В статье освещаются вопросы по обеспечению физического благополучия лиц, находящихся под стражей в российской пенитенциарной системе. Рассматриваются постановления Европейского Суда по делам «Ананьев и другие против России», «Арутюнян против России», «Сахвадзе против России» и «Владимир Васильев против России», касающиеся условий содержания заключенных. Статья содержит анализ практики Европейского Суда в отношении России, выявляет системную проблему в правопорядке конкретной страны, являющуюся причиной массовых нарушений прав человека, перечисляет действия российских властей для решения проблемы переполненности и плохих условий содержания в СИЗО, а также ответные меры ЕСПЧ по разгрузке суда от однотипных жалоб.
Европейский суд по правам человека, пенитенциарная система, правовые стандарты
As the European Court repeatedly pointed out in its acts, Article 3 of the Convention allocates one of the fundamental values of a democratic society — humanism as a form of human communication. Even under the most difficult circumstances, such as the fight against terrorism and organized crime, it prohibits in absolute terms torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the victim’s conduct (page 93 of the Bulletin of the European Court of Human Rights, 9`2009) [1]. Member states of the European Convention have an obligation to ensure the physical wellbeing of persons in custody. These individuals are vulnerable and should not be in excess of the allowable limit suffering under this principle.
January 10 of this year, the European Court adopted the determination of “Ananyev and others against Russia” case which addressed the question of the conditions in the detention centers. Also ruled on three cases concerning the protection of the health of prisoners, “Harutyunyan against Russia”, “Sakhvadze against Russia” and “Vladimir Vasilyev against Russia”. They all relate to the conditions of detention in the Russian penitentiary system.
The European Court jurisdiction concerning Russia began in 2002 with just a complaint to the conditions in the detention center. And until now, these things lead to court statistics ECHR. In one of the first in this thread determination of “Kalashnikov against Russia” case the Court declared inhuman many months of detention in overcrowded cells. To date, the Court issued more than ninety determinations regarding size and jail cell equipment, as well as the number of places the prisoners, their conditions of detention.
Discussed European Court determination dated the 10th day of January 2012 concerning these complaints is special as The Supreme Court applied the socalled pilot procedure. It is not limited to the admitting of violations of the applicants and the appointment of compensation for the trespass
Revealed a systemic problem in the nomocracy of the country — a problem that is a cause of massive violations of human rights provided by the European Convention. In the determination, the Court points to the direction and solutions of the identified problem and imposes a duty on the State to resolve it. In the determination of “Ananyev and Others against Russia” case, the European Court noted that the inhumane and degrading conditions of detention were found in detention centers located in different regions of Russia. Agreeably, the problem affects large numbers of people.
1. Bulletin of the European Court of Human Rights. 09. 2009. URL: http://ka-advocat.ru/662/1173/1676/
2. Shepeleva O. Strasbourg against investigative isolation wards. URL: http://www.gazeta.ru/comments/2012/01/1 1_a_3959397.shtml
3. Pushkarskaya A. Russian citizens deserve more place in investigative isolation wards. URL: http://www.kommersant.ru/docy/1848778
4. Pushkarskaya A. Russian citizens deserve more place in investigative isolation wards. URL: http://rapsinews.ru/international_publication/20120113/259536071.html
5. Pushkarskaya A. Russian citizens deserve more place in investigative isolation wards. URL: http://rapsinews.ru/international_publication/20120113/259536071.html
