| Applicant name | PANIN AND OTHERS |
| Applicant type | Natural person (prisoner) |
| Number of applicants | 38 |
| Country | Russia |
| Application no. | 14228/18, 21314/18, 37081/18, 46898/18 53355/18, 53394/18, 59246/18, 59610/18 59865/18, 269/19, 1475/19, 1494/19 2124/19, 2253/19, 4039/19, 6727/19 11677/19, 13173/19, 14055/19, 17426/19 19319/19, 32916/19, 34376/19, 34586/19 46611/20, 46237/21, 46509/21, 47606/21 57503/21, 60247/21, 3038/22, 3347/22 4451/22, 5773/22, 6177/22, 18565/22 33410/22, 56493/22 |
| Date | 02/11/2023 |
| Judges | Lorraine Schembri Orland, President, Frédéric Krenc, Davor Derenčinović |
| Institution | Court |
| Type | Judgment |
| Outcome Art. 8 | Violation |
| Reason | No legal basis |
| Type of privacy | Informational privacy |
| Keywords | surveillance |
| Facts of the case | Main judgement about Article 3 and 13 ECHR Four applicants invoke Article 8 ECHR Art. 8 (1) – permanent video surveillance of detainees in pre-trial or post-conviction detention facilities – SIZO-1 Komi Republic, 16/02/2020 – 15/11/2021, detention in different cells with video surveillance, opposite-sex operators; Art. 8 (1) – permanent video surveillance of detainees in pre-trial or post-conviction detention facilities – SIZO-1 Irkutsk Region; 13/12/2019 – ongoing on the date when the application was lodged with the Court; detention in different cells with video surveillance. Art. 8 (1) – permanent video surveillance of detainees in pre-trial or post-conviction detention facilities – SIZO-1 Syktyvkar Komi Republic, 08/11/2018 – ongoing on the date when the application was lodged; detention in different cells with video surveillance, opposite-sex operators, video surveillance in a lavatory and/or shower room; Art. 8 (1) – secret surveillance phone tapping pursuant to the order of the Taganrog Town Court of 17/09/2018. Specific defects: the courts did not verify the existence of a “reasonable suspicion” and did not apply the “necessity in a democratic society test”. The applicant learnt about phone tapping on 18/01/2019 at the latest. He was allowed to study the relevant documents in July 2019. |
| Analysis | Mini-judgement |
| Other Article violation? | Yes, many |
| Damage awarded | Four applicants invoking Article 8 ECHR together get 35500 |
| Documents | Judgment |