xtend a defendant's detention for successive periods of up to three months. It does not contain, however, any provisions permitting the courts to take a decision extending a defendant's detention once the previously authorised time-limit has expired, in which event the person is detained for a period without a judicial decision. Nor do other rules of criminal procedure provide for such a possibility. Moreover, Articles 10 § 2 and 109 § 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure expressly require the court, prosecutor, investigator... to immediately release anyone who is unlawfully held in custody beyond the time-limit established in the Code. Such is also the requirement of Article 5 §§ 3 and 4 of the European Convention... which is an integral part of the legal system of the Russian Federation, pursuant to Article 15 § 4 of the Russian Constitution..."
(b) Constitutional Court decision No. 101-O of 4 April 2006
51. Verifying the compatibility of Article 466 § 1 of the CCP with the Russian Constitution, the Constitutional Court reiterated its established case-law to the effect that excessive or arbitrary detention, unlimited in time and without appropriate review, was incompatible with Article 22 of the Constitution and Article 14 § 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in all cases, including extradition proceedings.
52. In the Constitutional Court's view, the guarantees of the right to liberty and personal integrity set out in Article 22 and Chapter 2 of the Constitution, as well as the legal norms laid down in Chapter 13 of the CCP on preventive measures, were fully applicable to detention with a view to extradition. Accordingly, Article 466 of the CCP did not allow the authorities to apply a custodial measure without abiding by the procedure established in the CCP, or in excess of the time-limits fixed therein.
(c) Constitutional Court decision No. 158-O of 11 July 2006 on the Prosecutor General's request for clarification
53. The Prosecutor General asked the Constitutional Court for an official clarification of its decision No. 101-O of 4 April 2006 (see above), for the purpose, in particular, of elucidating the procedure for extending a person's detention with the aim of extradition.
54. The Constitutional Court dismissed the request on the ground that it was not competent to indicate specific criminal-law provisions governing the procedure and time-limits on the keeping of a person in custody with the aim of extradition. That was a matter for the courts of general jurisdiction.
(d) Constitutional Court decision No. 333-O-P of 1 March 2007
55. In this decision the Constitutional Court reiterated that Article 466 of the CCP did not imply that detention of a person on the basis of an extradition request did not have to comply with the terms and time-limits provided for in the legislation on criminal procedure.
(e) Ruling of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 22 of 29 October 2009
56. In this ruling the Supreme Court reiterated that the arrest and detention of a person with the aim of extraditing him or her under Article 466 of the CCP should comply with the requirements of Article 108 of the CCP, and that detention pending extradition could be extended only in compliance with the requirements of Article 109 of the CCP.
B. Relevant documents concerning the use of diplomatic
assurances and the situation in Uzbekistan
57. UN General Assembly resolution 62/148 of 18 December 2007 ("Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" (UN Doc.: A/RES/62/148)) reads as follows:
"The General Assembly...
12. Urges States not to expel, return (refouler), extradite or in any other way transfer a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing t
> 1 2 3 ... 5 6 7 ... 14 15 16
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
