THIRD SECTION
\nDECISION<\/p>\n
Application no. 21891\/12
\nIgor Ivanovich BOYKO against Russia
\nand 8 other applications
\n(see list appended)<\/p>\n
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 5\u00a0March 2019 as a Committee composed of:<\/p>\n
Alena Pol\u00e1\u010dkov\u00e1, President,
\nDmitry Dedov,
\nJolien Schukking, judges,
\nand Fato\u015f Arac\u0131, Deputy Section Registrar,<\/p>\n
Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,<\/p>\n
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants,<\/p>\n
Having deliberated, decides as follows:<\/p>\n
THE FACTS<\/strong><\/p>\n 1.\u00a0\u00a0The applicants are Russian nationals, living in various regions of the Russian Federation. Their personal details appear in the appended table.<\/p>\n 2.\u00a0\u00a0The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented initially by Mr G. Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation to the European Court of Human Rights, and then by his successor in that office, Mr M. Galperin.<\/p>\n 3.\u00a0\u00a0The facts of the cases, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.<\/p>\n 4.\u00a0\u00a0On various dates between 2006 and 2013 the applicants were criminally prosecuted and convicted of various offences.<\/p>\n 5.\u00a0\u00a0The applicants\u2019 convictions were based among other evidence on the statements of one or more witnesses for prosecution, which were made during pre-trial stages of the proceedings and read out in open court while those witnesses were absent.<\/p>\n 6.\u00a0\u00a0Allowing the witnesses\u2019 pre-trial statements as evidence the trial courts in their judgments relied on the impossibility to locate them, and\/or their refusal to appear at court, and\/or remoteness of their place of residence as well as engagements existing at the material time and\/or their poor state of health that made impossible for them to appear before the court, and\/or the death of the witnesses before the trial.<\/p>\n 7.\u00a0\u00a0The convictions were based on a multiplicity of evidence, including statements by the applicants made at the pre-trial stage and at trial in the presence of their lawyers, trial statements by the police officers, other witnesses for prosecution, material and documentary evidence. The domestic courts analysed the witnesses\u2019 pre-trial statements and established their coherence and consistency with other evidence.<\/p>\n 8.\u00a0\u00a0The judgments of the trial courts were upheld on appeal.<\/p>\n COMPLAINTS<\/strong><\/p>\n 9.\u00a0\u00a0The applicants complained under Article 6 \u00a7\u00a7 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention that the domestic courts had not provided good reasons for reading-out of the pre-trial statements of the witnesses for prosecution and thus the applicants had been unable to have those witnesses examined at the trial.<\/p>\n 10.\u00a0\u00a0The applicants, except for Ms\u00a0Bashirova and Mr\u00a0Krasnov(applications nos.\u00a050072\/12 and 73008\/12 respectively), also complained under Article 6 \u00a7 1 of the Convention about the outcome of the proceedings, assessment of evidence and refusal to admit certain materials into evidence.<\/p>\n 11.\u00a0\u00a0Mr Boyko (application no. 21891\/12) complained in addition under Articles 13 and 18 of the Convention.<\/p>\n 12.\u00a0\u00a0Ms Ilyicheva (application no. 60261\/12) further complained under Article 3 of the Convention.<\/p>\n THE LAW<\/strong><\/p>\n 13.\u00a0\u00a0The Court first considers that in accordance with Rule 42 \u00a7 1 of the Rules of Court, the applications listed in the appended table should be joined, given their common legal background.<\/p>\n 14.\u00a0\u00a0The respondent Government in their observations argued that applicants had had a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against them in accordance with Article 6 \u00a7 1 of the Convention. They argued that the applicants\u2019 convictions were based on other abundant evidence. Referring to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, as well as the relevant interpretative guidelines and practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Government contended that the Russian legal system had afforded the applicants sufficient procedural safeguards aimed at securing their right to examine witnesses testifying against them and guarantees of a fair trial.<\/p>\n 15.\u00a0\u00a0Certain applicants disagreed, while the others did not provide specific arguments.<\/p>\n 16.\u00a0\u00a0The Court has carefully examined the applications listed in the appended table and concluded that, in the light of the Court\u2019s primary concern under Article 6 \u00a7 1 to evaluate the overall fairness of the criminal proceedings (see Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos.\u00a026766\/05 and 22228\/06, \u00a7 118, ECHR 2011, and Schatschaschwili v.\u00a0Germany [GC], no.\u00a09154\/10, \u00a7 101, ECHR 2015), the presumption that in principle the Russian legal system offers robust procedural guarantees securing the right of an accused to examine witnesses testifying against him, ensuring that the reading out of absent witnesses\u2019 testimony is possible only as an exception (see Zadumov v. Russia, no.\u00a02257\/12, \u00a7 63, 12\u00a0December 2017, recently reiterated in Kiba and Others (dec.), nos. 38047\/08 and 2\u00a0others, \u00a7 16, 17 April 2018), the material in its possession, and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, the applications are manifestly ill-founded, as well as the accessory complaints of all the applicants except for Ms\u00a0Bashirova and Mr\u00a0Krasnov(applications nos.\u00a050072\/12 and 73008\/12 respectively) under Article 6 \u00a7 1 of the Convention, complaints of Mr Boyko (application no.\u00a021891\/12) under Articles 13 and 18 of the Convention and complaint of Ms Ilyicheva (application no. 60261\/12) under Article 3 of the Convention, which were not communicated to the Government, and thus must be rejected in accordance with Article\u00a035 \u00a7\u00a7 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.<\/p>\n For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,<\/p>\n Decides to join the applications;<\/p>\n Declares the applications inadmissible.<\/p>\n Done in English and notified in writing on 28 March 2019.<\/p>\n Fato\u015f Arac\u0131\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Alena Pol\u00e1\u010dkov\u00e1 __________<\/p>\n APPENDIX<\/strong><\/p>\n Date of introduction<\/strong><\/td>\n Date of birth<\/strong><\/p>\n Place of residence<\/strong><\/p>\n Represented by<\/strong><\/td>\n appeal\/cassation courts\u2019 judgments<\/strong><\/td>\n 10\/04\/2012<\/td>\n BOYKO<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong>26\/03\/1964<\/p>\n Magadan\u00a0<\/strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n 09\/08\/2011<\/p>\n Magadan Regional Court<\/p>\n 26\/10\/2011<\/p>\n Convicted of stealing firearms by a group of persons on preliminary collusion, using official position<\/td>\n Mr Shch.,<\/p>\n Mr G.,<\/p>\n Mr M.,<\/p>\n Mr Kh.,<\/p>\n Mr Zh.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 03\/09\/2012<\/td>\n BESPALOV<\/strong><\/p>\n 28\/06\/1978<\/p>\n Omsk<\/p>\n Self-representation<\/td>\n 27\/12\/2011<\/p>\n Chelyabink Regional Court<\/p>\n 23\/03\/2012<\/p>\n Convicted of attempted drug dealing in large quantities, preparation for dealing of psychotropic substances in especially large quantities<\/td>\n 28\/09\/2006<\/td>\n OCHIROV<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong>16\/08\/1964<\/p>\n Ulan-Ude, Buryatia Republic<\/p>\n Yekaterina Viktorovna Yefremova<\/td>\n 23\/06\/2006<\/p>\n Supreme Court of the Buryatia Republic 07\/09\/2006<\/p>\n Convicted of murder<\/td>\n 07\/08\/2012<\/td>\n BASHIROVA<\/strong><\/p>\n 19\/11\/1988<\/p>\n Narimanov, Astrakhan Region<\/p>\n Aleksandr Anatolyevich Anokhin<\/td>\n 16\/07\/2012<\/p>\n Astrakhan Regional Court<\/p>\n 06\/09\/2012<\/p>\n Convicted of attempted drug dealing<\/td>\n Mr A.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 12\/07\/2012<\/td>\n KHONIN<\/strong><\/p>\n 22\/07\/1963<\/p>\n Kamyshin, Volgograd Region<\/p>\n Aleksandr Viktorovich Shestakov<\/td>\n 19\/04\/2012<\/p>\n Volgograd Regional Court<\/p>\n 25\/06\/2012<\/p>\n Convicted of attempted drug dealing in large quantities<\/p>\n by an organised group<\/td>\n Ms K.,<\/p>\n Mr Po.,<\/p>\n Mr Pet.,<\/p>\n Mr Pi.,<\/p>\n Mr S.,<\/p>\n Ms B.,<\/p>\n Ms Sh.,<\/p>\n Mr Pekh., \u201cZakupshchik\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 10\/08\/2012<\/td>\n PYAZHEVA<\/strong><\/p>\n 23\/07\/1978<\/p>\n Kamyshin,<\/p>\n Volgograd Region\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n 19\/04\/2012<\/p>\n Volgograd Regional Court<\/p>\n 25\/06\/2012<\/p>\n Convicted of attempted drug dealing in large quantities<\/p>\n by an organised group<\/td>\n Ms K.,<\/p>\n Mr Po.,<\/p>\n Mr Pet.,<\/p>\n Mr Pi.,<\/p>\n Mr S.,<\/p>\n Ms B.,<\/p>\n Ms Sh.,<\/p>\n Mr Pekh., \u201cZakupshchik\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 17\/08\/2012<\/td>\n ILYICHEVA<\/strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n 31\/08\/1976<\/p>\n Gornoye, Primorskiy Region\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n 03\/08\/2012<\/p>\n Primorsk Regional Court<\/p>\n 31\/01\/2013<\/p>\n Convicted of inter alia<\/em> drug dealing in large quantities by a group of persons on preliminary collusion<\/td>\n 26\/09\/2012<\/td>\n BABUSHKIN<\/strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n 25\/07\/1961<\/p>\n Khabarovsk<\/p>\n Sergey Yuryevich Popov<\/td>\n 13\/06\/2012<\/p>\n Khabarovsk Regional Court<\/p>\n 30\/08\/2012<\/p>\n Convicted of illegal enterprise connected with deriving profits on a large scale<\/td>\n Ms K.,<\/p>\n Mr A.,<\/p>\n Mr L.,<\/p>\n Mr T.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 16\/10\/2012<\/td>\n KRASNOV<\/strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n 03\/02\/1973<\/p>\n Uptar, Magadan Region\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Aleksandr Svyatoslavovich Osokin<\/td>\n 23\/11\/2011<\/p>\n Supreme Court of the Republic of Chuvashiya<\/p>\n 17\/04\/2012<\/p>\n Supreme Court of the Republic of Chuvashiya<\/p>\n 21\/09\/2012<\/p>\n Convicted of inter alia<\/em> nineteen counts of extortion by an organized group, fraud with infliction of significant damage to a citizen by an organized group<\/td>\n Ms M.,<\/p>\n Mr Sh.,<\/p>\n Mr Kur.,<\/p>\n Mr Kon.,<\/p>\n Mr May.,<\/p>\n Mr Ye.,<\/p>\n Ms Kh.,<\/p>\n Ms S.,<\/p>\n Mr A.V.,<\/p>\n Ms K.,<\/p>\n Ms B.,<\/p>\n Mr G.,<\/p>\n Mr T.,<\/p>\n Mr Maks.,<\/p>\n Mr Mikh.,<\/p>\n Mr Maku.,<\/p>\n Mr I.Yu.,<\/p>\n Mr Mid.,<\/p>\n Ms G.,<\/p>\n Mr D.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n
\nDeputy Registrar\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 President<\/p>\n\n\n
\n No.<\/strong><\/td>\n Application no.<\/strong><\/p>\n Applicant name<\/strong><\/p>\n Date of the trial and<\/strong><\/p>\n Witness absent from trial<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n\n \n 1.<\/td>\n 21891\/12<\/p>\n Igor Ivanovich<\/strong><\/p>\n Magadan Town Court of the Magadan Region<\/p>\n Mr F.,<\/p>\n \n 2.<\/td>\n 26138\/12<\/p>\n Nikolay Gennadyevich<\/strong><\/p>\n Kaliniskiy District Court of Chelyabinsk<\/p>\n Mr Ts.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 3.<\/td>\n 30730\/12<\/p>\n Vitaliy Vladimirovich<\/strong><\/p>\n Gusinoozersk Town Court of the Buryatia Republic<\/p>\n Mr K.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 4.<\/td>\n 50072\/12<\/p>\n Ruzaliya Gennadyevna<\/strong><\/p>\n Leninskiy District Court of Astrakhan<\/p>\n Mr I.,<\/p>\n \n 5.<\/td>\n 56948\/12<\/p>\n Valeriy Ivanovich<\/strong><\/p>\n Kamyshin Town Court of the Volgograd Region<\/p>\n Mr B.,<\/p>\n \n 6.<\/td>\n 56982\/12<\/p>\n Marina Dmitriyevna<\/strong><\/p>\n Kamyshin Town Court of the Volgograd Region<\/p>\n Mr B.,<\/p>\n \n 7.<\/td>\n 60261\/12<\/p>\n Inna Viktorovna<\/strong><\/p>\n Leninskiy District Court of Vladivostok, Primorsk Region<\/p>\n Ms K.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 8.<\/td>\n 63826\/12<\/p>\n Vladimir Stanislavovich<\/strong><\/p>\n Tsentralniy District Court of Khabarovsk<\/p>\n Mr K.,<\/p>\n \n 9.<\/td>\n 73008\/12<\/p>\n Yevgeniy Mikhaylovich<\/strong><\/p>\n Leninskiy District Court of Cheboksary, Republic of Chuvashiya<\/p>\n \u00a0\u201cKharitonov\u201d, \u201cSidorov\u201d, \u201cYefremov\u201d,<\/p>\n