ECtHR decision in Kasymakhunov v. Russia, Application No. 29604/12 [Articles 3, 5(1), 13 and 34], 14 December 2013

Date: 
Wednesday, November 20, 2013

The Applicant is an Uzbek national whose current whereabouts are unknown. Charged in Uzbekistan with membership of Hizb-ut Tahrir, a radical Islamic organisation banned in Uzbekistan and Russia, the Applicant fled in 1995 to Russia, where he was detained pending extradition in 2004. The extradition order was stayed pending a seven year and four month prison sentence in Russia for terrorist offences. After serving his sentence, he was again detained pending extradition, which was stayed by a Rule 39 Interim Measure of the ECtHR. On 14 December 2012, four days after he was released due to the expiration of the maximum detention period, the Applicant alleges he was forcibly abducted and transferred to Uzbekistan. The Applicant’s original complaint alleged that his removal to Uzbekistan would risk his subjection to ill-treatment contrary to Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment). He also submitted that his detention pending extradition was excessively long , in violation of Article 5(1)(f) (right to liberty). The alleged Russian involvement in, and ineffective investigation into, his forcible return, created additional complaints that his abduction and involuntary transfer contravened Articles 3 and 34 (right of individual petition).

The Court first found that the Russian government had failed to rebut the prima facie evidence in favour of the Applicant's version of events, i.e. his forced transfer with the authorisation or acquiescence of the Russian authorities. The Court went on to determine that, in light of the general situation in Uzbekistan and the Applicant's alleged personal association with Hizb-ut Tahrir, his return created a real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3. Finding another violation of Article 3 and a related violation of Article 34 (breach of interim measure), the Court ruled that whatever the authorities' extent of involvement in the transfer, they had failed in their obligations to protect the Applicant from such a transfer and conduct an effective investigation into the incident. On Article 5(1), the Court decided that the Applicant's detention pending extradition was compliant with domestic law in length and diligence. The Court awarded 30,000 Euros in respect of non-pecuniary damage and 20,000 Euros for costs and expenses.

Read the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights.


This item was reproduced with the permission of ECRE from the weekly ELENA legal update supported by the Fundamental Rights and Citizenship Funding Programme and distributed by email. The purpose of these updates is to inform asylum lawyers and legal organizations supporting asylum seekers and refugees of recent developments in the field of asylum law. Please note that the information provided is taken from publicly available information on the internet. Every reasonable effort is made to make the content accurate and up to date at the time each item is published but no responsibility for its accuracy and correctness, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed by ECRE, the IRC or its partners.

Keywords: 
Detention
Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
Tags: 
Greece
ECtHR
Russia