Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 17.06.2010 «Дело Шуленков (Shulenkov) против России» [англ.]

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST SECTION

CASE OF SHULENKOV v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 38031/04)

JUDGMENT <*>

(Strasbourg, 17.VI.2010)

--------------------------------
<*> This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Shulenkov v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Christos Rozakis, President,
Nina {Vajic} <*>,
--------------------------------
<*> Здесь и далее по тексту слова на национальном языке набраны латинским шрифтом и выделены фигурными скобками.

Anatoly Kovler,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Dean Spielmann,
Sverre Erik Jebens,
Giorgio Malinverni, judges,
and {Soren} Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 27 May 2010,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in an application (No. 38031/04) against the 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 Aleksandr Nikolayevich Shulenkov ("the applicant"), on 15 July 2004.
2. The applicant, who had been granted legal aid, was represented by Ms O.V. Preobrazhenskaya from the International Protection Centre, a Moscow-based human-rights NGO, and Mr S. Obolentsev, a lawyer practising in Tula. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by Ms V. Milinchuk, former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights, and subsequently by their Representative, Mr G. Matyushkin.
3. The applicant alleged, in particular, that a period of his detention had not been authorised in accordance with the law and that his appeals against the orders for his detention had not been properly examined.
4. On 25 July 2007 the President of the First Section decided to give notice of the application to the Government. It was also decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility (Article 29 § 3 of the Convention).

THE FACTS

I. The circumstances of the case

5. The applicant was born in 1974 and is now serving a prison sentence in the Tula Region.
6. On 10 April 2003 the police apprehended the applicant and two other individuals near a psychiatric hospital which had been robbed shortly before. The applicant was carrying a firearm and offered resistance to the arresting officers.
7. The applicant claimed that the police officers had ill-treated him and compelled him to make a confession. On 23 October 2003 a deputy Leninskiy District prosecutor of the Tula Region found the applicant's allegations of ill-treatment unsubstantiated and decided not to institute criminal proceedings. An appeal against that decision lay to a court of general jurisdiction; the applicant did not make use of that procedure.
8. On 12 April 2003 the Leninskiy District Court of the Tula Region remanded the applicant in custody for an initial two-month period.
9. On 16 April 2003 the applicant was charged with the armed robbery of the hospital. On 8 May and 7 June 2003 the applicant was additionally charged with five offences of theft and robbery committed in 2002 and 2003.
10. On 5 June, 5 August and 14 October 2003 the Uzlovaya Town Court extended the applicant's detention until 31 December 2003.
11. On 15 September 2003 the applicant was transferred to Moscow for an in-patient psychiatric

> 1 2 3 ... 8 9 10