CASE OF PASHKEVICH v. RUSSIA
Violation of Article 13 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment;Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect)
Branko Lubarda;Georgios A. Serghides;Pere Pastor Vilanova
6. The applicant was born in 1952. Until his death in 2016 he was detained in correctional colony no. 14 in the village of Olovyannaya, Zabaykalsk Region. 7. On 29 January 2014 the Fokino Town Court of the Primorskiy Region convicted the applicant of murder and sentenced him to six and a half years’ imprisonment. On the same day he was taken into custody. 8. Prior to his detention the applicant sustained several spinal injuries and lost the ability to walk unaided. Since 2013 he has been confined to a wheelchair. 9. On his admission to a remand prison in January 2014, the applicant was given a general medical check-up by the doctor on duty, to whom he complained of lower back and joint pain. The doctor provisionally diagnosed him with spinal tuberculosis. No drugs were prescribed. 10. According to the applicant’s submissions, which were not disputed by the Government, he was put in an ordinary cell not equipped for wheelchairusing detainees. As a result he suffered various inconveniences, including restricted access the toilet. 11. Several days later he was seen by a medical specialist, who amended his diagnosis to osteoporosis with compression fractures of two discs of the lumbar spine. 12. In February 2014 he was examined by a neurologist, who noted that one of his diagnoses was paraplegia, impairment in motor function of the lower extremities. He was advised to undergo various medical examinations and tests, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the spine and a hip X-ray. 13. In April 2014 a prison surgeon established that the osteoporosis affected not only the applicant’s spine, but also his legs. He was prescribed pain relief medication and advised to undergo several medical tests. 14. There is no information in the applicant’s file to suggest that the remand prison authorities gave him medication, an MRI scan or radiography. According to the applicant, even painkillers were unavailable in the remand prison. 15. On 9 April 2014 the applicant was sent to serve his sentence in correctional colony no. IK-14/7. On his arrival he was seen by a prison doctor who, in addition to the spinal and joint conditions, diagnosed him with coronary heart disease, angina pectoris and moderate hypertension disease. He was prescribed and provided with comprehensive drug treatment. 16. The Government did not provide any evidence to show that the correctional colony had any special facilities to accommodate wheelchairusing prisoners. 17. On 30 July 2014 the applicant was sent to prison hospital no. 1 in Chita, Zabaiykalsk Region, for an in-depth medical examination to establish whether he was entitled to early release on medical grounds. 18. A hip X-ray revealed that he suffered from an old displaced fracture of the cervical hip with full avulsion of the greater trochanter. 19. On 27 August 2014 a specialist medical panel of the prison hospital concluded that the applicant was not eligible for early release, because none of his illnesses were included in the governmental decree containing a list of illnesses precluding offenders from serving their sentences. On the same day the applicant was discharged from the prison hospital. 20. On 2 October 2014 the Olovyannaya District Court dismissed the applicant’s application for early release, referring to the medical report of 27 August 2014. That decision was upheld on appeal by the Zabaiykalsk Regional Court on 16 December 2014. 21. In the meantime the applicant lodged several complaints with the head of the prison medical authorities, the Federal Service for the Execution of Sentences and the Federal Supervisory Service for Healthcare and Social Development of the Russian Federation. The latter authority found a shortcoming in the applicant’s treatment, namely a failure to ensure he was examined by an orthopaedic traumatologist. 22. On 25 March 2015 the applicant was seen by a traumatologist, who diagnosed him with an inguinal hernia and recommended surgery to be performed at a later date. The doctor also stated that he should be provided with a walking stick and a walking frame. 23. Over the months that followed the applicant was regularly seen by prison doctors and provided with hypotensive drugs and pain relief drugs. 24. In the meantime he brought a civil claim against the medical authorities seeking compensation for damage to his health caused by inadequate medical treatment. 25. On 15 June 2015 the Central District Court of Chita dismissed the claim. Having looked at the list of medical services provided to the applicant, the court concluded that he had been afforded adequate medical treatment. It appears that no appeal followed. 26. On 1 September 2015 a neurologist ordered the applicant’s admission to the prison hospital, which would involve a train journey. The applicant refused, arguing that prison train carriages were not equipped to transport wheelchair-using detainees. 27. On 27 June 2016 the applicant died of a heart attack.