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

B. The conditions of the applicant's detention
from December 1999 to August 2003

12. Between 27 and 30 December 1999 the applicant was detained in a temporary isolation facility.
13. On 30 December 1999 the applicant was transferred to detention facility IZ-49/1 of the town of Magadan (also known as IZ-47/1), in which he remained until 28 August 2003.

1. Cell No. 38

14. The applicant submitted that between 31 December 1999 and 22 February 2000 he was kept in cell No. 38 measuring 25 square metres and designed for nine inmates. At all times the number of inmates varied between seventeen and nineteen.
15. Since the number of beds was insufficient, the inmates took it in turns to sleep. The applicant's turn started at 4 o'clock in the morning. According to him, proper sleep was impossible as the television was on around the clock and the light in the cell was never turned off. Being surrounded by heavy smokers, the applicant was forced to become a passive smoker.
16. The cell had no ventilation and was very cold in winter. Because of the poor quality of the air in the cell, a window had to remain open all the time. The applicant claimed that he was never provided with proper bedding. The cell was heavily infected with bugs and had no anti-infestation treatment.
17. The lavatory pan in the corner of the cell offered no privacy, being separated, by a partition of 1.1 m only, from a wash stand but not from the living area and dining table. As a result a person using the toilet was in plain view of both his cellmates and any prison guard who happened to be observing the inmates through the peep-hole in the door.
18. The applicant alleged that in general hot showers and changes of bed sheets were irregular and daily walks outside his cell were restricted to one hour.
19. The Government submitted that cell No. 38 measured 8.4 square metres and had one window. They were unable to provide any exact information concerning the overall number of detainees during the relevant period of time, since the original prison records in this connection had been destroyed.
20. The Government submitted a written statement by prison officer K. dated 17 February 2006, who recalled that there had been two inmates, including the applicant, in that cell at the relevant time.

2. Cell No. 77

21. On 22 February 2000 the applicant was transferred to cell No. 77. He stayed there until 28 February 2000.
22. According to the applicant, the cell measured 20 square metres and was originally designed for eight inmates. The cell usually hosted thirteen inmates. The applicant's shift to sleep started at 9 a.m.
23. He also alleged that fellow inmates had beaten him up and psychologically abused him. The case file contains no indication that the applicant applied for medical aid or complained to any officials in connection with that allegation.
24. The Government submitted that the cell measured 12.5 square metres and had one window. They were unable to provide any exact information concerning the overall number of detainees at the relevant period of time, since the original prison records in this connection had been destroyed. According to the written statement of prison officer K. dated 17 February 2006 there had been four inmates, including the applicant, in that cell at the relevant time.

3. Cell No. 6

25. From 29 February until 21 July 2000 the applicant was kept in cell No. 6.
26. The applicant submitted that the cell had measured 14 square metres and had had two beds for two or three inmates. The applicant alleges that the cell served as a place of confinement for inmates who had breached the prison regulations. The applicant submitted that the location of the

> 1 2 3 ... 6 7 8