CAT/C/60/D/465/2011
identity documents with him, he was taken to a police station. On the premises, policemen
verbally abused him and he was beaten with a truncheon. His arms were repeatedly twisted,
which resulted in a serious fracture of his left shoulder and the dislocation of a finger on his
right hand. He lost consciousness several times. He was also forced to sign two documents
without reading them under threat of further beatings. He was released in the early morning
of 29 July. As he was feeling unwell, he went to a first-aid post close to his residence, from
where he was taken to hospital. He underwent surgery on his left shoulder on 2 August and
7 November 2007. Surgeons affirmed that the injury was typical police ill-treatment.
Following the surgery, he went to the hospital for bandaging three times a week for 10
months.
2.2
On 12 September 2007, the complainant filed a complaint with the Office of the
Prosecutor of the Kalininskiy District of St. Petersburg. Having received no reply, he
submitted another complaint, to the Office of the Prosecutor of the City of St. Petersburg,
on 4 December 2007. On 10 December, he received a decision from the district
prosecutor’s office, dated 11 October 2007, refusing to initiate criminal proceedings against
the police on account of the absence of corpus delicti. According to the decision, the
complainant was arrested under article 20.21 of the Code of Administrative Offences
(appearing in public places in a state of alcoholic intoxication). He acknowledged that he
could have had a conflict with the policemen because of the inebriation. According to
police records and the explanations of an on-duty policeman, B., the complainant was
admitted to the Kalininskiy district police station on 29 July 2007 at around 1.25 a.m. and
released at 3.25 a.m. Arrest and administrative offence reports were drawn up, no physical
force or special means were used against him and he did not ask for medical assistance.
2.3
In January 2008, the complainant’s mother contacted a media agency. On 10 March,
an article about the complainant’s case, titled “My son became disabled after beatings in a
police station”, was published in the weekly newspaper Smena. The complainant’s real
name was not used.
2.4
On 26 February 2008, the complainant filed a second complaint with the district
prosecutor’s office. He was warned that making false allegations might constitute a crime
under article 306 of the Criminal Code.
2.5
On 18 August 2008, the complainant left the Russian Federation without waiting for
a reply from the prosecutor’s office. On 25 August, when he was in Norway, an unknown
person told his mother on the telephone to have the complaint withdrawn, or the
complainant would have problems.
2.6
On an unspecified date, the complainant arrived in Finland and submitted an
application for asylum and a residence permit. On 3 May 2010, the Immigration Service
rejected his application, indicating, inter alia, that the complainant had not exhausted the
available domestic remedies in the Russian Federation with regard to his allegations of
torture and that his passport contained records of his previous travel to Finland, which
would have been impossible should he be a victim of persecution by the Russian Federation
police and authorities. The Immigration Service considered that the complainant did not
substantiate the risk of torture in case of deportation and found no grounds for granting a
residence permit.
2.7
On 24 June 2010, the complainant appealed to the Helsinki Administrative Court.
On 9 November, the Court upheld the decision of the Immigration Service. On 19
November, his lawyer informed him of the decision by telephone. Thereafter, the
complainant received notification that he would be deported to the Russian Federation. He
claims that it was impossible for him to file an appeal with the Helsinki Supreme
Administrative Court because there was no time to do so before the scheduled deportation.
Furthermore, such an appeal would have no suspensive effect. It would be impossible for
him to submit it without a lawyer as appeals have to be drafted in Finnish, which he does
not speak. Therefore, he contends that all available domestic remedies have been exhausted.
2.8
Facing deportation and fearing for his life, the complainant fled to Sweden on 19
November 2010 and filed an application for asylum there on 26 November. His application
was rejected by the Swedish Migration Board on 21 January 2011 and, in accordance with
the Dublin II Regulation, he faced deportation to Finland. The complainant appealed the
2