Translated material
The ECHR awarded compensation to the defendant in the “ABTO case” due to improper conditions of detention in the colony
The European Court of Human Rights satisfied the complaint of Ivan Astashin, a person involved in the “ABTO case”, who asked to recognize the serving of a sentence in a colony remote from home as illegal. Astashin himself announced this to OVD-Info, the text of the decision was published on the website of the ECtHR.
Ivan Astashin was kept in IK-17 of Krasnoyarsk, which is located 2800 kilometers from the region of his residence. The ECtHR considered this to be a violation of paragraph 2 of Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Astashin was awarded compensation of 6,000 euros.
The court agreed with the applicants (the Astashin case was considered in the group of cases “Yevsyukov and others v. Russia”) that by sending him to serve his sentence in a remote colony, the state violates the right to respect for private and family life. In particular, relatives have difficulty visiting convicts.
The ECHR considered that the state did not provide arguments confirming that the decision to send Astashin to a remote colony was made "in accordance with the law."
The main complainant in the case is Denis Yevsyukov, a retired police major who fired at a Moscow supermarket in 2009.
- In June, the ECtHR upheld Astashin's other complaint. In it, he asked that the conditions of detention in IK-15 in Norilsk be recognized as degrading: the cells were cramped and stuffy, constant video surveillance and the absence of normal partitions in the bathrooms deprived privacy, smokers and non-smokers were kept in the same room.
- Ivan Astashin, a defendant in the ABTO case, spent nine years and nine months in prison. He was released on September 21, 2020. Astashin was accused of involvement in a series of arsons, which the FSB considered terrorist activities. In April 2012, the Moscow City Court found Astashin guilty of several crimes under the article on a terrorist attack committed by an organized group and causing significant property damage (clauses “a” and “c” of part 2 of article 205 of the Criminal Code), for a number of episodes under articles on intentional damage to property (part 2 of article 167 of the Criminal Code), as well as under articles on illegal storage and manufacture of weapons (art. 222 of the Criminal Code and 223 of the Criminal Code).
- In October 2020, Astashin was interviewed by employees of the Center for Combating Extremism. This happened when he came to check in at the police department in the Kotlovka district. Astashin was asked questions about employment, plans and attitude towards law enforcement officers. He was also asked why he considers himself a political prisoner and whether he communicates with any of the defendants in the case. Employees promised Astashin that they would personally communicate with him two or three times every month, as well as make phone calls. At the same time, regular conversations with CPE employees are not part of the duties assigned to Astashin by a court decision.