THIRD SECTION
\nDECISION<\/p>\n
Application no.23686\/13
\nSergey Valeriyevich KOZLOV against Russia
\nand 10 other applications
\n(see appended table)<\/p>\n
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 19\u00a0March 2019 as a Committee composed of:<\/p>\n
Alena Pol\u00e1\u010dkov\u00e1, President,
\nDmitry Dedov,
\nJolienSchukking, 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, except for MrShirinov who is a national of\u00a0Tajikistan, 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 2012 and 2014 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.<\/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 MrKozlov, MsShlyapkina, Mr\u00a0Kufayev, Mr\u00a0Chesnokov, Mr\u00a0Dubinin and Mr\u00a0Shcherbatykh (applications nos.\u00a023686\/13, 52635\/13, 15803\/14, 32501\/14, 45811\/14 and 56742\/14 respectively), also complained under Article 6 \u00a7 1 of the Convention about the outcome of the proceedings and assessment of evidence.<\/p>\n 11.\u00a0\u00a0Ms\u00a0Shlyapkina (application no. 52635\/13) complained in addition under Articles\u00a07 and 13 of the Convention.<\/p>\n 12.\u00a0\u00a0MrGorbatyuk and MrVinogradov (applications nos. 65765\/13 and 77434\/13 respectively) further complained under Article 3 of the Convention.<\/p>\n 13.\u00a0\u00a0Mr\u00a0Dubinin (application no. 45811\/14) complained also under Article\u00a06\u00a0\u00a7\u00a02 of the Convention.<\/p>\n 14.\u00a0\u00a0Mr\u00a0Gostev (application no. 60644\/14) complained under Article\u00a07\u00a0\u00a7\u00a02 of the Convention.<\/p>\n THE LAW<\/strong><\/p>\n 15.\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 16.\u00a0\u00a0The respondent Government in their observations argued that the 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 17.\u00a0\u00a0Certain applicants disagreed, while the others did not provide specific arguments.<\/p>\n 18.\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 MrKozlov, MsShlyapkina, Mr\u00a0Kufayev, Mr\u00a0Chesnokov, Mr\u00a0Dubinin and Mr\u00a0Shcherbatykh (applications nos.\u00a023686\/13, 52635\/13, 15803\/14, 32501\/14, 45811\/14 and 56742\/14 respectively) under Article 6 \u00a7 1 of the Convention, complaints of Ms\u00a0Shlyapkina (application no. 52635\/13) under Articles\u00a07 and 13 of the Convention, complaints of Mr\u00a0Gorbatyuk and Mr\u00a0Vinogradov (applications nos.\u00a065765\/13 and 77434\/13 respectively) under Article 3 of the Convention, complaint of\u00a0\u00a0Mr\u00a0Dubinin (application no. 45811\/14) under Article\u00a06\u00a0\u00a7\u00a02 of the Convention and that of Mr\u00a0Gostev (application no.\u00a060644\/14) under Article\u00a07\u00a0\u00a7\u00a02 of the Convention, which were not communicated to the Government, and thus must be rejected in accordance with Article\u00a035\u00a0\u00a7\u00a7\u00a03\u00a0(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 11 April 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<\/p>\n no.<\/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 12\/02\/2013<\/td>\n KOZLOV<\/strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Potma, Republic of Mordovia<\/p>\n 19\/06\/1980<\/p>\n AleksandrMikhaylovich<\/p>\n Plodukhin<\/td>\n 18\/06\/2012<\/p>\n Moscow City Court<\/p>\n 31\/10\/2012<\/p>\n Convicted of murder<\/td>\n Ms P.,<\/p>\n Mr S.,<\/p>\n Ms Yu.,<\/p>\n Ms Z.,<\/p>\n Mr R.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 07\/03\/2013<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/td>\n SHIRINOV<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n 31\/07\/1975<\/p>\n Startsevo, Krasnoyarsk Region<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Svetlana Nikolayevna<\/p>\n Rzhepko<\/td>\n 03\/09\/2012<\/p>\n Krasnoyarsk Regional Court<\/p>\n 13\/12\/2012<\/p>\n Convicted of attempted drug dealing on large scale, attempted drug dealing, attempted drug dealing on especially large scale<\/td>\n Mr B.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 01\/08\/2013<\/td>\n SHLYAPKINA<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong>23\/10\/1986<\/p>\n Ulyanovsk<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong>YekaterinaAlekseyevna<\/p>\n Fetisova<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n 29\/11\/2012<\/p>\n Ulyanovsk Regional Court<\/p>\n 06\/02\/2013<\/p>\n Ulyanovsk Regional Court<\/p>\n 14\/02\/2014<\/p>\n Convicted of swindling through an official position on a large scale<\/td>\n 26\/09\/2013<\/td>\n GORBATYUK<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n 14\/02\/1978<\/p>\n Mikhaylovka, Primorskiy Region<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Aleksey SergeyevichArkhipov<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n 05\/07\/2012<\/p>\n Primorskiy Regional Court<\/p>\n 27\/03\/2013<\/p>\n Convicted of extortion by a group of persons in preliminary collusion (3\u00a0episodes) and of preparation for extortion by a group of persons in preliminary collusion<\/td>\n Mr S.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 14\/11\/2013<\/td>\n VINOGRADOV<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n 12\/05\/1982<\/p>\n Armarvir, Krasnodar Region<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Irina Vladimirovna<\/p>\n Khrunova<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n 18\/03\/2013<\/p>\n Krasnodar Regional Court<\/p>\n 15\/05\/2013<\/p>\n Convicted for attempted drug trafficking on especially large scale<\/td>\n 12\/02\/2014<\/p>\n <\/td>\n KUFAYEV<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong>03\/07\/1969<\/p>\n Barnaul<\/p>\n Grigoriy Gennadyevich Akimov\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n 23\/05\/2013<\/p>\n Altay Regional Court<\/p>\n 20\/09\/2013<\/p>\n Convicted of swindling (2\u00a0episodes) by a group of persons on preliminary collusion on especially large scale through official position, money laundering (2 episodes) on a large scale through an official position where one of the episodes was committed by a group of persons on preliminary collusion<\/td>\n 07\/12\/2014<\/td>\n CHESNOKOV<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n 22\/06\/1985<\/p>\n Karymskoye, Zabaykalskiy Region<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n 14\/08\/2013<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Amursk Regional Court<\/p>\n 24\/09\/2014<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Convicted of attempted dealing<\/p>\n of psychotropic substances by an organized group in large quantities<\/p>\n (3 episodes), attempted drug dealing<\/p>\n by an organized group in large quantities<\/p>\n (2 episodes), drug dealing in especially large quantities (2 episodes), unlawful storage of drugs without the purpose of trafficking in especially large quantities<\/td>\n 07\/04\/2014<\/td>\n \u00a0<\/strong>Moscow<\/p>\n 02\/05\/1976<\/p>\n AleksandrStepanovich<\/p>\n Bukharets<\/td>\n 16\/07\/2013<\/p>\n Moscow City Court 07\/10\/2013<\/p>\n Convicted of attempted drug dealing by a group of persons on preliminary collusion<\/p>\n <\/td>\n 16\/06\/2014<\/td>\n DUBININ<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong>17\/04\/1973<\/p>\n Ryazan<\/p>\n Erika Nikolayevna<\/p>\n Barsukova<\/td>\n 17\/09\/2013<\/p>\n Moscow City Court 22\/04\/2014<\/p>\n Convicted of attempted drug dealing<\/td>\n 24\/09\/2014<\/td>\n SHCHERBATYKH<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n 03\/12\/1978<\/p>\n Sorda, Kirov Region<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n 21\/10\/2013<\/p>\n Vladimir Regional Court<\/p>\n 27\/03\/2014<\/p>\n Convicted of murder<\/td>\n 28\/07\/2014<\/td>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n 28\/03\/1985<\/p>\n Novocherkassk\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n 27\/11\/2013<\/p>\n Rostov Regional Court<\/p>\n 05\/02\/2014<\/p>\n Convicted of burglary with unlawful entry to premises and of burglary with unlawful entry to premises on a large scale<\/td>\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<\/strong><\/p>\n Applicant name<\/strong><\/p>\n Date of the trial and appeal\/cassation courts\u2019 judgments<\/strong><\/td>\n Witness absent from trial<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n\n \n 1.<\/td>\n 23686\/13<\/p>\n Sergey Valeriyevich<\/strong><\/p>\n Presnenskiy District Court of Moscow<\/p>\n Mr P.,<\/p>\n \n 2.<\/td>\n 24356\/13<\/p>\n NasimzhonNodirovich<\/strong><\/p>\n Leninskiy District Court of Krasnoyarsk<\/p>\n Mr \u201cProkhorov\u201d,<\/p>\n \n 3.<\/td>\n 52635\/13<\/p>\n Marina Anatolyevna<\/strong><\/p>\n Leninskiy District Court of Ulyanovsk, Ulyanovsk Region<\/p>\n Mr S.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 4.<\/td>\n 65765\/13<\/p>\n AleksandrFedorovich<\/strong><\/p>\n Mikhaylovka District Court of the Primorskiy Region<\/p>\n Mr D.,<\/p>\n \n 5.<\/td>\n 77434\/13<\/p>\n Konstantin Konstantinovich<\/strong><\/p>\n Tsentralniy District Court of Sochi, Krasnodar Region<\/p>\n Mrs Z.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 6.<\/td>\n 15803\/14<\/p>\n Igor Aleksandrovich<\/strong><\/p>\n Tsentralniy District Court of Barnaul, Altay Region<\/p>\n Mr Ch.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 7.<\/td>\n 32501\/14<\/p>\n YanisAleksandrovich<\/strong><\/p>\n Mikhaylovskiy District Court of the Amur Region<\/p>\n Mr P.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 8.<\/td>\n 33551\/14<\/p>\n Yuriy Sergeyevich GUROV<\/strong><\/p>\n Izmailovskiy District Court of Moscow<\/p>\n Ms K.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 9.<\/td>\n 45811\/14<\/p>\n Maksim Andreyevich<\/strong><\/p>\n Golovinskiy District Court of Moscow<\/p>\n Mr K.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 10.<\/td>\n 56742\/14<\/p>\n Viktor Vasilyevich<\/strong><\/p>\n Vyazniki Town Court of the Vladimir Region<\/p>\n Mr K.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 11.<\/td>\n 60644\/14<\/p>\n Anatoliy Vasilyevich GOSTEV<\/strong><\/p>\n Leninskiy District Court of Rostov-on-Don<\/p>\n Mr E.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n