Судебное дело "О праве пожизненно заключенного и его жены на проведение искусственного зачатия"
20.03.2017
The Registrar
European Court of Human Rights
Council of Europe
F-67075 Strasbourg CEDEX
France
BY COURIER
20 March 2016
Contact Person:
Anton Burkov
620075, Russia, Yekaterinburg,
Turgenev Str., 11-1
Korolevy v. Russia
No 47668/15
submitted 18 September 2015
Request
on the application for interim measures of 14 September 2016 to be
submitted to a judge for decision on applicability of interim measures
Dear Mr. Ryngielewicz,
On 19 October 2016 I acknowledged receipt of your correspondence of 21
September 2016 rejecting the applicants' request under Rule 39 of the
Rules of Court.
On 20 December 2016 I informed you that after learning the fact that
the Registrar considered applicants' request under Rule 39 to fall
outside the scope of Rule 39 and it had therefore not been submitted
to a judge for decision, the applicants insisted that their
application be submitted to a judge for decision on applicability of
interim measures to their case.
The applicants have not heard back since.
By this correspondence I once again inform you that the applicants
insist that their application be submitted to a judge for decision on
applicability of interim measures to their case. The applicants insist
that they are facing an imminent risk of serious and irreparable
damage of losing the ability to conceive children. If (which is not
admitted) it is unclear whether the applicants' case is suitable for
interim measures, then this is likely because the legal question of
the applicability of interim measures in the applicants' case is not
straightforward or suitable for administrative determination.
I also would like to inform you by this correspondence that on 10
March 2017 the risk of serious and irreparable damage of losing the
ability to conceive children significantly increased due to recent
decisions by local courts in the applicants' case. Despite the
Constitutional Court's judgment of 15 November 2016 No 24-P (Annex 2),
which softened the conditions of detention of lifers by allowing the
applicants one conjugal meeting per year, the Babushkin district court
of Moscow rejected (Annex 5) the applicants' motion of 24 January 2017
(Annex 3 and 4) for reconsideration of the Babushkin district court's
decision of 25 December 2014, which rejected the applicants' right to
artificial insemination (the core issue in the case of Korolevy v.
Russia No 47668/15). The rejected motion was based on the
Constitutional Court's judgment of 15 November 2016 No 24-P (Annex 2).
Therefore, I would like to ask this Court that
1. this letter be considered as the applicants' further request that
their application for interim measures of 14 September 2016 to be
submitted to a judge for decision on applicability of interim measures
to their case.
2. this letter with annexes be considered as supplementary to the
initial application submitted on 18 September 2015 as well as addition
to the initial request for interim measures of 14 September 2016.
3. the Court communicate directly with me via my eComms account of the
European Court of Human Rights Electronic Communication Service
(account name is anton.burkov@gmail.com)
Annexes:
1. Application to the Constitutional Court.
2. Judgment of the Constitutional Court No 24-P of 15 November 2016.
3. Motion of 24 January 2017 to the Babushkin district court of Moscow
to reconsider the Babushkin district court's decision of 25 December
2014.
4. Addition to the motion to reconsider the Babushkin district court's
decision of 25 December 2014.
5. Decision of 10 March 2017 by the Babushkin district court of Moscow
rejecting the applicants' motion of 24 January 2017 to reconsider the
Babushkin district court's decision of 25 December 2014.
Yours faithfully,
Anton Burkov
The applicants' legal representative
Добавить комментарий: