CEDAW/C/68/D/91/2015
1.
The author of the communication is O.G., a national of the Russian Federation
born in 1985. She claims to be a victim of violations by the Russian Federation of
her rights under articles 1, 2 (b)–(g), read in conjunction with the Committee’s
general recommendations No. 19 (1992) on violence against women and No. 28
(2010) on the core obligations of States parties under article 2 of the Convention,
and articles 3 and 5 (a) of the Convention. The Russian Federation ratified the
Convention and the Optional Protocol thereto on 23 January 1981 and 28 July 2004,
respectively. The author is represented by counsel.
Facts as submitted by the author
2.1 The author was in a civil partnership with K. from 2008 to 2010. During that
time K. allegedly used psychoactive substances and alcohol and insulted the author.
He also had a gambling addiction. For those reasons, the author left him. In late
2010, she began living with another partner. Nevertheless, K. continued to call the
author, demanded that their relationship should continue, sent offensive text
messages, visited the building in which she lived and insisted on entering her flat.
Because of the psychological harassment and K.’s obsessive behaviour, the author
stopped communicating with him.
2.2 On 4 December 2011, at around 7 p.m., K. came to the author ’s house and
demanded that she should let him in. When the author refused, he hit her in the face
in front of her son and the author ’s partner. Afterwards, he ran outside and broke the
author’s window with a stone.
2.3 On 20 December 2011, the author approached the Crisis Centre for Women, a
non-governmental organization in Saint Petersburg, to report the events. She was
offered legal aid. On 21 February 2013, K. was found guilty by Magistrate ’s Court
No. 1 of the Admiralteysky District of having committed a crime under article 116 (1)
of the Criminal Code (battery) and was sentenced to four months of corr ective
labour with 5 per cent of his income to be withheld by the Government. Under
article 73 of the Criminal Code, his sentence was suspended with a six-month
probationary period. 1 He was also ordered to compensate the author for the moral
damage caused to her in the amount of 3,000 roubles (around $50).
2.4 On 23 February 2013, K. repeatedly sent the author text messages containing
insults and threats that he would catch her and kill her and her partner. On
24 February 2013, the author filed a criminal complaint at the local police station.
On 7 March 2013, the police officer in charge of the complaint issued an official
decision refusing to initiate a criminal investigation on the grounds that he could not
interrogate K. because the latter would not come to the police station and, because
he was not backing up his threats with action, the author ’s life was not in danger.
2.5 On 20 May 2013, K. sent another text message to the author, telling her to
“come home faster, I am waiting for you here by the door ”. The author immediately
called the police and reported the threat. Neverthe less, the police called back
10 minutes later and said that they had talked to K. by telephone and that he had
promised that he would leave her alone. Some 90 minutes later, the a uthor received
another insulting text message from K.
__________________
1
2/12
Article 73 of the Criminal Code states that, if by imposing corrective labour, restriction in
military service, service in a disciplinary military unit or deprivation of liberty for a term of up
to eight years, a court of law arrives at the conclusion that it is possible to rehabilitate the
convicted person without his actually serving punishment, then the court shall decree that the
imposed penalty be suspended. Conditional sentences shall not be given to persons convicted for
offences against the sexual integrity of minors under 14 years old.
17-21669