003-2914687-3202252

840 13.11.2009   Press release issued by the Registrar   FORTHCOMING CHAMBER JUDGMENTS   19 November 2009   The European Court of Human Rights will be notifying in writing 11 Chamber judgments on Thursday 19 November 2009.   Press releases and texts of the judgments will be available at 11 a.m. (local time) on the Court’s Internet site (http://www.echr.coe.int).     Tonchev v. Bulgaria (application no. 18527/02) The applicant, Krastiu Dimitrov Tonchev, is a Bulgarian national who was born in 1941 and lives in Vratsa (Bulgaria). The case concerns in particular Mr Tonchev’s allegation that criminal proceedings brought against a neighbour who had assaulted his five-year old son had exceeded a reasonable time and had failed to provide effective redress. He relies on Articles 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), 8 (right to respect for private and family life) and 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) of the European Convention on Human Rights.   Glinov v. Ukraine (no. 13693/05) The applicant, Nikolay Andreyevich Glinov, is a Kazakh national who was born in 1978 and is currently serving a 14-year prison sentence in Rivne Penitentiary (Ukraine) for robbery with violence. Relying on Articles 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) and 5 (right to liberty and security) of the Convention, Mr Glinov complains about the unlawfulness and poor conditions of his detention; he also alleges that he was ill-treated in police custody. The case also concerns the authorities’ monitoring of Mr Glinov’s correspondence with the European Court of Human Rights and his allegation that pressure has been put on him to withdraw his complaint, in breach of Articles 8 (right to respect for correspondence) and 34 (right of individual petition).   Kaboulov v. Ukraine (no. 41015/04) The applicant, Amir Damirovich Kubulov, born in 1979, is currently detained in the Poltava SIZO of the State Department for Enforcement of Sentences (Ukraine) pending his extradition to Kazakhstan on charges of murder as a citizen of Kazakhstan. He complains that, if extradited to Kazakhstan, he would be at real risk of being exposed to an unfair trial and subjected to poor conditions of detention, torture and capital punishment, in breach of Articles 2 (right to life), 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) and 13 (right to an effective remedy). Further relying on Article 5 §§ 1, 2, 4 and 5 (right to liberty and security) he also complains about the unlawfulness of the decisions initially to detain him and then to extradite him. Lastly, under Article 34 (right of individual petition), the applicant alleges interference by the authorities in his correspondence with his legal representatives and that pressure was put on him to withdraw his application to the European Court of Human Rights.   Kolesnik v. Ukraine (no. 17551/02) The applicant, Oleg Rebazovich Kolesnik, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1963 and is currently serving a 14-year prison sentence in Zhytomyr (Ukraine) for murder and robbery. Relying on Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) and (d) (right to a fair trial), he complains about the unfairness of the criminal proceedings against him, notably that his conviction was based on self-incriminating statements he had made in the absence of a lawyer and that he was unable to question key witnesses for the prosecution at his trial.   Telegina v. Ukraine (no. 2035/03) The applicant, Taisiya Alekseyevna Telegina, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1952 and lives in Zaporizhzhya (Ukraine). Head of Zaporizhzhya Airport Customs Office, she complains about the excessive length of criminal proceedings brought against her for, among other things, abuse of office and taking a bribe. She relies on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial within a reasonable time).     Repetitive cases   The following cases raise issues which have already been submitted to the Court.   Korabelnikov v. Ukraine (no. 29860/05) Lazarenko v. Ukraine (no. 26855/05) Savinskiy and Shevchenko v. Ukraine (nos. 34168/05 and 45750/07) Skaloukhov and Others v. Ukraine (nos. 8107/06, 8473/06, 8475/06, 15941/06 and 32116/06) These cases concern the applicants’ complaint that the Ukrainian authorities failed to enforce final judgments in their favour. They mainly rely on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) and Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing). The applicants in the case of Skaloukhov and Others also complain under Article 6 § 1 of the excessive length of the proceedings.     Length-of-proceedings cases   In the following cases, the applicants complain in particular under Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) about the excessive length of (non-criminal) proceedings. In the case of Tverdokhlebov the applicant also relies on Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).   Lazaruk v. Ukraine (no. 6261/04) Tverdokhlebov v. Ukraine (no. 27341/05)     ***   Press contacts Stefano Piedimonte (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 04) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30) Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 70) Céline Menu-Lange (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 58 77) Frédéric Dolt (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 53 39) Nina Salomon (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 49 79)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.