rt had not examined his ill-treatment complaints thoroughly and that it had disregarded the medical evidence supporting the applicant's version of events.
22. On 18 November 2003 the Kemerovo Regional Court upheld the applicant's conviction, endorsing the reasons given by the District Court.
23. According to the Government, on 20 October 2006 the case file pertaining to the inquiry into the applicant's ill-treatment complaints was destroyed due to the archiving time-limit.
C. Opening of the criminal investigation
into the ill-treatment complaints
24. On 18 January 2007 a deputy prosecutor of the Kemerovo Region instituted criminal proceedings against the police officers who, according to the applicant, had tortured him in March 2003.
25. On 18 May 2007 an investigator of the Prokopyevsk Town Prosecutor's office closed the criminal proceedings, finding that there was no prima facie case of ill-treatment. The investigator based his decision on statements by the applicant and Ms S., who had confirmed their allegations of police brutality, and statements by a number of police officers, investigators and a judge who had come into contact with the applicant in March 2003. Due to the remoteness of the events in question the interrogated officials could not recall certain details of the applicant's arrest and his subsequent detention in the police station or even if they had seen or talked to the applicant on 12 and 13 March 2003. The police officers, the alleged perpetrators of the offence, were also interrogated. They fiercely denied that force had been used and also had difficulties recalling either the applicant himself or the details of his presence in the police station. The investigator questioned two persons who had allegedly been detained in the police station together with the applicant in March 2003. Those persons did not remember the applicant and merely stated that during their detention in the police station they had not been ill-treated and had not heard anyone complain about police brutality.
The investigator had been unable to examine the medical evidence, including the X-ray records made in May 2003 and records of the medical emergency unit of the Prokopyevsk Town Hospital, as they had been destroyed due to the archiving time-limit.
The investigator concluded that the applicant's ill-treatment allegations were not supported by any evidence, save for statements given by him and his relatives. The investigator noted that those statements had to be treated with caution as they had been made by persons having a direct interest in the case.
26. It appears that, on an unspecified date, the decision of 18 May 2007 was annulled and a new round of criminal proceedings commenced.
27. The applicant lodged a complaint with the Prokopyevsk Town Prosecutor, seeking the transfer of the case file to the Kemerovo Regional Prosecutor's office for further investigation. He also asked to change the legal classification of the police officers' actions and to ensure his and his relatives' safety.
28. On 27 July 2007 a deputy to the Prokopyevsk Town Prosecutor dismissed the applicant's complaint in full.
29. On 6 August 2007 the applicant received a letter from the Prokopyevsk Town Prosecutor, informing him that the criminal proceedings were stayed as "it was impossible to identify persons who could be charged" with a criminal offence against the applicant.
II. Relevant domestic law
A. Investigation into criminal offences
30. The Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation (in force since 1 July 2002, "the CCrP") establishes that a criminal investigation can be initiated by an investigator or a prosecutor on a complaint by an individual or on the investigative authorities' ow
> 1 ... 2 3 4 5 ... 17 18 19
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
