The mysterious death of a witness after his examination in a police station. Multiple violations
JUDGMENT
Khayrullina v. Russia19.12.2017 (no. 29729/09)
SUMMARY
A wife complains that her husband was mistreated by the police when she was screened as a witness to a homicide investigation, resulting in his death three months later. Torture during police detention. Ineffective investigation and no compensation. Violation of the right to life, ineffective research, the right to liberty and security and the right to reparation.
PROVISIONS
Article 2
Article 5§1
Article 5§5
PRINCIPAL FACTS
The applicant, Faniya Khayrullina, is a Russian national who was born in 1957 and lives in Novyy (Tatarstan Republic, Russia). The case concerned her allegation that her husband had been ill-treated by the police when held for questioning as a witness in a murder investigation and that as a result he had died three months later.
According to the official records, Ms Khayrullina’s husband was taken on 13 September 2002 to a police station in order to verify his identity. He ended up though being interviewed by the investigator in charge of a murder investigation, and admitted to having had a drink at the victim’s house with a friend. Immediately afterwards, on being interviewed by a field officer, he changed his testimony and admitted that his friend had punched the murder victim during a quarrel. He was apparently told he could leave at 8 p.m., but had to come back the next day for another interview.
He was, however, found unconscious the same evening at the police station. He was taken to hospital, but died three months later without ever regaining consciousness. According to the autopsy report, he had died of asphyxia following strangulation.
The authorities subsequently concluded that Mr Kharyrullin had attempted suicide which had later resulted in his death. Both in the initial stages of an internal inquiry and throughout the subsequent criminal investigation, the investigating authorities essentially relied on testimony from medical professionals, including paramedics called to the police station to provide emergency care, stating that Mr Kharyrullin had had no visible injuries. The investigation, which is still ongoing has been discontinued on a number of occasions since 2003 but was reopened with instructions from the prosecuting authorities to clarify certain contradictions, such as the place where Mr Kharyrullin had been found – in a cell, interrogation room or on a fifth floor balcony. Most recently, in November 2010, a decision was issued discontinuing the investigation owing to a lack of evidence to prove that any police officer had driven him to suicide.
In concurrent civil proceedings brought by Ms Kharyrullina for compensation, she was awarded 250,000 Russian roubles (approximately 7,066 euros) for her own psychological suffering as result of her husband’s death. The courts – ultimately the Supreme Court in 2009 – refused, however, to award her compensation for her claim related to her husband’s unlawful detention and the ineffective investigation.
Relying essentially on Article 2 (right to life), Ms Khayrullina alleged that her husband had been tortured while in police custody, specifically by suffocation with a gas mask. She stated that this had been confirmed by the suspect in the murder investigation, who had been held at the police station at the same time as her husband, as he had claimed to have been ill-treated in the same way and initially even confirmed hearing her husband screaming in the interrogation room next to him. She alleged that the police had thus been either directly responsible for her husband’s death or drove him into attempting suicide and that the ensuing investigation had been ineffective.
She further complained under Article 5 § 1 (right to liberty and security) and Article 5 § 5 (right to compensation) that her husband had been unlawfully taken to the police station and detained and that her related compensation claim had been turned down.
THE DECISION OF THE COURT
Violation of Article 2 (right to life) Violation of Article 2 (investigation) Violation of Article 5 § 1 Violation of Article 5 § 5
Just satisfaction: EUR 3,000 (pecuniary damage), EUR 43,000 (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR 2,000 (costs and expenses)(echrcaselaw.com editing).
