Судебное дело "Борисов против России"
04.12.2009
4 December 2009
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 12543/09
by Vyacheslav Viktorovich BORISOV
against Russia
lodged on 13 January 2009
STATEMENT OF FACTS
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Vyacheslav Viktorovich Borisov, is a Russian
national who was born in 1964 and lives in Yekaterinburg.
A. The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be
summarised as follows.
1. Criminal proceedings
On 1 September 2008 the Chkalovskiy District Court of Yekaterinburg
convicted the applicant of aggravated fraud and sentenced him to seven
years' imprisonment.
The applicant appealed. On 21 November 2008 he was escorted to the
court house but for unknown reasons was not allowed into the court
room and could not participate in the hearing. By a judgment of the
same date the Sverdlovsk Regional Court upheld his conviction on
appeal.
On 19 January 2009 the investigating authorities charged the applicant
with another criminal offence.
2. Conditions of detention
On 1 September 2008 the applicant was remanded in custody and placed
in remand centre no. IZ-66/1 of Yekaterinburg.
He was held in cell no. 27 that measured 30 square metres and
accommodated from 22 to 45 inmates. He frequently had to share his
sleeping place with others.
The cell was poorly lit and ventilated.
The toilet pan was not separated from the living area by any
partition.
He was not provided with any toiletries and individual bedding.
The nutrition was inadequate.
The shower was allowed once in ten days.
At the time of submitting his application to the Court he was still
detained in that remand centre.
B. Relevant domestic law
Code of Criminal Procedure, in force since 1 July 2002
Appeal courts shall verify the legality, validity and fairness of the
judgment of the trial court (Article 360 S: 1).
A convicted person held in custody who expressed a wish to be present
at the examination of the appeal shall be entitled to participate
either directly in the court session or to state his case by video
link. The court shall make a decision with respect to the form of
participation of the convicted person in the court session. A
convicted person who has appeared before the court shall always be
entitled to take part in the hearing (Article 376 S: 3).
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention of poor
conditions of detention.
He also complained under Article 6 S:S: 1, 2 and 3 (b) of inequality
of arms, various procedural violations, violation of his presumption
of innocence, inadequate time and facilities for preparation of his
defence and the authorities' failure to ensure his right to
participate in the appeal hearing.
He finally complained under Articles 13 and 14 of the Convention and
Protocol No. 12 to the Convention of lack of domestic remedies and
discrimination.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. In respect of each cell in which the applicant was held in IZ-66/1:
(a) Indicate the cell number and the dates of the applicant's stay.
(b) What was the floor surface of the cell (in square metres)?
(c) How many bunk beds and/or sleeping places were available in the
cell?
(d) How many detainees were held in the cell? Indicate the maximum
number of detainees, not the average.
(e) Was the cell equipped with a functioning mandatory ventilation?
(f) What kind of lighting was available in the cell? If the lighting
was natural, indicate the dimensions of the window(s) and the number
and thickness of metal bars; if the lighting was artificial, indicate
the number of bulbs and their power.
(g) Indicate the placement of the toilet pan (corner, wall-mounted,
etc.) and the distances between (i) the pan and the dining table; and
(ii) the pan and the nearest sleeping place.
(h) Was there a partition separating the toilet pan from the rest of
the cell? Indicate its height and the material it was made of.
(i) Indicate the frequency of outdoor exercise, the surface of the
exercise yard (in square metres) and the type of the roof above the
yard (metal bars, solid roof, netting, etc.)
2. In the light of the replies to the above questions, were the
conditions of the applicant's detention compatible with Article 3 of
the Convention?
3. Having regard to the requirement of Article 376 S: 3 in fine that
an accused who was brought to the courthouse be allowed to take part
in the appeal hearing and to the allegation that the applicant was
present at the courthouse of the Sverdlovsk Regional Court on 21
November 2008 but not permitted to enter the hearing room, was there a
violation of Article 6 S:S: 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention?
Добавить комментарий: