Přehled

Text rozhodnutí
Datum rozhodnutí
6.10.2022
Rozhodovací formace
Významnost
3
Číslo stížnosti / sp. zn.

Rozhodnutí

THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 51669/20
Rustam Shirinbekovich VATANBEKOV-KOTOV
against Russia

(see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 6 October 2022 as a Committee composed of:

Darian Pavli, President,

Andreas Zünd,

Frédéric Krenc, judges,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 20 November 2020,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant’s details are set out in the appended table. He was represented by Mr A. Artamonov, a lawyer practising in Moscow.

The applicant’s complaints under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention concerning the unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”).

THE LAW

In the present application, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that the applicant’s complaint about the courts having held the criminal trial against him in the absence of a prosecution witness is inadmissible.

In particular, the Court notes that in the light of the principles established in the case-law under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention (see notably Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 26766/05 and 22228/06, §§ 118-47, ECHR 2011, and Schatschaschwili v. Germany [GC] no. 9154/10, §§ 100-31, ECHR 2015) and regard being had to the materials in its possession, the applicant’s criminal trial complied with the overall fairness requirement.

In view of the above, the Court finds that this complaint is manifestly illfounded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Declares the application inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 27 October 2022.

Viktoriya Maradudina Darian Pavli
Acting Deputy Registrar President



APPENDIX

Application raising complaints under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention

(unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses)

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of birth

Representative’s name and location

Final domestic decision

Charges convicted of

Witness absent from trial (indicated by initials)

Summary of the nature of the witness evidence

Reasons for absence

Steps taken to compensate for the witnesses’ absence

51669/20

20/11/2020

Rustam Shirinbekovich VATANBEKOVKOTOV

1992

Artamonov Aleksandr Vasilyevich

Moscow

Moscow City Court

25/05/2020

Kidnapping

Mr D.

The applicant and his co-defendant kidnapped D. following the latter’s failure to repay the debt owed to the codefendant. Both the applicant and D. worked as couriers for the applicant’s codefendant.

could not be located

The applicant was able to challenge other evidence presented by the prosecution (statement of an eyewitness of kidnapping questioned in court, video recording of kidnapping, statements of police officers who arrested him and his codefendant), etc.