o the Government. Under the provisions of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention, it decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility. On 27 September 2007 the President of the Chamber invited the Government to provide further written observations on the admissibility and merits of the applicant's complaint under Article 5 § 4.
4. The Government objected to the joint examination of the admissibility and merits of the application. The Court examined their objection and dismissed it.
THE FACTS
I. The circumstances of the case
5. The applicant was born in 1979 and lives in Snezhinsk, Chelyabinsk region. He is currently serving a prison sentence in the Chelyabinsk region.
6. On 16 July 2003 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of robbery.
7. On 18 July 2003 the Snezhinsk Town Court of the Chelyabinsk region ("the Town Court") released the applicant on an undertaking not to leave the town.
8. On 23 July 2003 the Town Court remanded the applicant in custody. It held that his detention was justified on the ground of his previous convictions, the gravity of the offence, and the risk that he would abscond, obstruct investigation of the case, commit another crime or hinder the execution of the sentence.
9. On 25 July 2003 the applicant's counsel Ye. appealed against the detention order of 23 July 2003. He contested the grounds on which the applicant had been placed in detention. On the same date the Town Court registered the appeal as No. 132.
10. It follows from the Government's submissions, confirmed by a copy of the record of the outgoing mail of the Town Court, that on 28 July 2003 the Town Court sent copies of the grounds of appeal to the applicant, the investigating authorities and the prosecutor's office. On 4 August 2003 the Town Court sent a notification about the examination of the appeal by the Regional Court on 14 August 2003 to the detention facility in which the applicant was detained and to his counsel. However, the Government did not submit any document confirming that the applicant or his lawyer had received that notification. On 7 August 2003 the appeal materials reached the Chelyabinsk Regional Court ("the Regional Court").
11. According to the applicant, neither he nor his lawyer received the notification of the appeal hearing.
12. On 14 August 2003 the Regional Court examined the appeal in the absence of the applicant and his counsel. The Prosecutor, who was present at the hearing, considered that the appeal should be dismissed. The Regional Court upheld the detention order of 23 July 2003, finding it lawful and duly reasoned.
13. Subsequently the Town Court extended the applicant's detention on 17 and 26 September 2003. The applicant did not appeal against those extension orders.
14. On 4 November 2003 the Town Court found the applicant guilty of aggravated robbery and sentenced him to ten years' imprisonment. On 15 January 2004 the Regional Court upheld the applicant's conviction and reduced the term of imprisonment to eight years.
15. On 13 April 2005 the Deputy President of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation granted the applicant's request for supervisory review of the judgment of 4 November 2003, as upheld on 15 January 2004, and remitted the case for examination on the merits to the Presidium of the Regional Court. On 1 June 2005 the Presidium of the Regional Court upheld the applicant's conviction.
II. Relevant domestic law and practice
16. Since 1 July 2002 criminal-law matters have been governed by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation of 18 December 2001 ("the CCrP").
17. Article 108 of the CCrP provides that detention may be ordered by a court if the charge carries a sentence of
> 1 2 3 ... 6 7 8 9 ... 10 11
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
