33140/15;44449/15;46378/15;46694/15;59230/15;59743/15;60150/15;60284/15;41181/16;61978/16;78399/16;51807/17;71029/17;71326/17;78092/17;79222/17;79233/17;79770/17;79772/17;79775/17;79776/17;79951/17;80357/17;80725/17;82160/17;83674/17;84167/17;1135/18;4506/18;4512/18;6766/18;9879/18;9930/18;10168/18;10174/18;11538/18;13569/18;8587/19;9293/19

THIRD SECTION CASE OF V.P. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 33140/15 and 38 others – see appended list)               JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 7 November 2024   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of V.P. and Others v. Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:  Ioannis Ktistakis, President,  Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir,  Diana Kovatcheva, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 10 October 2024, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1.  The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table. 2.  The Russian Government were given notice of the applications. THE FACTS 3.  The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table. 4.  The applicants complained that, as “outcast” inmates, they faced a risk of treatment prohibited by Article 3 of the Convention due to segregation, humiliating practices, and abuse in their daily lives while in detention. They highlighted the heightened risk of inter-prisoner violence due to prison hierarchy, the authorities’ failure to address that risk, and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law. Some applicants raised additional complaints under the Convention, stemming from the same set of facts. THE LAW JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 5.  Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment. Jurisdiction 6.  The Court observes that the facts giving rise to the alleged violations of the Convention occurred prior to 16 September 2022, the date on which the Russian Federation ceased to be a party to the Convention. The Court therefore decides that it has jurisdiction to examine the present applications (see Fedotova and Others v. Russia [GC], nos. 40792/10 and 2 others, §§ 68‑73, 17 January 2023). ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLEs 3 AND 13 of the Convention 7.  The applicants complained of inhuman and degrading treatment in Russian penal facilities due to their inferior position within an informal prisoner hierarchy and the alleged lack of effective domestic remedies for their complaints in that regard. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention. 8.  In the leading cases of S.P. and Others v. Russia (nos. 36463/11 and 10 others, 2 May 2023) and D v. Latvia (no. 76680/17, 11 January 2024), the Court already found violations of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention in respect of issues similar to those in the present case. The Court held that the physical and symbolic separation of “outcast” prisoners, coupled with restricted access to basic prison resources and denial of human contact, caused mental anxiety exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention, even when they were not subjected to physical violence or threats of violence (see S.P. and Others, cited above, § 96, and D v. Latvia, cited above, § 51). It also found that the domestic authorities had not taken adequate steps to protect the applicants from the treatment associated with their belonging to the stigmatised group or implemented effective mechanisms to improve their situation or address the issue comprehensively. 9.  Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. It finds that the applicants belonged to the stigmatised group of prisoners and endured degrading treatment on that account. They also did not have access to an effective remedy in respect of these complaints. 10.  These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention. REMAINING COMPLAINTS 11.  In the light of its findings concerning the applicants’ complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention, the Court takes the view that it has examined the main legal question raised in respect of their situation and does not need to give a separate ruling on the admissibility or merits of the remaining complaints (see, for a similar approach, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014). APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 12.  Regard being had to the material in its possession and to its case‑law (see S.P. and Others, cited above, § 114), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table and dismisses the remainder of the applicants’ claims for just satisfaction. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, Decides to join the applications; Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with these applications as they relate to facts that took place before 16 September 2022; Declares the complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention admissible and decides that there is no need to examine the remainder of the complaints; Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention; Holds (a)  that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement; (b)  that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points; Dismisses the remainder of the applicants’ claims for just satisfaction. Done in English, and notified in writing on 7 November 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.  Viktoriya Maradudina Ioannis Ktistakis  Acting Deputy Registrar President   APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention (inhuman and degrading treatment of outcast inmates as a result of segregation, humiliating practices and abuse in their daily life while in detention, heightened risk of inter-prisoner violence (prison hierarchy)) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s initials Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Facility Start and end date Other complaints under well-established case-law Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros)[1]     33140/15 20/01/2016   V.P. Valentina Aleksandrovna BOKAREVA Moscow IK-2 Zabaykalskiy Region 12/02/2011 - date of introduction   20,000     44449/15 25/08/2015   V.O. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   19/02/2012 - 08/06/2015   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000     46378/15 07/09/2015   A.S. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-7 Kostroma Region   22/05/2007 - 16/07/2015   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000     46694/15 04/09/2015   M.S. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   05/11/2013 - 10/06/2015   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000     59230/15 09/11/2015   D.Y. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-2 Kostroma Region   14/08/2011 - 23/06/2015   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000     59743/15 09/11/2015   D.Z. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   14/01/2015 - 09/09/2015   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000     60150/15 09/11/2015   A.B. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   25/09/2014 - 31/08/2015   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000     60284/15 09/11/2015   V.K. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-2 Kostroma Region   08/02/2010 - 26/08/2015   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000     41181/16 04/07/2016   S.Y. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   06/11/1998 - at least until the date of introduction   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   61978/16 18/10/2016   V.K. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   29/01/2016 - 06/09/2016   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   78399/16 29/11/2016   Y.M. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   28/01/2014 - 25/11/2016   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   51807/17 04/07/2017   T.R. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-4 Kostroma Region   15/02/2014 - 30/06/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   71029/17 15/09/2017   A.C. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-4 Kostroma Region   07/07/2013 - 01/09/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   71326/17 12/09/2017   I.S. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-2 Kostroma Region   01/05/2017 - 31/08/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   78092/17 21/12/2017   A.B. Laptev Aleksey Nikolayevich Moscow IK-11 Nizhniy Novgorod Region   03/10/2011 - 03/10/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   79222/17 10/11/2017   A.A. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   28/12/2016 - 27/09/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   79233/17 10/11/2017   G.O. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   02/11/2015 - 01/11/2017    Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   79770/17 08/11/2017   S.S. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   26/07/2013 - 24/10/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   79772/17 08/11/2017   M.G. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   19/05/2016 - 18/08/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   79775/17 08/11/2017   A.G. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   12/05/2008 - 25/07/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   79776/17 08/11/2017   S.Z. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   20/06/2016 - 19/07/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   79951/17 14/11/2017   A.C. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   22/06/2014 - 20/10/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   80357/17 17/11/2017   A.G. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   18/01/2000 - 17/11/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   80725/17 21/11/2017   A.I. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   28/02/2014 - 25/08/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   82160/17 28/11/2017   A.K. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   15/09/2015 - 14/11/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   83674/17 21/11/2017   V.B. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-5 Tatarstan   2007 – the end of 2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   84167/17 08/12/2017   V.K. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   08/12/2015 - 05/12/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   1135/18 12/12/2017   S.M. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-4 Kostroma Region   17/01/2012 - 21/11/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   4506/18 23/12/2017   R.S. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   23/06/2003 - 22/12/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   4512/18 23/12/2017   A.V. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   20/06/2016 - 14/12/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   6766/18 17/01/2018   M.S. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-4 Kostroma Region   10/03/2016 - 19/12/2017 Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   9879/18 12/02/2018   A.K. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   06/09/2014 - 29/12/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   9930/18 30/01/2018   D.M. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   31/08/2016 - 30/01/2018   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   10168/18 12/02/2018   D.S. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-2 Kostroma Region   16/09/2016 - 15/09/2017    Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   10174/18 12/02/2018   D.S. Aleksandr Vladimirovich VINOGRADOV Kostroma IK-1 Kostroma   11/02/2016 - 09/02/2018   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   11538/18 24/01/2018   D.P. Yekaterina Viktorovna YEFREMOVA Moscow IK-5 Krasnoyarsk Region   01/07/2016 - 27/09/2017   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   13569/18 31/01/2018   S.S. Oksana Vladimirovna PREOBRAZHENSKAYA Strasbourg IK-5 Krasnoyarsk Region   2014 - at least until the date of introduction   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   8587/19 21/01/2019   G.B.     IK-41 Kemerovo Region   24/05/2017 - 24/11/2018   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000   9293/19 10/01/2019   Y.P.     IK-41 Kemerovo Region   20/02/2018 - 19/11/2018   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law 20,000     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.