CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 4 juin 2020

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .sCF71F55 { width:100%; border-collapse:collapse } .s829ABBD9 { border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-top:11.35pt; padding-bottom:10.98pt; vertical-align:middle } .s9EC3D245 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s6AE8D4B6 { font-family:Arial; font-size:7.33pt; font-style:italic; vertical-align:super } .s2EAAAA4F { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify } .sE3D66594 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s41E9DBF5 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4AC9B09A { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify; font-size:11pt } .s24AC208E { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF004B676 { border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB30C44B0 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sC3AB69A { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2342A031 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s546C9D04 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s40B7A780 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4F2EDFF { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Interim Resolution CM/ResDH(2020)100 Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Pichugin against Russian Federation   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 4 June 2020 at the 1377 th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     Application No. Case Judgment of Final on 38623/03 PICHUGIN 23/10/2012 18/03/2013 38958/07 PICHUGIN 06/06/2017 06/06/2017   The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46 paragraph 2 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);   Noting that, in its first judgment concerning the applicant the Court found, inter alia, violations of the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the Convention on account of the lack of a public hearing without indication of grounds to hold proceedings in camera by the national court and the lack of opportunity for the defence to put some questions to a key witness and that in the second judgment it found violations of Article 6 on account of the refusal by the trial court to admit in evidence a specialist’s opinion obtained by the defence and the breach of the presumption of innocence against the applicant due to the publication of interviews about his involvement in crimes as an established fact in the media;   Noting further that the just satisfaction awarded to the applicant by the Court in both cases has been paid and no further measures are required in response to the violations of Article 5 of the Convention;   Recalling that the judicial reopening of the domestic criminal proceedings did not ensure redress for the applicant, since his convictions were upheld, notwithstanding the findings of the European Court, and that the applicant thus continues to suffer grave negative consequences as the unfair criminal proceedings against him resulted in a life sentence;   Stressing that the full execution of the Court’s first judgment has been pending since 2013;   Strongly regretting that, despite the Committee’s calls since 2016 to find alternative avenues to secure full redress for the applicant, no such avenues have been found;   Noting in this context that in March 2020 the applicant lodged a new request for presidential pardon which presents a possibility to secure his release;   EXHORTS the Russian authorities to adopt the individual measures necessary to erase as soon as possible the consequences of the applicant’s convictions resulting from the criminal trials found by the European Court to have been in violation of the Convention and to report to the Committee by 30   November 2020 at the latest;   DECIDES to resume consideration of the individual measures required in these cases at its Human Rights meeting in March 2021 at the latest.