CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 18 mars 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Published on 6 April 2021   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 47515/13 Oleksandr Oleksiyovych SHAKHOV against Ukraine and 6 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 18 March 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications principally concern the applicants’ allegations under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention that the domestic courts, when ordering or extending the applicants’ detention on remand, did not provide sufficient reasoning for that detention and, in particular, set an amount for bail which was excessive and disproportionate to their financial situation. Some of the applications, as specified in the appendix, also raise the following issues: the alleged unlawfulness of the applicants’ arrest by the law-enforcement bodies or by the court, the allegedly unreasonable duration of the applicants’ detention, the alleged absence of a right to compensation for the applicant’s unlawful deprivation of liberty, and the allegedly unreasonable duration of the criminal proceedings against the applicant. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES AS REGARDS ALL THE APPLICATIONS Was the applicants’ pre-trial detention free from arbitrariness and based on sufficient reasons for the purposes of Article 5   § 3 of the Convention (see, for instance, Buzadji v.   the Republic of Moldova [GC], no. 23755/07, §§ 84 et seq., ECHR 2016 (extracts) and Ignatov v.   Ukraine , no. 40583/15, §§ 34-37, 15 December 2016)? In particular, was the amount of bail set in accordance with the above provision (see Mangouras v. Spain [GC], no.   12050/04, §§ 78-81, ECHR 2010)? ADDITIONAL QUESTION TO THE PARTIES AS REGARDS APPLICATION NO. 9655/18 Was the applicant’s detention, based on the arrest report of 24 May 2017, in breach of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention (see Strogan v. Ukraine , no.   30198/11, §§ 85-89, 6 October 2016)? ADDITIONAL QUESTION TO THE PARTIES AS REGARDS APPLICATION NO. 18336/19 Was the applicant deprived of his liberty on 19 February 2019 in breach of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention, regard being had to the reasonableness of the grounds given by the court to justify his detention (see, e.g., Khayredinov v. Ukraine , no.   38717/04, §§   27-31, 14   October   2010)? ADDITIONAL QUESTION TO THE PARTIES AS REGARDS APPLICATIONS NOS. 47515/13 and 74633/17 Was the applicants’ detention compatible with the “reasonable time” requirement as provided by Article 5   § 3 of the Convention? (see, for instance, and Ignatov v.   Ukraine , no. 40583/15, § 40, 15 December 2016)? ADDITIONAL QUESTION TO THE PARTIES AS REGARDS APPLICATION NO. 43254/18 Did the applicant have an effective and enforceable right to compensation for alleged violation of Article 5 § 3, as required by Article 5 §   5 of the Convention (see, for example, Korneykova v. Ukraine , no.   39884/05, §§ 79-82, 19 January 2012, and Taran v. Ukraine , no.   31898/06, §§ 87-90, 17 October 2013)? ADDITIONAL QUESTION TO THE PARTIES AS REGARDS APPLICATION NO. 47515/13 Was the length of the criminal proceedings in the above case in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see, for example, Merit v. Ukraine , no. 66561/01, § 72, 30 March 2004)?   APPENDIX   No. Application no. Lodged on Applicant Year of birth Place of residence Nationality Represented by Court decision determining the bail Additional complaints to be communicated 1 47515/13 08/07/2013 Oleksandr Oleksiyovych SHAKHOV 1971 Kyiv Russian Viktor Viktorovych GRYTSYUK Podilskyi District Court of Kyiv of 28   February 2013 Article 5 § 3 – excessive length of pre-trial detention (from 9 October 2008 to 11 April 2016)   Article 6 § 1 – unreasonable length of the criminal proceedings against the applicant (pending since February 2006, approximately 15 years in 1 instance)   2 37822/16 17/06/2016 Vyacheslav Yuriyovych ZAIKIN 1981 Mostyska Ukrainian Valeriy Stepanovych MATSEPURA     Shevhenkivskyi District Court of Lviv of 11 February 2016, as amended by the Lviv Regional Court of Appeal on 19   February 2016   3 74633/17 10/10/2017 Andriy Mykolayovych SURZHAN 1985 Syevyerodonetsk Ukrainian Nataliya Gennadiyivna OKHOTNIKOVA   Rubizhne Local Court of 10 October 2015 Article 5 § 3 – excessive length of pre-trial detention (from 8 October 2015 to 13 April 2017)   4 9655/18 12/02/2018 Igor Grygorovych BONDARENKO 1966 Kyiv Ukrainian Oleksandr Leonidovych DULSKYY   Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv of 25 May 2017 Article 5 § 1 – arrest on 24 May 2017 without prior court decision in breach of the requirements of domestic law   5 13754/18 12/03/2018 Yaroslav Aleksandrovich GULYY 1986 Dnipro Ukrainian Oksana Vladimirovna PREOBRAZHENSKAYA Zhovtnevyi District Court of Dnipropetrovsk of 8 September 2017, as amended by the Dnipropetrovsk Regional Court of Appeal on 15 September 2017   6 43254/18 28/08/2018 Mylan Yuriyovych SIDAK 1982 Shevchenkove Ukrainian Kostyantyn Kostyantynovych DOROSHENKO   Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv of 2   April 2018 Article 5 § 5 – absence of an effective and enforceable right to compensation for alleged violation of Article 5 § 3 as required by Article 5 § 5   7 18336/19 18/03/2019 Oleksiy Anatoliyovych OMELYANENKO 1973 Kyiv Ukrainian Oleksandr Leonidovych DULSKYY   Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv of 19   February 2019 Article 5 § 1 – arrest by the court on 19   February 2019 without relevant justification