issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 047 (2018)
06.02.2018
Judgments of 6 February 2018
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing nine judgments1:
two Chamber judgments are summarised below; a separate press release has been issued for one
other Chamber judgment in the case of Kristiana Ltd. V. Lithuania (application no. 36184/13);
six Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been submitted to the Court, can
The judgments summarized below are available only in English.
Akimenkov and Others v. Russia (applications nos. 2613/13 and 50041/14)
The case concerned the applicant’s complaint that, following a political demonstration, there had
been no good reason for his arrest or pre-trial detention, and that various aspects of his detention
had amounted to degrading treatment.
The applicant, Vladimir Akimenkov, is a Russian national who was born in 1987 and lives in Moscow.
On 6 May 2012 he attended a protest against allegedly rigged presidential elections. After a peaceful
march, a meeting began at Bolotnaya Square, where clashes broke out between the demonstrators
and the police. The following month the applicant was arrested and charged with taking part in acts
of mass disorder and committing acts of violence against the police accompanied by violence. He
requested bail but detention was repeatedly extended until December 2013 when he was finally
released under the new Amnesty Act.
The applicant complained in particular under Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading
treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights, notably about the alleged poor conditions
in the various remand prisons, en route to court and at the court itself, and about a lack of medical
assistance for a serious eye condition. He further complained under Article 5 (right to liberty and
security) that there had been no good reason for his extended pre-trial detention, nor any reason to
suspect that he had committed a criminal offence.
No violation of Article 3 – in respect of the conditions of detention in the remand prisons
No violation of Article 3 – as regards the alleged lack of medical assistance
Violation of Article 3 (inhuman and degrading treatment) – in respect of the conditions of transfer
to and from court
Violation of Article 3 – on account of the confinement in a glass cabin in hearing room no. 338 at the
Moscow City Court
No violation of Article 3 – on account of the confinement in a glass cabin in hearing room no. 635 at
the Moscow City Court
Violation of Article 5 § 3
Just satisfaction: 10,000 euros (EUR) (non-pecuniary damage)
1
Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a Chamber
judgment’s delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a
panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and
deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the
Convention, judgments delivered by a Committee are final.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution
