KARNAUKHOV proti Rusku

THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 45538/14
Ruslan Ilkhamovich KARNAUKHOV

against Russia

(see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 8 December 2022 as a Committee composed of:

Darian Pavli, President,
Ioannis Ktistakis,
Andreas Zünd, judges,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 4 June 2014,

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant’s details are set out in the appended table.

The applicant was represented by Ms Z.M. Gubaydullina, a lawyer practising in Nizhnekamsk.

The applicant’s complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning torture or inhuman or degrading treatment were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”). Complaints based on the same facts were also communicated under other provisions of the Convention.

THE LAW

1. Complaints under Article 3 of the Convention (torture or inhuman or degrading treatment)

The Court reiterates that allegations of ill-treatment must be supported by appropriate evidence and to assess such evidence, the Court adopts the standard of proof “beyond reasonable doubt” (see Bouyid v. Belgium [GC], no. 23380/09, § 82, 28 September 2015).

The Court observes that the applicant’s account of ill-treatment is not corroborated by the evidence submitted, which puts in question the credibility of his allegations (see Andreyevskiy v. Russia, no. 1750/03, § 62, 29 January 2009). Furthermore, it notes that duly represented throughout the criminal proceedings, the applicant failed to appeal against the refusal of 3 July 2013 to open a criminal case under Article 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (see Belevitskiy v. Russia, no. 72967/01, § 55, 1 March 2007) and only raised the ill-treatment complaint during the trial.

Having questioned the applicant about the circumstances of the alleged ill‑‑treatment and studied numerous pieces of medical evidence, as well as after hearing a witness who confirmed the applicant’s own admission that shortly prior to his arrest the applicant had been in a scooter accident in which he had sustained abrasions, the trial court concluded that the allegations of police ill-treatment were unsubstantiated.

Given the above and the lack of any evidence to the contrary, the Court cannot conclude that that the applicant’s injuries had been sustained as a result of the police ill-treatment as alleged by him (compare to Ryazanov v. Russia (dec.), no. 44885/06, 19 October 2021, and Tikhomirov v. Russia (dec.), no. 24651/06, 23 November 2021).

Accordingly, the applicant’s complaint about the ill-treatment and the authorities’ response to it is manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected under Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.

2. Remaining complaints

The applicant also raised other complaints under various articles of the Convention.

The Court has examined the application and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto.

It follows that this part of the application must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Declares the application inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 12 January 2023.

Viktoriya Maradudina Darian Pavli
Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

Application raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention

(torture or inhuman or degrading treatment)