Week-ending 17 September 2021
This week the European Court of Human Rights handed down three judgments in relation to Russia finding violations of Convention articles 5 (liberty and security), 8 (private and family life) and 11 (assembly and association); and in addition of articles 2 (right to life) and 3 (prohibition on torture) should Russia expel certain individuals.
14 September 2021
Art 2 and Art 3 • Proposed expulsion to Syria not feasible at present and at least in near future owing to volatile security situation • Presentation of substantial grounds for believing applicants face a real risk of death or ill-treatment if expelled, not duly examined by domestic authorities
Art 5 § 1 • Expulsion • Detention pending expulsion for at least two years, without possibility to ensure periodic review • Detention lasting between one and two and a half months not excessive
Art 5 § 4 • Review of lawfulness of detention • No effective judicial review of detention pending expulsion
A violation of Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention in the event of the expulsion of M.O., K.A., Z.A., O.S., M.A., R.K., A.A. and A.K.A. to Syria; a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention in respect of M.D. and M.O. and no violation of that Article in respect of M.A., A.A. and A.K.A.; a violation of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention in respect of M.D. and M.O.; the respondent State is to pay, 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:(i) EUR 5,000 (five thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, to M.D. and M.O. each, in respect of non-pecuniary damage; (ii) the amounts indicated under “Costs and expenses granted” in the Appendix, to each of the concerned applicants, respectively, plus any tax that may be chargeable to those applicants, in respect of costs and expenses.
Art 11 • Freedom of association • Disproportionate dissolution of “National Bolshevik Party” (NBP) association • Insufficiently justified refusal by authorities to register the NBP political party
A violation of Article 11 of the Convention on account of the dissolution of the NBP association; a violation of Article 11 of the Convention on account of the refusal of registration of the NBP political party; the respondent State is to pay Ms A. Savenko, Mr B. Savenko, Mr A. Averin, Mr A. Dmitriyev, Mr S. Fomchenkov, and Mr A. Volynets, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, EUR 10,000 (ten thousand euros) jointly, plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement.
Art 8 • Private life • Positive obligations • Authorities’ failure to protect victim of domestic violence from repeated acts of cyberviolence and to bring perpetrator to justice
A violation of Article 8 of the Convention; 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: (i) EUR 7,500 (seven thousand five hundred euros), to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement, plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage; (ii) EUR 5,386.46 (five thousand three hundred and eighty-six euros and 46 cents), plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant, in respect of costs and expenses.
See also:
Human Rights in Ukraine, 13 September 2021: The European Court of Human Rights has demanded that Russia provide information regarding its treatment of Crimean Tatar Mejlis leader Nariman Dzhelyal and Asan Akhtemov (or Akhtem). The questions concern both access to a lawyer of their choice and medical examinations and are of critical importance since both Asan Akhtemov and his cousin, Aziz Akhtemov, have been prevented from seeing an independent lawyer for over a week. There are extremely strong grounds for assuming that both cousins gave videoed ‘confessions’ under torture, and that they remain in danger of such torture until allowed to see proper lawyers.
