CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 25 novembre 2019

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .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 } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sFBB1651C { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s58699FB5 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s3AAA249C { width:91.26%; border-collapse:collapse } .s2FCE6CFC { width:8.24%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s85646119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sF1DCBE94 { width:25.12%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s49C2CA3B { width:20.74%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s58FA5326 { width:25.16%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sC2D0AC95 { width:8.24%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB62FFB0 { width:25.12%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s862A0ED6 { width:20.74%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s5CACD8B4 { width:25.16%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Communicated on 25 November 2019   THIRD SECTION Application no. 4878/18 Aleksandr Borisovich KLUBOV and others against Russia lodged on 13 December 2017 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicants are Russian nationals. They are represented by Mr   E.   Mezak and Mr A. Laptev, lawyers practising in Syktyvkar and Moscow respectively. A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. On 12   June 2017 the police arrested the applicants at the site of an unauthorised manifestation against corruption at Marsovo Pole, St   Petersburg. The applicants were held in a police van for several hours and then taken to a police station. Messrs   Klubov, Melnikov and Samarin were detained in a cell measuring 6.9 sq. m and housing eight detainees. The cell was equipped with two narrow benches. It was impossible to lean against the walls which had an abrasive surface. There was no window or ventilation. The lighting was dim. The toilet, which was clogged, was located outside the cell with no light or door. The applicants received water and some food at 1 a.m. on 13   June 2017. Mr Nechayev and eight other detainees were detained in cell no.   3 measuring 8.8 sq. m. There were no beds or benches in the cell. Instead, it was equipped with a wooden board measuring 5.4 sq. m. There was no window or ventilation. The lighting was dim. The walls had abrasive surface. It was impossible to lean against them. The detainees received some food and water at 5 a.m. on 13   June 2017. The second meal was provided at 2 p.m. On 13   June 2017 between 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. the applicants were taken to the courthouse. On the same date the Kolpinskiy District Court of St Petersburg found the applicants guilty of (1) refusal to comply with a lawful police order and (2) violation of the procedure prescribed for the conduct of a public gathering, and imposed fines on them. COMPLAINTS The applicants complain under Articles   3 and   13 of the Convention about the conditions of their detention at the police station from 12 to 13   June 2017. The applicants complain under Article 5 of the Convention that their arrest and detention were not “lawful” or “in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law”. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the material conditions of the applicants’ detention at the police station from 29 to 30   December 2016, in particular, the personal space available in the cell and the availability of sanitary facilities, meals, drinking water, beds and bed linen, amount to inhuman or degrading treatment (see Fedotov v. Russia , no. 5140/02, §§   66-70, 25 October 2005)?   2.     Did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for their complaint under Article   3 of the Convention, as required by Article   13 of the Convention?   3.     Were the applicants’ arrest and detention “lawful” and “in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law” as required by Article   5   §   1 of the Convention (see Navalnyy and Yashin v. Russia , no. 76204/11, §§   89-98, 4   December 2014)?         APPENDIX No. Applicant’s Name Birth date Nationality Place of residence 1 Aleksandr Borisovich KLUBOV 12/02/1974 Russian St Petersburg 2 Sergey Yuryevich MELNIKOV 16/09/1964 Russian St Petersburg 3 Petr Andreyevich NECHAYEV 16/06/1975 Russian St Petersburg 4 Nikita Aleksandrovich SAMARIN 04/04/1994 Russian St Petersburg