CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 30 mai 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 30 May 2018   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 56483/09 Ruslan Alekseyevich ALEKSANDROV against Ukraine lodged on 5 October 2009 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application mainly concerns the applicant’s inability to obtain copies of documents from his case file in support of his application before the Court, which he introduced after the completion of the criminal proceedings against him. The applicant raises his complaint under Article 34 of the Convention.   By the judgment of the Court of Appeal of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea of 25 December 2008 and the final ruling of the Supreme Court of 21 May 2009, the applicant was found guilty of two counts of aggravated rape and one count of murder and sentenced to fifteen years’ imprisonment. On 5 October 2009 he introduced his application before the Court, in which he complained, in particular, that he had been ill-treated by the police and that his trial had been unfair in various aspects. On numerous occasions after the criminal proceedings against the applicant were completed, in particular, in 2009-2012, he requested the trial court to provide him with access to his case file so that he could copy documents required for substantiating his application before the Court. In the alternative, he requested the court to provide him with copies of those documents. His requests were refused on the ground that, firstly, he had already studied the case file in full and, secondly, there was no legal basis for providing him with copies of documents from his case file. It was observed that the applicant had already received copies of documents required by law (namely, the verdict). As the applicant further stated, without details, eventually the authorities had agreed to provide him with the requested copies, but at his cost, which he could not afford. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Has there been any hindrance on the part of the State of the effective exercise of the applicant’s right of application, as guaranteed by Article   34 of the Convention? In particular, did the applicant have any opportunity to obtain copies of the documents from his case file and send them to the Court in order to pursue his present application (see, for example, Naydyon v.   Ukraine , no. 16474/03, §§ 64-69, 14 October 2010, and Vasiliy Ivashchenko v. Ukraine , no.   760/03, §§ 103-109, 26 July 2012)?