CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 11 décembre 2012

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 162 April 2013 Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia (referral) - 32541/08 and 43441/08 Judgment 11.12.2012 [Section I] Article 3 Degrading treatment Applicants’ placement in a metal cage during court hearings: case referred to the Grand Chamber The applicants, who were standing trial for violent offences, appeared in court in a metal cage. No reasons were given by the trial court for subjecting them to such treatment. In a judgment of 11 December 2012, a Chamber of the Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 §   1 (excessive length of criminal proceedings) and a violation of Article   3. Noting that the applicants had been constantly guarded by armed police officers, and that other security measures had also to be taken in the courtroom, and having regard to the absence of any evidence capable of giving serious grounds to fear the applicants posed a danger to order and security in the courtroom, or would resort to violence or abscond, or that there was a risk to their own safety, the Court found that their placement in the cage, where they had been exposed to the public in the courtroom, had not been justified. The impugned treatment had humiliated the applicants in their own eyes and in those of the public and aroused in them feelings of anguish and inferiority amounting to degrading treatment. The Court rejected the applicants’ claims in respect of pecuniary damage and awarded EUR 7,500 to each applicant in respect of non-pecuniary damage. On 29 April 2013 the case was referred to the Grand Chamber at the request of the Government.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes