ties may well be required in respect of certain prisoners... [E]ven when such measures are required, they should never involve depriving the prisoners concerned of natural light and fresh air. The latter are basic elements of life which every prisoner is entitled to enjoy..."
THE LAW
I. The applicant's victim status
55. In their observations dated 13 February and 25 April 2006 the respondent Government drew the Court's attention to the fact that on 15 July 2002 the criminal proceedings against the applicant had been discontinued and that as a result of two sets of court proceedings which had ended on 6 May 2003 and 2 March 2005 respectively the applicant had been fully compensated for any damage he had sustained during his criminal prosecution. Accordingly, the Government invited the Court to discontinue the proceedings in the applicant's case for the loss of the victim status.
56. The applicant disagreed and argued that the amount of compensation awarded to him by the national courts had been insufficient. He further emphasised that the domestic law had not provided for compensation in cases of appalling conditions of detention.
57. The Court observes that according to its well-established case-law an individual can no longer claim to be a victim of a violation of a Convention when the national authorities have acknowledged, either directly or in substance, a breach of the Convention and afforded appropriate redress (see, among other authorities, Amuur v. France, 25 June 1996, § 36, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-III). Thus, in principle, where domestic proceedings include an admission of the breach by the national authorities and the payment of a sum of money amounting to redress, the dual requirements established in Amuur are satisfied and the applicant can no longer claim to be a victim of a violation of the Convention (see Rechachi and Abdelhafid v. the United Kingdom (dec.), No. 55554/00, 10 June 2003). The Court also notes that, as a general rule, an acquitted defendant or a person against whom criminal proceedings have been discontinued cannot claim to be a victim of violations of the Convention which, according to him, took place in the course of proceedings against him (see Osmanov and Husseinov v. Bulgaria (dec.), No. 54178/00, 4 September 2003). However, this conclusion can only be drawn where the applicant is no longer affected at all by the proceedings in question, having been relieved of any effects to his disadvantage (see Correia de Matos v. Portugal (dec.), No. 48188/99, ECHR 2001-XII).
58. Turning to the circumstances of the present case, the Court observes the following. The applicant brought two actions for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages in connection with his unlawful prosecution and detention and the domestic courts awarded him RUB 742,962.41 in total (approximately EUR 21,633). In both decisions the courts emphasised that, in assessing the amount of compensation to be awarded to the applicant, they took account of particular circumstances in which the harm had been caused and the evidence submitted by the applicant and concerning his physical and psychological suffering sustained as a result of his unlawful prosecution and detention. The Court further finds that the judgment of 19 December 2005, as upheld on appeal, declared the applicant's detention and criminal prosecution unlawful in their entirety, from the applicant's arrest until the discontinuation of the criminal proceedings against him and his release. The Court also notes that the domestic courts specifically emphasised the length of the applicant's detention when assessing the intensity of his physical and moral suffering. Furthermore, by decision of 7 February 2003, as upheld on appeal on 6 May 2003, the Regional Court compensated the applicant for lost earnings for the whole period of the criminal proceedi
> 1 2 3 ... 9 10 11 ... 13 14 15
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
