CASE OF SAFRONOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA – The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of detention under strict imprisonment regime

Last Updated on November 9, 2023 by LawEuro

The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of detention under strict imprisonment regime. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 3 of the Convention. 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. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.

---

Read the entire document.

THIRD SECTION
CASE OF SAFRONOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 48796/18 and 15 others – see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
9 November 2023

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

In the case of Safronov and Others v. Russia,

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Peeter Roosma, President,
Ioannis Ktistakis,
Andreas Zünd, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 19 October 2023,

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 Russian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications.

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 detention under strict imprisonment regime. 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. Jurisdiction

6. The Court observes that the facts giving rise to the alleged violations of the Convention occurred prior to 16 September 2022, the date on which the Russian Federation ceased to be a party to the Convention. The Court therefore decides that it has jurisdiction to examine the present applications (see Fedotova and Others v. Russia [GC], nos. 40792/10 and 2 others, §§ 68‑73, 17 January 2023).

III. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 of the Convention

7. The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of detention under strict imprisonment regime. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 3 of the Convention.

8. In the leading case of N.T. v. Russia, no. 14727/11, 2 June 2020, 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.

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

IV. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW

11. Some applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, given 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 the cases of Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC] (nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts)), Idalov v. Russia [GC] (no. 5826/03, 22 May 2012) and Gorlov and Others v. Russia (nos. 27057/06 and 2 others, 2 July 2019).

V. REMAINING COMPLAINTS

12. The applicant in applications nos. 8011/19, 45709/19, 43712/21 also raised other complaints under various Articles of the Convention.

13. The Court has examined these complaints and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto.

14. It follows that this part of the applications must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.

VI. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION

15. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, N.T. v. Russia, cited above, § 61, and Svinarenko and Slyadnev, also cited above), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,

1. Decides to join the applications;

2. Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with these applications as they relate to the facts that took place before 16 September 2022;

3. Declares the complaints concerning the inadequate conditions of detention under strict imprisonment regime and the other complaints under the well-established case-law of the Court, as set out in the appended table, admissible and the remainder of applications nos. 8011/19, 45709/19, 43712/21 inadmissible;

4. Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention under strict imprisonment regime;

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

6. 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 9 November 2023, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Viktoriya Maradudina                   Peeter Roosma
Acting Deputy Registrar                   President

____________

APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention
(inadequate conditions of detention under strict imprisonment regime)

No.	Application no. Date of introduction	Applicant’s name Year of birth	Representative’s name and location	Facility	Start and end date of detention under strict regime	Other complaints under well-established case-law	Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant /household (in euros)[i]
1.	48796/18 26/09/2018	Andrey Aleksandrovich SAFRONOV 1974		IK-5 Vologda Region	01/08/2017 – pending as of 16/09/2022		3,000
2.	8011/19 14/01/2019	Aleksey Gennadyevich BERDUTO 1966		IK-56 Sverdlovsk Region, IK-6 Khabarovsk Region	06/12/2013 – pending as of 16/09/2022		3,000
3.	20545/19 27/03/2019	Roman Leonidovich CHERNYSHEV 1988		IK-6 Khabarovsk Region	01/04/2018 – pending as of 16/09/2022		3,000
4.	21973/19 02/04/2019	Roman Mikhaylovich SHASHKOV 1963		IZ-6 St Petersburg	28/11/2017 – 11/09/2019	Art. 3 – inadequate conditions of detention during transport – transport between 24/01/2022 and 03/02/2022 by train and van – duration of transport in a van is about 2 hours each time; applicant transported on numerous occasions, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light, inadequate temperature, passive smoking, no or restricted access to toilet, no or restricted access to warm water, no or restricted access to potable water, no more than 2 sq. m. personal space in a train, no more than 0.3 sq. m. personal space in a van	4,000
5.	45709/19 20/08/2019	Artem Melikovich CHAKRYAN 1979		IK-6 Khabarovsk Region	26/02/2019 – pending as of 16/09/2022		3,000
6.	61210/19 27/04/2018	Vladislav Viktorovich TAMAMSHEV 1989		IK-18 Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Region, SIZO-1 Kirov Region, SIZO-1 Sverdlovsk Region, SIZO-1 Irkutsk Region, SIZO-1 Khabarovsk Region	06/05/2012 – pending as of 16/09/2022	Art. 3 – inadequate conditions of detention during transport – poor conditions of the applicant’s transport by train between 17/10/2020 and 20/10/2020; between 15/11/2020 and 16/11/2020; between 18/11/2020 and 12/12/2020: personal space from 0.5 to 0.9 sq. m. Specific grievances: lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, no or restricted access to toilet, overcrowding, lack of privacy for toilet; applicant transported on numerous occasions,   Art. 8 (1) – permanent video surveillance of detainees in pre-trial or post-conviction detention facilities – video surveillance in remand prisons (SIZO) where he was placed between 20/10/2020 and 17/12/2020. Specific grievances: opposite-sex operators, detention in different cells with video surveillance, surveillance in the lavatory / shower,   Art. 3 – use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms – placement in a metal cage in court hearings from 25/02/2021 to 13/05/2021; Moscow City Court, Kirovskiy District Court of Irkutsk, Pervomayskiy Districk Court of Kirov, Amursk Town Court of Khabarovsk Region, Kirovskiy District Court of Khabarovsk, Kuybyshevskiy Districk Court of Irkutsk,   Art. 13 – lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport and in respect of placement to a metal cage	9,750
7.	61240/19 21/10/2019	Vitaliy Yuryevich VIKHAREV 1983		IK-6 Khabarovsk Region	05/04/2018 – pending as of 16/09/2022		3,000
8.	62867/19 19/11/2019	Sergey Mikhaylovich SHIROKOV 1969		IK-6 Orenburg Region	14/03/2001 – 14/08/2019		3,000
9.	26567/20 01/06/2020	Anton Sergeyevich MALYUTIN 1987		IK-5 Vologda Region, IK-6 Khabarovsk Region	10/11/2016 – pending as of 16/09/2022	Art. 13 – lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of placement in a metal cage during court hearings;   Art. 3 – use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms – placement in a metal cage in the court hearing on 20/09/2021 before the Belozerskiy District Court of the Volgograd Region	9,750
10.	26571/20 26/03/2020	Denis Konstantinovich MIKHAYLOV 1992		IK-5 Vologda Region, IK-6 Khabarovsk Region	28/04/2014 – pending as of 16/09/2022	Art. 3 – use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms – placement in a metal cage in court hearings before the Supreme Court of the Republic of Buryatia, Zheleznodorozhnyy District Court of Ulan-Ude, Khabarovsk Regional Court, 10/02/2021 – 08/07/2021	9,750
11.	31132/20 26/06/2020	Sergey Vyacheslavovich LOYEV 1972		IK-6 Khabarovsk Region	17/01/2013 – pending as of 16/09/2022		3,000
12.	49194/20 26/06/2020	Vladimir Viktorovich MENKOV 1982		IK-6 Khabarovsk Region, IK-56 Sverdlovsk Region	04/11/2010 – pending as of 16/09/2022		3,000
13.	1889/21 18/12/2020	Stanislav Sergeyevich MURASHEV 1983		IK-2 Perm Region	05/05/2016 – pending as of 16/09/2022		3,000
14.	20963/21 14/01/2021	Igor Vladimirovich ZHILENKOV 1987		IK-6 Orenburg Region	22/07/2013 – pending as of 16/09/2022		3,000
15.	22965/21 23/08/2021	Vitaliy Vladimirovich SHASTUN 1979		IK-6 Khabarovsk Region	26/05/2018 – pending as of 16/09/2022		3,000
16.	43712/21 16/08/2021	Oleg Nikolayevich SYSLOV 1979		IK-56 Sverdlovsk Region, IK-6 Khabarovsk Region	04/09/2011 – 04/09/2021		3,000

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