CEDH, Cour (Cinquième Section Comité), CASE OF KRYKLYVYY AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE, 9 février 2023, 2335/21, 9575/21, 11426/21, 28323/21

En anglais

Synthèse

  • Juridiction : CEDH
  • Numéro de pourvoi :
    2335/21, 9575/21, 11426/21, 28323/21
  • Dispositif : Violation de l'article 3 - Interdiction de la torture (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant) (Volet matériel);Violation de l'article 13+3 - Droit à un recours effectif (Article 13 - Recours effectif) (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant;Interdiction de la torture);Violation de l'article 6 - Droit à un procès équitable (Article 6 - Procédure pénale;Article 6-1 - Délai raisonnable)
  • Importance : Faible
  • État défendeur : Ukraine
  • Nature : Arrêt
  • Identifiant européen :
    ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:0209JUD000233521
  • Liens HUDOC :
  • Avocat(s) : PUSTYNTSEV A.V.
Voir plus

Résumé

Vous devez être connecté pour pouvoir générer un résumé. Découvrir gratuitement Pappers Justice +

Suggestions de l'IA

Texte intégral

FIFTH SECTION CASE OF KRYKLYVYY AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE (Application no. 2335/21 and 3 others - see appended list) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG 9 February 2023 This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Kryklyvyy and Others v. Ukraine, The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of: Mārtiņš Mits, President, Mattias Guyomar, Mykola Gnatovskyy, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 19 January 2023, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in applications against Ukraine 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 applicants were represented by Mr A.V. Pustyntsev, a lawyer practising in Dnipro. 3. The Ukrainian Government ("the Government") were given notice of the applications. THE FACTS 4. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table. 5. The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention and of the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law. In application no. 2335/21, the applicant also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.

THE LAW

JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 6. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLES 3 AND 13 OF THE CONVENTION 7. The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention and that they had no effective remedy in this connection. They relied on Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention. 8. The Court notes that the applicants were kept in detention in poor conditions. The details of the applicants' detention are indicated in the appended table. The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, Muršić v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, §§ 96-101, ECHR 2016). It reiterates in particular that a serious lack of space in a prison cell weighs heavily as a factor to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the detention conditions described are "degrading" from the point of view of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see Muršić, cited above, §§ 122-41, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 149-59, 10 January 2012). 9. In the leading cases of Melnik v. Ukraine (no. 72286/01, 28 March 2006) and Sukachov v. Ukraine (no. 14057/17, 30 January 2020), the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case. 10. 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. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants' conditions of detention were inadequate. 11. The Court further notes that the applicants did not have at their disposal an effective remedy in respect of these complaints. 12. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 13. In application no. 2335/21, the applicant submitted a complaint under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of criminal proceedings and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law. This complaint is not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention, nor is it inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, it must be declared admissible. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that it also discloses violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in Nechay v. Ukraine (no. 15360/10, 1 July 2021). APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 14. Article 41 of the Convention provides: "If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party." 15. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case-law (see, in particular, Sukachov, cited above, §§ 165 and 167), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.

FOR THESE REASONS

, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, Decides to join the applications; Declares the applications admissible; Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law; Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table); 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 February 2023, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court. Viktoriya Maradudina Mārtiņš Mits Acting Deputy Registrar President APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention (inadequate conditions of detention and lack of any effective remedy in domestic law) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant's name Year of birth Facility Start and end date Duration Sq. m per inmate Specific grievances Other complaints under well-established case-law Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros)[1] 2335/21 17/12/2020 Andriy Mykolayovych KRYKLYVYY 1998 Cherkasy Pre-Trial Detention Facility 13/10/2017 to 05/11/2021 4 years and 24 days 1.84-3.7 m² Overcrowding, passive smoking, lack of fresh air, mouldy or dirty cell, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of toiletries, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food, lack or insufficient quantity of food, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities. Art. 6 (1) - excessive length of criminal proceedings - 12/10/2017 - 10/09/2021 before 1 level of jurisdiction. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings. 9,800 9575/21 29/01/2021 Oleksandr Olegovych MOMOTOK 1998 Dnipro Detention Facility no. 4 14/08/2018 pending More than 4 years and 3 months and 3 days 4.3 m² Infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of toiletries, lack or insufficient quantity of food, mouldy or dirty cell, no or restricted access to running water, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to warm water, passive smoking, poor quality of food. 7,500 11426/21 09/02/2021 Yaroslav Anatoliyovych KOLESNIKOV 1992 Dnipro Detention Facility no. 4 29/01/2018 pending More than 4 years and 9 months and 19 days 3.1-4.3 m² Overcrowding, lack of fresh air, passive smoking, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of privacy for toilet, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of toiletries, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food, no or restricted access to shower, mouldy or dirty cell. 7,500 28323/21 21/05/2021 Sergiy Oleksandrovych SUKHINICH 1971 Zhytomyr Detention Facility no. 8 26/05/2017 to 22/11/2021 4 years and 5 months and 28 days 05/08/2022 pending More than 3 months and 18 days 2.5-4.8 m² Overcrowding, lack of fresh air, passive smoking, mouldy or dirty cell, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of privacy for toilet, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of toiletries, poor quality of food, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, no or restricted access to shower, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient natural light. 7,500 [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
Note...

Décisions d'espèce similaires

CEDH, Cour (Première Section Comité), CASE OF SIMAKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 12 septembre 2024, 14035/20, 14122/20, 14683/20, 16526/20, 16654/20, …
Violation de l'article 3 - Interdiction de la torture (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant) (Volet matériel);Violation de l'article 3 - Interdiction de la torture (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant) (Volet matériel);Violation de l'article 13+3 - Droit à un recours effectif (Article 13 - Recours effectif) (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant;Interdiction de la torture)
CEDH, Cour (Cinquième Section Comité), CASE OF KOVALEVSKIY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 4 avril 2024, 47083/19, 47571/19, 47755/19, 50252/19, 54842/19, …
Violation de l'article 3 - Interdiction de la torture (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant) (Volet matériel);Violation de l'article 13+3 - Droit à un recours effectif (Article 13 - Recours effectif) (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant;Interdiction de la torture);Violation de l'article 3 - Interdiction de la torture (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant) (Volet matériel);Violation de l'article 13+3 - Droit à un recours effectif (Article 13 - Recours effectif) (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant;Interdiction de la torture)
CEDH, Cour (Quatrième Section Comité), CASE OF SAMARUKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 11 janvier 2024, 54274/18, 54431/18, 54596/18, 54655/18, 54748/18, …
Violation de l'article 3 - Interdiction de la torture (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant) (Volet matériel);Violation de l'article 13+3 - Droit à un recours effectif (Article 13 - Recours effectif) (Article 3 - Interdiction de la torture;Traitement dégradant);Violation de l'article 3 - Interdiction de la torture (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant) (Volet matériel)
CEDH, Cour (Deuxième Section Comité), CASE OF GORBUNOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 18 avril 2024, 46924/19, 46995/19, 47164/19, 47168/19, 47213/19, …
Violation de l'article 3 - Interdiction de la torture (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant) (Volet matériel);Violation de l'article 3 - Interdiction de la torture (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant) (Volet matériel);Violation de l'article 13+3 - Droit à un recours effectif (Article 13 - Recours effectif) (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant;Interdiction de la torture)
CEDH, Cour (Quatrième Section Comité), CASE OF AZIZOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 28 septembre 2023, 33369/18, 33680/18, 34049/18, 34534/18, 34956/18, …
Violation de l'article 3 - Interdiction de la torture (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant) (Volet matériel);Violation de l'article 13+3 - Droit à un recours effectif (Article 13 - Recours effectif) (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant;Interdiction de la torture);Violation de l'article 3 - Interdiction de la torture (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant;Traitement inhumain) (Volet matériel);Violation de l'article 13+3 - Droit à un recours effectif (Article 13 - Recours effectif) (Article 3 - Traitement dégradant;Traitement inhumain;Interdiction de la torture)