EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации"


^ EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS


FIRST SECTION


CASE OF MEDOV v. RUSSIA

(Application No. 1573/02)


JUDGMENT


(Strasbourg, 8.XI.2007)


--------------------------------

This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" revision.


In the case of Medov v. Russia,

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:

Mr L. Loucaides, President,

Mrs F. Tulkens EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации",

Mrs {N. Vajic},

--------------------------------

Тут и дальше по тексту слова на государственном языке набраны латинским шрифтом и выделены фигурными скобками.


Mr A. Kovler,

Mr K. Hajiyev,

Mr D. Spielmann,

Mr S.E. Jebens, judges,

and EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" Mr S. Nielsen, Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 11 October 2007,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on the last-mentioned date:


PROCEDURE


1. The case originated in an application (No. 1573/02) against the EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") by a Russian national, Mr Suleyman Akberdovich Medov ("the applicant"), on EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" 20 December 2001.

2. The applicant, who had been granted legal aid, was represented by Mr M. Ferschtman, a lawyer practising in Amsterdam. The Russian Government ("the Government") were initially represented by Mr P EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации". Laptev, the former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights, and subsequently by their Representative, Mrs V. Milinchuk.

3. The applicant alleged, in particular, that between January and EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" May 2000, while in detention on criminal charges, he had been subjected to ill-treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention. He also claimed an absence of effective domestic remedies EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" and referred to Article 13 of the Convention.

4. By a decision of 7 September 2006 the Court declared the application partly admissible.

5. The Chamber having decided, after consulting the parties, that no hearing on the merits was EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" required (Rule 59 § 3 in fine), the parties replied in writing to each other's observations.


^ THE FACTS


I. The circumstances of the case


6. The applicant was born in 1958. Formerly a resident of Grozny EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации", Chechnya, he is currently living in Ingushetia.

7. The facts of the case are partially in dispute between the parties. Their submissions are summarised below in Part A. A summary of the documents submitted by the EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" parties is set out in Part B and a summary of other relevant documents in Part C below.


A. Submissions of the parties


1. The applicant's arrest


8. The applicant is married and EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" has three children. He and his family lived in the Staropromyslovskiy district of Grozny, in a settlement referred to by the local residents as Karpinka. The applicant submitted the following account EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" of the events.

9. On 23 January 2000 the applicant and his extended family were in the basement of a neighbours' house at Krasnovodskaya Street, because their house at 21 Volodarskaya Street had been burnt down. At EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" approximately 2 p.m. a group of servicemen of the troops of the Ministry of the Interior came to the basement to carry out an identity check. The applicant and seven other men from EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" the same basement and from a nearby building were rounded up by the soldiers and taken to the garages in the neighbourhood. The applicant's wife and sisters went there and unsuccessfully EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" sought his release.

10. Later that day the applicant and other detainees were taken to the encampment of a tank division near a place called Solyonaya Balka, situated 2 - 3 kilometres from Karpinka. The applicant EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" and other detainees were мейд to sit on the ground near the tanks. The soldiers threatened to kill them in retribution for the death of General Mikhail Malofeyev, who had been killed in EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" Grozny several days earlier. The applicant and others were briefly spoken to by General Troshev, the military commander of the Russian forces in Chechnya, who was at the encampment to collect the EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" General's body. He told them that after the identity check, and on condition that their documents were in order, they would be released.

11. However, later that day the applicant and other EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" detainees were placed together in an anti-tank pit in the ground in the open field and left there overnight. The soldiers beat and kicked the applicant and other detainees, and EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" while they were in the pit, threw rocks and poured cold water over them. The temperature that night was about minus 3 degrees Celcius. Around midnight the applicant and other detainees were EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" allowed to sit near a campfire and were given some food.

12. On 24 January 2000 the detainees were driven to the Khankala military base, the headquarters of the United Group Alignment (UGA) in Chechnya. They EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" were ordered into a small lorry used for transporting prisoners ("avtozak"). The applicant was hit by a rifle butt by a soldier when boarding the lorry. Upon arrival at Khankala, they were EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" moved into another lorry where the applicant spent approximately twenty-four hours.

13. According to the Government, the applicant was apprehended on 23 January 2000 under suspicion of having participated in an attack on federal EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" servicemen which had occurred on 4 October 1999 in the village of Chervlenaya, in the Shelkovskoy District of Chechnya. As a result of the attack, fifteen servicemen were killed and twenty-eight were wounded. The EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" attack was investigated under criminal case file No. 14/03/0547-99/49064.

14. The Government submitted that the applicant's allegations of ill-treatment between 23 and 25 January 2000 could not be verified, because all records had been destroyed EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" and because it was impossible to identify and question the military servicemen who had participated in the operations in question.


2. The applicant's detention in Chernokozovo


15. On 25 January 2000 the applicant was EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" taken to the Chernokozovo detention centre, where he was kept in cells Nos. 8 and 17. The applicant submitted that in cell No. 8, which was meant for five persons, he had been kept EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" with about twenty other detainees. In cell No. 17 the applicant had been kept with about forty persons.

16. The applicant stated that during his stay in Chernokozovo he had been subjected to regular EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" and particularly severe ill-treatment by the guards. The applicant identified them as the special police forces (OMON) from the Rostov-on-Don region. The guards who ill-treated him were often drunk.

17. In EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" particular, the applicant submitted that upon arrival he and other detainees had been forced to run through a corridor of soldiers who beat them with great force using rubber truncheons EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации", rifle butts and wooden hammers. While standing naked in the shower room the applicant was also severely beaten. Some time later while in Chernokozovo the applicant was hit with a rifle butt on EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" the head so hard that it left a deep wound on the left side of his head. The scar was still clearly visible about three months later when the applicant was questioned by EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" an interviewer from the NGO Human Rights Watch (hereafter "HRW") in Ingushetia. As a result of the beatings the applicant sustained a broken nose and fractured ribs, as well as bruises. The EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" guards also played humiliating "games", such as riding on the applicant who had been forced onto his hands and knees.

18. The applicant was formally interrogated four times. During the interrogations he was beaten EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации". The interrogators tried to force him to sign a confession of participation in an illegal armed group, a crime under Article 208 of the Criminal Code. The applicant denied having committed any crimes EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" and refused to sign the document. He was shown an electric chair and threatened with the application of electric shock.

19. In addition, the applicant was on several occasions "informally" questioned EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" by the guards, who beat him and tried to obtain a confession.

20. The applicant later recounted the conditions of his detention and ill-treatment at Chernokozovo to an HRW interviewer, and his testimony under EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" the name of "Aslanbek Digayev" was included in their report "Welcome to Hell: Arbitrary Detention, Torture and Extortion in Chechnya" of October 2000.

21. The Government in their submissions confirmed that between 25 January EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" and 18 February 2000 the applicant had been detained at pre-trial detention centre IZ 4/2 in Chernokozovo. His detention had been ordered on 28 January 2000 by an investigator of the General Prosecutor's Office Department EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" for the Northern Caucasus and authorised by the acting Prosecutor for the Republic of Chechnya (the Chechnya Prosecutor). On the same day the applicant had been formally charged with committing EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" a crime under Article 208 part 2 of the Criminal Code - participation in an illegal armed group. On 28 January 2000 the decree authorising his arrest had been read out to him and he had been advised of his EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" procedural rights, including the right to appeal. On the same day the applicant was questioned about the charges and opted to remain silent, in accordance with Article 51 of the Constitution EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации". He refused to sign any procedural documents or to give testimony. The applicant filed no appeals or motions related to the charges brought against him or the arrest warrant.

22. The Government submitted that upon EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" admission to the pre-trial detention centre the applicant had undergone a medical examination, which revealed a bruise on his left shoulder. The Government submitted a copy of the register of new EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" arrivals kept by the detention centre, which did not indicate any other injuries or health problems in respect of the applicant. The page contained eight entries, some of them with details of EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" wounds, burns and diseases for other prisoners. While detained in detention centre IZ 4/2 the applicant had not applied for medical assistance and no separate medical record had been opened for him.

23. The EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" Government submitted documents issued in October 2004 by the pre-trial detention centre IZ 20/2, located in Chernokozovo, which stated that it had become operational in August 2000 (presumably replacing pre-trial EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" detention centre IZ 4/2) and that it therefore had no information concerning the conditions of detention of the applicant or whether physical force had been used on him.

24. Another letter issued by pre EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации"-trial detention centre IZ 20/2 stated that the applicant had been detained in IZ 4/2 between 25 January 2000 and 29 April 2000 (sic) and that no personal file had been opened for him. Instead, an "informal record card EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации"" (карточка неустановленного эталона) had been kept, a copy of which was submitted by the Government (see Part B below).


3. The applicant's subsequent detention in Mozdok,

Pyatigorsk and Stavropol


25. The applicant submitted EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" that on 18 February 2000, along with twelve men and three women, he had been taken to Mozdok in North Ossetia. The detainees spent the night in a railway carriage. The applicant was taken to EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" a shower room outside the carriage, мейд to undress and beaten and kicked by the guards.

26. On 20 February 2000 the applicant was taken to the pre-trial detention centre "SIZO No. 2" in Pyatigorsk in the EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" Stavropol Region. He submitted that upon admission he had been superficially examined by a doctor who had asked whether he had any complaints. The applicant, who felt intimidated by EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" the presence of the guards, did not make any complaints, even though he submitted that his bruises and an unhealed wound on his head should have been evident.

27. The Government stated that the applicant's EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" allegations of ill-treatment during transportation from Chernokozovo to Pyatigorsk were impossible to verify in the absence of the relevant records.

28. The applicant stated that while in SIZO No. 2 he had EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" been severely beaten by the guards on his way to the shower room, when he and other detainees had been forced to run naked. He had also been beaten in the bathroom.

29. On EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" 22 February 2000 the applicant was taken to Stavropol to the pre-trial detention centre IZ 26/1 ("SIZO No. 1"). Upon arrival the applicant was again briefly examined by a doctor in the presence of EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" the guards. Subsequently, the applicant was subjected to the same treatment as in Chernokozovo and in Pyatigorsk - he was forced to run through a corridor of soldiers who beat him. He was then EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" forced to get into an ice-cold bath.

30. While in Stavropol, the applicant was interrogated only once by officials who did not introduce themselves. They wore uniforms with badges of EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" the Ministry of Justice. The interrogators beat him and tried to force him to confess to having committed crimes under Article 208 of the Criminal Code. The applicant refused to sign a confession.

31. The Government EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" confirmed that between 22 February and 3 May 2000 the applicant had been detained at the pre-trial detention facility IZ 26/1 in Stavropol. Upon arrival he had undergone a medical examination which had revealed EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" no injuries or particular health problems. He did not submit any complaints about his medical conditions either. He did not seek any medical assistance, did not submit any complaints about EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" ill-treatment or conditions of detention and was not subjected to any disciplinary measures while in SIZO No. 1.

32. In support of their position the Government submitted a number of documents, which showed that EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" the applicant had been subjected to a medical examination upon arrival and that no injuries or diseases had been recorded. On the same day he underwent a fluorography of the chest and EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" blood tests, which did not reveal any health problems. He submitted no complaints about his health or injuries while in detention. The Government submitted a copy of the detention centre's register of new EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" arrivals and a copy of the applicant's medical record (see Part B below).

33. During his stay in SIZO No. 1 the applicant stayed in cell No. 79. The Government submitted a EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" detailed description of the cell and gave details of the applicant's conditions of detention in that facility, supported by relevant records and testimonies of the supervising officers, produced in 2001 during a prosecutor's EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" investigation into the applicant's complaints. They stated that the cell was intended to hold ten persons, but had not held more than nine. The applicant and other detainees were supplied EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" with bedding, food and items of personal hygiene in accordance with the relevant standards. They were taken to the shower room once a week. The detention facility stated that no disciplinary measures EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" or physical force had been applied to the applicant during his stay there. He had received no visits from relatives, lawyers or investigators while in the SIZO.


4. The applicant's release EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" and domestic investigation


34. On 3 May 2000 the applicant was released from custody in Stavropol. Upon release he was provided with a document issued by the Ministry of the Interior which stated that he had been EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" detained from 23 January to 3 May 2000 and that the criminal proceedings against him had been dropped under State Duma Decree No. 4785-11 of 13 December 1999 "on amnesty for persons who had committed dangerous acts against public EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" order during the anti-terrorist operation in the Northern Caucasus". The measure of restraint was lifted. The applicant stated that his passport had not been returned to him.

35. The following day EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" the applicant joined his family in Ingushetia. According to affidavits produced by his wife, sister-in-law and an interviewer from HRW, upon release the applicant showed signs of severe physical EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" abuse and mental trauma and it took him about six months to recover from the injuries he had sustained while in detention.

36. The applicant's wife submitted that the applicant had lost EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" weight significantly, that he had numerous bruises and scars on his body and head, that he had difficulty breathing, and for several months had difficulty in performing the simplest of exercises EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации". She and the applicant's sister-in-law, who had some basic knowledge of first aid and who treated the applicant upon his release, submitted in addition that the applicant was nervous and depressed EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации", had trouble sleeping, and could not stand noise. They both stated that the deterioration of the applicant's health was due to the ill-treatment received while in detention, and that before EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" that the applicant had been healthy.

37. On 7 December 2000 the applicant lodged a complaint with the Grozny Town Prosecutor's Office. He stated the circumstances of his arrest and detention, and stated that he EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" had been beaten and ill-treated while in detention in Grozny, Khankala, Chernokozovo, Mozdok, Pyatigorsk and Stavropol. As a result of the beatings he had suffered a broken nose, two EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" broken ribs and a wound to his head. The applicant requested that the prosecutor carry out an investigation into his complaints and award him compensation for the damage sustained.

38. On 21 December 2000 HRW wrote EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" a letter to the Prosecutor General on the applicant's behalf. They briefly reiterated the circumstances of the applicant's arrest and detention and requested that criminal proceedings in respect of the EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" credible allegations of severe ill-treatment and torture be instituted. A copy of the letter was sent to Mr Kalamanov, the Special Envoy of the Russian President in the Chechen Republic for rights EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" and freedoms, who forwarded the letter to the Stavropol Regional Prosecutor's Office.

39. On 21 February 2001 the Pyatigorsk Town Prosecutor's Office informed the applicant of its decision not to open criminal proceedings EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" in relation to his complaint of ill-treatment and of the possibility to appeal against that decision to the Town Court.

40. On 12 March 2001 the applicant underwent an informal medical examination EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" in Ingushetia. The doctor, who remained anonymous, noted a scar of about 10 centimetres long on the left side of the applicant's head, signs of a healed fracture of three ribs EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" on the left side, apathy and anxiety. He concluded that the applicant was suffering from the consequences of a head trauma, broken ribs, astheno-neurotic syndrome and phobias. The applicant later explained that he could EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" not register with a doctor in Ingushetia, because he had no passport, and that he had eventually found a doctor from Chechnya who was staying in Ingushetia and who EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" agreed to give a consultation on informal terms.

41. On 26 March 2001 HRW again wrote to the Prosecutor General, reminding him of their earlier letter to which no reply had been received.

42. On 20 April EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" 2001 the Chechnya Prosecutor's Office replied to HRW that no criminal prosecution would be initiated upon the applicant's complaints since the investigation had showed that they lacked grounds. The letter stated that on 20 February EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" 2000 the applicant had been examined by a doctor in SIZO No. 2 in Pyatigorsk and that no injuries had been reported. Similarly, no relevant records had been мейд on 22 February 2000 upon examination EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" by a doctor in SIZO No. 1 in Stavropol. While in SIZO No. 1 the applicant had not sought medical assistance or been subjected to disciplinary measures or physical coercion.

43. On 27 April 2001 the Stavropol EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" Regional Prosecutor's Office replied to the letter forwarded to them by Mr Kalamanov. The letter referred to the absence of recorded complaints or injuries in the medical files мейд upon admission EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" of the applicant to the detention centres and the absence of any medical complaints during his detention. It also cited the absence of records of disciplinary measures or physical coercion EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" applied in respect of the applicant. It was no longer possible to interview his former cell-mates as cell population records were not kept. The applicant's passport was not in his personal file EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации". The letter concluded that no violation of the applicant's rights had been committed by the staff of the detention centres in Pyatigorsk and Stavropol and thus it was decided not to initiate EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" criminal proceedings. On 15 May 2001 this information was sent to the HRW office in Moscow.

44. On 21 May 2001 the applicant was summoned as a witness by an investigator of the Zavodskoy District EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" Temporary Department of the Interior (VOVD) in Grozny. No further information about the nature of the proceedings was contained in the summons. The summons mentioned that the applicant was obliged to present himself and EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" to bring his passport.

45. On 22 May 2001 the applicant was examined by a doctor from {Medecins} Sans {Frontieres} in Nazran, Ingushetia. The doctor noted, in French, a scar on the EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" left side of his head and healed fractures of the ribs and nose.

46. On 23 May 2001 HRW wrote to the Prosecutor General and challenged the outcome of the prosecutorial inquiries conducted upon their EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" earlier requests. They stated that the decision of the Stavropol Prosecutor's Office not to initiate a criminal investigation was unfounded and failed to answer most of the well-founded allegations brought by EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" the applicant, in particular, concerning torture and ill-treatment, the legal grounds of his detention and confiscation of his passport.

47. On 25 May 2001 HRW wrote to the Deputy Minister of Justice in an attempt to EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" clarify the situation of the cell population records. In particular, it asked what kind of records were kept and for how long. No reply to that letter has been received.

48. On 14 June EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" 2001 the Prosecutor General's Office forwarded HRW's letter of 23 May 2001 to the Chechnya Prosecutor's Office.

49. On 2 July 2001 the applicant wrote letters to the Grozny Prosecutor's Office EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" and the Zavodskoy District VOVD of Grozny in reply to their summons. He explained that he resided in Ingushetia and that his passport had been confiscated upon arrest in January 2000. He therefore asked to EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" be questioned in Ingushetia and gave his temporary address there. Those letters were delivered in person by the applicant's sister-in-law. Neither the Grozny Prosecutor's Office nor the EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" Zavodskoy VOVD replied to those letters or took any follow-up action of which the applicant would be aware.

50. On 10 July 2001 HRW again contacted the Prosecutor General. They requested that the case-file from EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" the Stavropol and Chechnya Prosecutor's offices be retrieved, the decision of the Stavropol Prosecutor's Office not to open criminal proceedings be reviewed and a proper investigation be conducted EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации". No reply to that letter was received.

51. On 16 July 2001 HRW wrote to the Minister of the Interior, asking him which unit of the Ministry had conducted the passport check in the settlement of Karpinka EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" in Grozny on 23 January 2000. No reply to that letter has been received.

52. On 20 May 2003 the Stavropol Regional Prosecutor's Office sent to lawyers at "Stichting Russia Justice Initiative", a human rights EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" NGO office in Moscow, copies of orders of 21 February 2001 by the Pyatigorsk Town Prosecutor's Office and of 20 March 2001 by the Stavropol Town Prosecutor's Office.

53. In support of his submissions concerning ill EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации"-treatment and lack of an effective investigation the applicant referred to a number of public reports in relation to the situation in Chechnya (see Part C below).

54. The Government EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" confirmed that on 3 May 2000 the criminal proceedings against the applicant had been dropped in application of the Amnesty Act of 13 December 1999 and that he had been released on the same day.

55. The Government EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" submitted that the medical report of March 2001 obtained by the applicant had not been drawn up in conformity with the rules applicable to these kind of documents and that the applicant had EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" failed to apply to a medical institution upon his release to obtain a proper report. They also stressed the passage of a significant amount of time - almost ten months after his release - before the EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" applicant had sought any medical help.

56. Concerning the investigation into the alleged ill-treatment, the Government referred to the information received from the Prosecutor General's Office. According to EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" them, following the complaints brought on the applicant's behalf by HRW, on 21 February 2001 the Pyatigorsk Town Prosecutor's Office and on 20 March 2001 the Stavropol Town Prosecutor's Office refused to initiate criminal proceedings upon EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" the applicant's complaints for absence of a criminal offence. Those decisions had been taken following an inquiry conducted in accordance with Article 109 of the Criminal Procedural Code then in EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" force. The applicant was advised of those decisions immediately, and again in May 2003, upon an application by the NGO "Stichting Russian Justice Initiative" brought on his behalf. The Government submitted a number of EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" relevant documents (see Part B below).

57. The Government also informed the Court that "in connection with the dissolution of the Grozny Prosecutor's Office in 2003, no data concerning the examination of EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" this application has been kept. According to the information provided by the Prosecutor's Office of the Chechen Republic, no pre-investigative inquiries upon [the applicant's] application have been carried out by the EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" territorial bodies of prosecutor's office from February 2000 up to the present time".

58. As to the applicant's passport, the Government stated that upon release he had been issued with a EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" standard reference form concerning his detention and release. On the basis of that notice, on 31 July 2002 the Zavodskoy District Court of Grozny issued him with a passport. The materials of the criminal case EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" against the applicant contained no reference to the alleged seizure of his passport.


B. Documents submitted by the parties


59. Upon the Court's requests, both parties submitted a number of documents EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" related to the applicant's arrest and the investigation into his complaint of ill-treatment.


1. Documents related to the criminal

case against the applicant


60. On 9 October 1999 military prosecutor of the Northern Caucasus Military Prosecutor EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации"'s Office opened a criminal investigation into the attack by unidentified persons on a military unit near the village of Chervlennaya in Chechnya, as a result of which fifteen servicemen had been killed and EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" twenty-eight wounded. The investigation was opened with regard to Articles 208 part 2 of the Criminal Code (organisation of an illegal armed group) and 105 part 2 (murder in aggravating circumstances).

61. On 23 January 2000 an officer EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" of the rapid reaction police force (SOBR) reported to the head of the police mobile unit that on that day the applicant had been arrested in Grozny in Volodarskiy Street upon suspicion EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" of being involved in illegal armed groups.

62. On 28 January 2000 the acting Chechnya Prosecutor authorised the applicant's placement in detention upon suspicion of involvement in illegal armed groups, a crime under Article EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" 208 part 2 of the Criminal Code.

63. On 28 January 2000 in Chernokozovo the applicant was charged with participation in an illegal armed group and, as noted on the copy of the document, refused EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" to accept the charges or sign the document. On the same day he was questioned about the charges, but refused to testify or to sign the transcript.

64. On 3 May 2000 the acting EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" Chechnya Prosecutor authorised application of the Amnesty Act of 13 December 1999 to the applicant, as a member of the illegal armed group who had not committed grave crimes. On the same day the decision EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" was announced to the applicant in Mozdok, North Ossetia, and he signed a copy of it.


2. Documents related to the applicant's

detention in Chernokozovo


65. The Government submitted a copy of the "informal" registration entry EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" dated 28 January 2000. It stated that the applicant had arrived at the detention facility on 25 January 2000, that he had been arrested on 25 January 2000 by the Naurskiy (District) Prosecutor (sic) and that EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" on 19 February 2000 he had been sent to the (pre-trial detention centre) SI-2 in Pyatigorsk. The document further stated that the applicant had been released on 29 April 2000 under the Amnesty Act of EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" 13 December 1999.

66. They also submitted a copy of the medical register of new arrivals kept by the detention centre and covering the period between 8 November 1999 and 12 February 2000. The entry for the applicant referred to a bruise EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" on the right shoulder and did not indicate any other injuries or health problems. The page contained eight entries, some of them with details of wounds, burns and diseases in respect EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" of other prisoners.

67. In addition, the Government produced several documents issued in October 2004 by the pre-trial detention centre IZ 20/2 in Chernokozovo which stated that it had become operational in August EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" 2000 (presumably replacing pre-trial detention centre IZ 4/2) and that it therefore had no information concerning the conditions of detention of the applicant or whether physical force had been used on him EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации".

68. Another letter issued by pre-trial detention centre IZ 20/2 stated that the applicant had been detained in IZ 4/2 between 25 January 2000 and 29 April 2000 (sic) and that no personal file had been opened for him EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации". Instead, an "informal record card" (карточка неустановленного эталона) had been kept (see paragraph 65 above). While in detention in IZ 4/2 the applicant had not applied for medical assistance and no separate medical record had EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" been kept for him.


3. Documents related to the applicant's

detention in Pyatigorsk


69. On 20 February 2000 at 9.30 p.m. a medical worker and two officers of the IZ 21/2 detention centre in Pyatigorsk signed a medical EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" form in respect of the applicant, drawn up on his arrival. They noted no injuries or traumas and found him fit for detention at the pre-trial detention centre.

70. In February 2001 four EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" officers of the detention centre and the medical worker produced written statements. They stated that on 20 February 2000 the arrival, reception and allocation to the cells of the detainees arriving from Vladikavkaz (eighty persons EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации") had been carried out in accordance with the internal regulations and that no incidents had occurred. No injuries or health problems had been noted or recorded in respect of the applicant. The EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" medical worker noted, in particular, that he was obliged by law to record any injuries for new arrivals.

71. On 21 February 2001 the deputy Prosecutor of Pyatigorsk, in the Stavropol Region, issued a EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" decision not to open criminal proceedings into the applicant's complaints concerning ill-treatment. The order referred to the letter from HRW which had alleged that in February 2000 the applicant EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" had been placed in the IZ 21/2 detention centre in Pyatigorsk and had been beaten there. The order stated that the Town Prosecutor's Office had carried out an inquiry into that allegation and found EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" no factual grounds to support it. It read:

"Assistant to the officer in charge of the pre-trial detention facility M. explained that on 20 February 2000 a regular group of detainees had EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" arrived from the town of Vladikavkaz [North Ossetia]. Among the detainees there was a group of persons from the pre-trial detention centre in Chernokozovo, Chechnya. Medov S.A. was in that group EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации".

After sanitary treatment all the detainees were placed in transit cells at the pre-trial detention centre. The new arrivals did not commit any offences, so no physical coercion or special measures were EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Европейский суд по правам человека первая секция дело "медов (medov) против российской федерации" applied to them, as provided by the Federal Law on the Detention on Remand of Suspects and Persons Accused of Offences.


eto-uzh-kak-tebe-budet-ugodno.html
eto-vihod-podzemnih-vod-na-poverhnost-pod-estestvennim-davleniem-vsledstvie-podpiraniya-vodoupornimi-plastami-glina-izverzhennaya-gornaya-poroda-i-t-d-vodonos.html
eto-vopros-kotorij-zadayut-vekami-i-otvet-na-nego-davalsya-vsyakij-raz-vi-libo-ne-slishite-otveta-libo-ne-hotite-v-nego-verit.html