Week-ending 12 February 2021
This week there were four judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in relation to Russia, finding violations of Articles 2 (right to life), 3 (prohibition on torture), 5 (security and liberty of person), 6 (fair trial), and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property), of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Fisenko v. Russia, 9 February 2021
Translated from the French by Rights in Russia
A violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention; the defendant State shall pay the applicant, within three months, the following sums, to be converted into the currency of the defendant State at the rate applicable on the date of settlement: EUR 6 500, plus any amount that may be due from that sum by way of tax, for non-material damage; EUR 1,400, plus any amount that may be due from the claimant on that sum by way of tax, costs and expenses.
LAPTEV v. RUSSIA, 9 February 2021
Art. 2 (procedural) • Effective investigation • Failure to take all reasonable steps to ascertain the circumstances of the deceased’s death while in State custody • Refusal to open a criminal investigation a serious breach of domestic procedural rules capable of undermining the validity of any evidence collected
Art 2 (substantive) • Positive obligations • Failure of the authorities to safeguard the deceased’s right to life in custody • Lack of sufficient, strong, clear and concordant inferences indicating that the death occurred at the hands of State officials • Failure of the authorities to respond in a reasonable way to the known risk to the deceased’s life
A violation of Article 2 of the Convention under its procedural limb on account of the authorities’ failure to conduct an effective investigation into Mr Sergey Laptev’s death; a violation of Article 2 of the Convention under its substantive limb on account of the State’s failure to safeguard Mr Sergey Laptev’s right to life; the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, the following amounts, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement: EUR 23,000, plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage; EUR 3,430 plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant, in respect of costs and expenses.
RAZMANOVA v. RUSSIA, 11 February 2021
A breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the non-enforcement of the domestic decision in the applicant’s favour; the respondent State shall ensure, by appropriate means, within three months, the enforcement of the pending domestic decision referred to in the appended table; the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months, the amount indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement.
USPANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 9 February 2021
A violation of Article 3 of the Convention under its substantive and procedural limbs in that Mr Uspanov (no. 48053/06), Mr Mutayev and Mr Tatayev (no. 29924/07), Mr Aliyev (no. 7626/08), Mr Shavayev (no. 8187/08), Mr Khadziyev, Mr Ozdoyev and Mr Tsurov (no. 30444/08), Mr Laypanov (no. 8600/09), Mr Vitrigov, Mr Agamerzayev and Mr Tuntuyev (no. 21123/09) and Mr Gastemirov (no. 19185/10) were subjected to torture in police custody, and that no effective investigation into their complaints was carried out by the authorities; a violation of Article 3 of the Convention in respect of Mr Tuntuyev (no. 21123/09) on account of his solitary confinement; a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention in respect of Mr Uspanov (no. 48053/06), Mr Mutayev and Mr Tatayev (no. 29924/07), Mr Laypanov (no. 8600/09), and Mr Vitrigov and Mr Agamerzayev (no. 21123/09); a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in respect of Mr Mutayev and Mr Tatayev (no. 29924/07), Mr Shavayev (no. 8187/08), Mr Laypanov (no. 8600/09), Mr Khadziyev, Mr Ozdoyev and Mr Tsurov (no. 30444/08), and Mr Vitrigov, Mr Agamerzayev and Mr Tuntuyev (no. 21123/09); the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement.
Other news:
The Moscow Times, 12 February 2021: Russia has agreed to pay jailed opposition leader Alexei Navalny damages for his 2012 detention during mass anti-government demonstrations that Europe’s human rights court ruled degrading, Interfax reported Thursday. Russia’s Justice Ministry said it will not appeal the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECHR) November ruling because the ruling did not hold that Navalny’s rights had been violated. “The Russian Justice Ministry had brought forward at the adversarial process the position that ‘political motivations’ were absent in the actions of the authorized state bodies in bringing [Navalny] to justice,” Interfax quoted the ministry as saying. The ECHR ordered Russia to compensate Navalny 8,500 euros ($10,300) for violating his freedom of assembly and right to a fair trial.
Meduza, 11 February 2021: The Russian Justice Ministry has declined to appeal a European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruling from November 2020, obliging Russia to pay opposition politician Alexey Navalny compensation for his detention amid the Bolotnaya Square protests in 2012. This was reported by Interfax, citing the Justice Ministry’s press service. Spokespeople explained that the Russian Justice Ministry won’t be challenging the decision because “the ECHR refused to consider the complainants’ claims about the Russian authorities violating article 18 of Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ([which] limits the use of restrictions on rights).”
