The ECHR found a violation of the requirements of paragraph 1 of Article 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, and Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 to the Convention.

Заголовок: The ECHR found a violation of the requirements of paragraph 1 of Article 5 of the Convention for the Protect Сведения: 2019-04-22 07:01:47

ECHR ruling dated October 23, 2018 in the case of Manannikov v. Russia (application N 74253/17).

The case was successfully considered the application of the applicant that his compulsory placement in a hospital for a psychiatric examination and the prohibition to leave the city for the entire time of the criminal proceedings in the case violated his rights to liberty, as well as the fact that his computer’s withdrawal as part of the proceedings the case and the rejection of the application to make copies of the necessary documents was a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The case has violated the requirements of paragraph 1 of Article 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, and Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 to the Convention.

In 2017, the complainant was assisted in preparing a application. Subsequently, the application was communicated to the Russian Federation.

In his application, the applicant, who was accused of having committed two crimes (insulting a representative of the authorities and contempt of court), complained that his compulsory placement in a hospital for a psychiatric examination and the prohibition to leave the city of Novosibirsk for the entire time of the criminal proceedings in the case his rights to freedom. He also pointed out that the removal of his computer in the framework of the proceedings and the rejection of the request to make copies of the necessary documents was a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention.

On 23 October 2018, on the application filed by the applicant, the European Court unanimously decided that in the present case the authorities violated the requirements of Article 5 § 1 (right to liberty and security of person), Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention (protection of property), Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 to the Convention (the right to freedom of movement), and ordered the respondent State to pay the applicant 10,000 euros in compensation for non-pecuniary damage.

 

Добавить комментарий


Защитный код
Обновить

© 2011-2018 Юридическая помощь в составлении жалоб в Европейский суд по правам человека. Юрист (представитель) ЕСПЧ.