t known (Article 50 of the CCP). Free legal assistance may be provided to indigent plaintiffs in civil disputes concerning alimony or pension payments or claims for health damage (section 26 § 1 of the Advocates Act in force as of 31 May 2002).
22. Convicted persons may be transferred from a correctional colony to an investigative unit if their participation is required as witnesses, victims or suspects in connection with certain investigative measures (Article 77.1 of the Code of Corrections in force as of 8 January 1997). The possibility for a convicted person to take part in civil proceedings, whether as a plaintiff or defendant is not provided for.
23. On several occasions the Constitutional Court has examined complaints by convicted persons whose requests for leave to appear in civil proceedings had been refused by courts. It has consistently declared the complaints inadmissible, finding that the contested provisions of the CCP and the Code of Corrections did not, as such, restrict the convicted person's access to court. It has emphasised, nonetheless, that the convicted person should be able to make submissions to the civil court, either through a representative or in any other way provided by law. If necessary, the court may hold the hearing at the location where the convicted person is serving the sentence or may ask the court having territorial jurisdiction over the correctional colony to obtain the applicant's submissions or carry out any other procedural actions (decisions No. 478-O of 16 October 2003, No. 335-O of 14 October 2004, and No. 94-O of 21 February 2008).
THE LAW
I. Alleged violation of Article 3 of the Convention
24. The applicant complained that he had been detained in appalling conditions from 16 March to 30 December 1998 in remand prison No. IZ-39/1 in Kaliningrad in contravention of Article 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows:
"No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."
A. Admissibility
1. The parties' submissions
25. The applicant submitted that he had tried to obtain redress for the violation of his rights set out in Article 3 of the Convention by bringing an action against State authorities to recover damages for inhuman conditions of his detention. However, it was to no avail.
26. The Government conceded that the applicant had resorted to one of the domestic remedies available in respect of his grievances. However, in their opinion, he had applied to domestic courts only four years after his detention ended and the civil proceedings instituted by the applicant should not be taken into account for the purposes of the six-month rule. They submitted that the period of six months for the introduction of the complaint should be calculated from 30 December 1998, which was when the applicant's detention ended. Therefore, the applicant had introduced his complaint out of time and it should be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention.
2. The Court's assessment
(a) The Court's competence to examine the complaint
27. The Court notes from the outset that the applicant complained about the conditions of his detention between 16 March and 30 December 1998. However, it will examine the complaint only in respect of the period which falls within its competence ratione temporis, that is after the Convention entered into force in respect of Russia on 5 May 1998.
(b) Whether the applicant complied with the six-month rule
28. In view of the Government's argument that the applicant introduced his complaint about the conditions of detention more than four years after his detention ended and his application to the domestic courts should not be taken into account for the p
> 1 2 3 ... 16 17 18 ... 23 24 25
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
