/21, 42308/21, 42314/21, 42318/21 and 46227/21, were the applicants, Ukrainian nationals, expelled from the territory of their State, in breach of Article   3 §   1 of Protocol No.   4 and/or Article 8 of the Convention?   11.     Have the applicants in applications nos. 20518/17, 7932/18, 4705/20, 45090/20, 46998/20, 47142/20, 20233/21, 20238/21, 20241/21, 27648/21, 37597/21, 37604/21, 38077/21, 38079/21, 38084/21, 38088/21, 38756/21, 38820/21, 38875/21, 38887/21, 38890/21, 38891/21, 39173/21, 39177/21, 42153/21, 42302/21, 42308/21, 42314/21, 42318/21 and 46227/21 suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of their rights under Article 6 of the Convention (as regards applications nos. 20518/17, 7932/18 and 4705/20) and Article   3 §   1 of Protocol No.   4 (as regards the remaining applications mentioned above) contrary to Article 14 of the Convention?   12.     In cases nos. 7932/18 and 51619/20 were the restrictions imposed by the respondent State, purportedly pursuant to Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention, applied for a purpose other than those envisaged by those provisions, contrary to Article   18 of the Convention?     QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICANT AND THE UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT IN APPLICATION No. 46414/17     1.     Has the applicant in this application complied with the admissibility requirements set forth in Article   35   §   1 of the Convention?   2.     Was the applicant deprived of his liberty in breach of Article   5 §   1 of the Convention?   3.     Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against him by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention?   In this connection, were the applicant’s rights secured by Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention respected in so far as the identity of some witnesses remained undisclosed during the trial?     APPENDIX   No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by 1. 20518/17 Vaitov and Оthers v. Russia 07/03/2017 Rustem Mamutovych VAITOV 1986 Kurgan Ukrainian Yuriy Volodymyrovych PRYMOV 1976 Yasnyy Ukrainian Ferat Refatovych SAYFULLAYEV 1983 Omutnynsk Ukrainian Mykhaylo Oleksandrovych TARAKHKALO 2. 46414/17 Kuku v. Russia and Ukraine 26/12/2016 Emir-Usein Kemalovich KUKU 1976 CRIMEE Ukrainian Aleksandr Vasilyevich POPKOV 3. 7932/18 Zeytullayev v. Russia 20/01/2018 Ruslan Borisovich ZEYTULLAYEV 1985 CRIMEE Ukrainian Anastasiya Romanivna MARTYNOVSKA 4. 4705/20 Mamutov and Others v. Russia 10/01/2020 Enver Shevketovich MAMUTOV 1975 Kochubeyevskoye Ukrainian Rustem Seyranovich ABILTAROV 1979 Kochubeyevskoye Ukrainian Zevri Serdarovich ABSEITOV 1975 Kochubeyevskoye Ukrainian Remzi Shevketovich MEMETOV 1966 Kochubeyevskoye Ukrainian Olga Mykolayivna KURYSHKO 5. 14363/20 Saliyev v. Russia 11/03/2020 Seyran Alimovich SALIYEV 1985 Rostov-na-Donu Russian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 6. 14597/20 Zekiryayev v. Russia 11/03/2020 Server Zekiyevich ZEKIRYAYEV 1973 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 7. 14670/20 Belyalov v. Russia 10/03/2020 Memet Reshatovich BELYALOV 1989 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 8. 14736/20 Ibragimov v. Russia 11/03/2020 Timur Izetovich IBRAGIMOV 1985 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 9. 27630/20 Dzhepparov v. Russia 07/05/2020 Arsen Bormambetovich DZHEPPAROV 1991 Shakhty Russian, Ukrainian Simon PAPUASHVILI 10. 33964/20 Asanov v. Russia 10/03/2020 Marlen Rifatovich ASANOV 1977 Rostov-na-Donu Russian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 11. 45090/20 Omerov v. Russia 01/10/2020 Enver Viktorovich OMEROV 1961 Rostov-na-Dony Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 12. 46998/20 Omerov v. Russia 08/10/2020 Riza Enverovich OMEROV 1988 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 13. 47142/20 Dzhapparov v. Russia 13/10/2020 Ayder Enverovich DZHAPPAROV 1980 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 14. 51619/20 Mamedeminov v. Russia 13/11/2020 Nariman Ibragimovych MAMEDEMINOV 1993 Kholmovka Ukrainian Anastasiya Romanivna MARTYNOVSKA 15. 2122/21 Bekirov v. Russia 25/12/2020 Inver Nebiyevich BEKIROV 1963 Salavat Russian, Ukrainian Natalya Yuryevna MOROZOVA 16. 19835/21 Ametov v. Russia 13/03/2021 Ernest Seyarovich AMETOV 1985 Bakhchisaray Russian, Ukrainian Olga Pavlovna TSEYTLINA 17. 20233/21 Seytumerov v. Russia 09/04/2021 Seytumer Shukriyevich SEYTUMEROV 1988 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 18. 20238/21 Seitmemetov v. Russia 09/04/2021 Rustem Abduramanovich SEITMEMETOV 1973 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 19. 20241/21 Seytumerov v. Russia 09/04/2021 Osman Shukriyevich SEYTUMEROV 1992 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 20. 27648/21 Osmanov v. Russia 12/05/2021 Erfan Serverovich OSMANOV 1982 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 21. 37298/21 Bekirov v. Russia 13/07/2021 Akim Ekremovych BEKIROV 1988 Sverdlovskoye Ukrainian Anastasiya Romanivna MARTYNOVSKA 22. 37597/21 Bazarov v. Russia 20/07/2021 Farkhod Egamberdiyovych BAZAROV 1986 Simferopol Ukrainian Anastasiya Romanivna MARTYNOVSKA 23. 37604/21 Bekirov v. Russia 20/07/2021 Remzi Rustemovych BEKIROV 1985 Pervomayske Ukrainian Anastasiya Romanivna MARTYNOVSKA 24. 38077/21 Seytkhalilov v. Russia 12/07/2021 Rustem Narimanovich SEYTKHALILOV 1984 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 25. 38079/21 Suleymanov v. Russia 12/07/2021 Eskender Serverovich SULEYMANOV 1973 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 26. 38084/21 Seytabdiyev v. Russia 13/07/2021 Seytveli Eskenderovich SEYTABDIYEV 1994 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 27. 38088/21 Yanikov v. Russia 13/07/2021 Asan Aliyevich YANIKOV 1986 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 28. 38756/21 Abdullayev v. Russia 20/07/2021 Izzet Mustafayevich ABDULLAYEV 1986 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 29. 38820/21 Abdulgaziyev v. Russia 20/07/2021 Tofik Sultanovich ABDULGAZIYEV 1981 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 30. 38875/21 Gaziyev v. Russia 26/07/2021 Servet Abduraimovych GAZIYEV 1960 Trekhprudne Ukrainian Anastasiya Romanivna MARTYNOVSKA 31. 38887/21 Muyedinov v. Russia 18/07/2021 Yashar Seyfetdinovich MUYEDINOV 1968 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 32. 38890/21 Umerov v. Russia 18/07/2021 Shaban Izzetovich UMEROV 1969 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 33. 38891/21 Gafarov v. Russia 18/07/2021 Dzhemil Abdullayevich GAFAROV 1962 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 34. 39173/21 Abdulkadyrov v. Russia 22/07/2021 Vladlen Vasilyevich ABDULKADYROV 1979 Rostov na Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 35. 39177/21 Sheykhaliyev v. Russia 22/07/2021 Rustem Dinarovich SHEYKHALIYEV 1979 Rostov na Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 36. 42153/21 Karimov v. Russia 02/08/2021 Alim Egamberdiyovych KARIMOV 1994 CRIMEE Ukrainian Anastasiya Romanivna MARTYNOVSKA 37. 42302/21 Murtaza v. Russia 20/07/2021 Seyran Kemadinovich MURTAZA 1983 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 38. 42308/21 Abdurakhmanov v. Russia 22/07/2021 Medzhit Anafiyevich ABDURAKHMANOV 1975 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 39. 42314/21 Izetov v. Russia 18/07/2021 Riza Mustafayevich IZETOV 1979 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 40. 42318/21 Arifmemetov v. Russia 17/07/2021 Osman Feratovich ARIFMEMETOV 1985 Rostov-na-Donu Ukrainian Roman Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY 41. 46227/21 Ziyadinov v. Russia 08/09/2021 Emil Ismailovich ZIYADINOV 1984 Rostov-on-Don Ukrainian Roman Yuryovych MARTYNOVSKYY