CASE OF PICHUGIN AGAINST RUSSIA AND 1 OTHER CASE (European Court of Human Rights)

Last Updated on March 15, 2022 by LawEuro

Interim Resolution CM/ResDH (2022) 50
Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
Pichugin against Russian Federation
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9 March 2022 at the 1428th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies[1])

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46 paragraph 2 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);

Recalling that, in its first judgment concerning the applicant the Court found, inter alia, violations of the right to a fair trial under Article 6, paragraphs 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention on account of the lack of a public hearing  and the refusal to allow the defence to put questions to a decisive witness, including in relation  to his credibility, and that in the second judgment it found violations of Article 6, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3(d) on account of the refusal to admit expert evidence submitted by the defence and a breach of the presumption of innocence due to the publication of media interviews by officials presenting his involvement in the crimes as an established fact;

Recalling again that the just satisfaction awarded to the applicant by the Court in both cases has been paid and no further measures are required in response to the violations of Article 5 of the Convention;

Recalling further that the judicial reopening of the domestic criminal proceedings did not ensure redress for the applicant, since his convictions were upheld without providing a full analysis of the evidence against him and the safety of the convictions in the light of the findings of the European Court;

Noting that while a further review by the Supreme Court would be highly desirable as a means to provide appropriate redress to the applicant, other forms of redress are also possible;

Reaffirming the unconditional obligation of every respondent State, under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention, to abide by final judgments in cases to which it is a party;

Stressing again that the applicant has been waiting for redress since 2013;

DEPLORES that, despite the Committee’s calls since 2016 to find alternative avenues to secure full redress for the applicant, no such avenues have been found;

EXHORTS again the Russian authorities to find, as a matter of urgency, alternative avenues to secure redress to the applicant, including by considering the adoption of measures to ensure his release, and to inform the Committee of their conclusions by 1 June 2022 at the latest.

______________

§ [1] It is recalled that, in consequence of the serious violation by the Russian Federation of its obligations under Article 3 of the Statute of the Council of Europe, the Committee of Ministers on 25 February 2022 decided to suspend the Russian Federation from its rights of representation in the Council of Europe. It is further recalled, however, that in accordance with Resolution CM/Res(2022)1, the Russian Federation remains subject to its obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights, it may continue to participate in the meetings of the Committee of Ministers only when the latter exercises its functions in respect of the supervision of the execution of judgments under Article 46 of the Convention with a view to providing and receiving information concerning the judgments where they are the respondent or applicant State, without the right to participate in the adoption of decisions by the Committee nor to vote.