[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> STEPANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 27015/12 (Judgment : Violation of Prohibition of torture (Degrading treatment) [2018] ECHR 37 (11 January 2018) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2018/37.html Cite as: CE:ECHR:2018:0111JUD002701512, [2018] ECHR 37, ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0111JUD002701512

[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

 

 

 

THIRD SECTION

 

 

 

 

 

 

CASE OF STEPANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

 

(Application no. 27015/12 and 6 others -

see appended list)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

 

 

STRASBOURG

 

11 January 2018

 

 

 

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.




In the case of Stepanov and Others v. Russia,

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:

          Luis López Guerra, President,
          Dmitry Dedov,
          Jolien Schukking, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 7 December 2017,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1.  The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.

2.  The applications were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”).

THE FACTS

3.  The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.

4.  The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.

THE LAW

I.  JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS

5.  Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.

II.  ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONVENTION

6.  The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows:

Article 3

“No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”

7.  The Court notes that the applicants were kept in detention in poor conditions. The details of the applicants’ detention are indicated in the appended table. The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, Muršić v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, §§ 96-101, ECHR 2016). It reiterates in particular that a serious lack of space in a prison cell weighs heavily as a factor to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the detention conditions described are “degrading” from the point of view of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see Muršić, cited above, §§ 122 -141, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 149-159, 10 January 2012).

8.  In the leading case of Ananyev and Others v. Russia, cited above, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.

9.  Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants’ conditions of detention were inadequate.

10.  These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.

III.  REMAINING COMPLAINTS

11.  Some applicants submitted complaints under Article 13 of the Convention, in accordance with the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table). These complaints are not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention, nor are they inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, they must be declared admissible. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in Ananyev and Others, cited above, §§ 100-119, related to the lack of an effective domestic remedy to complain about inadequate conditions of detention.

IV.  APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION

12.  Article 41 of the Convention provides:

“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”

13.  Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case-law (see, in particular, Ananyev and Others v. Russia, cited above, § 172), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.

14.  The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,

1.  Decides to join the applications;

 

2.  Declares the applications admissible;

 

3.  Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention;

 

4.  Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table);

 

5.  Holds

(a)  that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;

(b)  that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 11 January 2018, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

        Liv Tigerstedt                                                             Luis López Guerra

Acting Deputy Registrar                                                            President




APPENDIX

List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention

(inadequate conditions of detention)

No.	Application no. Date of introduction	Applicant name Date of birth	Representative name and location	Facility Start and end date Duration	Inmates per brigade Sq. m. per inmate Number of toilets per brigade	Specific grievances	Other complaints under well-established case-law	Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros)[1]
1.	27015/12 05/01/2013	Andriyan Nikolayevich Stepanov 15/01/1976		IZ-66/1 Yekaterinburg 11/12/2011 to 13/12/2012 1 year(s) and 3 day(s)	0.97 m²	not provided with an individual sleeping place and had to share one with inmates, inadequate separation of toilet from living area, dim electric light, no hot water, inadequate condition of bedding and bed linen, poor food quality, roofed walking yards of about 15 sq.m. for 7-24 inmates, irregular walks for 30-60 min., shower once in 10 days for 15 min. in a room of 5-6 sq.m. with 2-3 shower heads for 12-15 inmates, shower walls covered with mould	Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention -	5,300
2.	35210/16 06/06/2016	Vladimir Faukatovich Zaynullin 06/10/1986		IK-13 (PFRSI), Nizhny Tagil; IVS in Ekaterinburg 22/04/2013 to 19/12/2015 2 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 28 day(s)		overcrowding, passive smoking, insufficient natural light, mouldy or dirty cell, sharing cells with inmates infected with contagious disease, poor quality of food, constant electric light, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of privacy for toilet, no or restricted access to warm water	Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention -	10,000
3.	40467/16 27/06/2016	Viktor Valeryevich Sablin 11/03/1976		IK-2, Zbaykalskiy Region (ЯГ-14/2), ward-type premises 04/11/2015 to 31/03/2016 4 month(s) and 28 day(s)	6 inmate(s) 2.5 m² 1 toilet(s)	overcrowding, lack of or insufficient natural light, constant electric light, lack of fresh air	Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention -	2,500
4.	48141/16 08/08/2016	Vladislav Olegovich Saburov 06/07/1992		IZ-1 Ivanovo 23/12/2015 to 13/07/2016 6 month(s) and 21 day(s)	0,2-2,9 m² 1 toilet(s)	overcrowding, passive smoking, lack of fresh air, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light, inadequate temperature, no or restricted access to warm water, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, no or restricted access to shower, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, no or restricted access to toilet, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen	Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention -	3,200
5.	78007/16 28/11/2016	Mikhail Aleksandrovich Barantsev 29/10/1980		SIZO-1 Nizhniy Novgorod Region 08/04/2016 to 25/07/2016 3 month(s) and 18 day(s)	12 inmate(s) 2.1 m²	lack of privacy for toilet, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, no or restricted access to shower, inadequate temperature, passive smoking, no or restricted access to warm water		2,100
6.	5883/17 04/01/2017	Aleksey Viktorovich Nikitin 04/02/1989		IZ-1 Primorsky Region 22/03/2015 to 28/07/2016 1 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 7 day(s)	2-3.6 m²	inadequate temperature, lack of privacy for toilet, no or restricted access to running water, lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or insufficient electric light, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, mouldy or dirty cell, sharing cells with inmates infected with contagious disease, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, poor quality of food		6,300
7.	7590/17 12/01/2017	Mavlud Ibadulayevich Kerimov 10/08/1994	Preobrazhenskaya Oksana Vladimirovna Strasbourg	IZ-1 Stavropol Region 07/03/2015 to 22/02/2016 11 month(s) and 16 day(s)           IZ-1 Rostov-on-Don Region 22/02/2016 pending More than 1 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 28 day(s)	1.2 - 3 m²                 1.1 m²	overcrowding, lack of fresh air, passive smoking, constant electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of privacy for toilet, no or restricted access to shower, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, no or restricted access to potable water, poor quality of food   overcrowding, insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of fresh air, passive smoking, no or restricted access to shower, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air	Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention -	10,300

 




---

[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants