K. v. RUSSIA - 69235/11 - Chamber Judgment [2013] ECHR 451 (23 May 2013)

K. v. RUSSIA - 69235/11 - Chamber Judgment [2013] ECHR 451 (23 May 2013)

The Court found that the applicant failed to substantiate a real and individual risk of torture or inhuman treatment if extradited to Belarus, as his allegations of political persecution were uncorroborated and the criminal charges were ordinary offences. The diplomatic assurances from Belarus, though general, were not sufficient to dispel all doubts, but the applicant's personal circumstances did not demonstrate a real risk under Article 3. The applicant's detention pending extradition was found to be lawful, regularly reviewed, and not excessive, thus not violating Article 5 § 1.

Citation
[2013] ECHR 451
Parties
Applicant: Mr K.; Respondent: Russian Federation
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
23 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Application Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Judgment on Admissibility and Merits
Outcome
Application dismissed; no violation found.
Legal Topics
Extradition, Prohibition of Torture, Right to Liberty, Effective Remedy, Detention Pending Extradition
Human Rights Law International Law Criminal Procedure Extradition Prohibition of Torture Right to Liberty Effective Remedy Detention Pending Extradition

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr K.

Applicant

Russian Federation

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Judgment on Admissibility and Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's extradition to Belarus would violate Article 3 (prohibition of torture, inhuman or degrading treatment) of the Convention
  2. 2 Whether the applicant had effective remedies under Article 13 of the Convention
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's detention pending extradition was lawful under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the applicant failed to substantiate a real and individual risk of torture or inhuman treatment if extradited to Belarus, as his allegations of political persecution were uncorroborated and the criminal charges were ordinary offences. The diplomatic assurances from Belarus, though general, were not sufficient to dispel all doubts, but the applicant's personal circumstances did not demonstrate a real risk under Article 3. The applicant's detention pending extradition was found to be lawful, regularly reviewed, and not excessive, thus not violating Article 5 § 1.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; no violation found.