header-logo header-logo

Human rights update

28 June 2007
Issue: 7279 / Categories: Features , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Conditions in detention >>
Religious intolerance >>
Discrimination and widow’s benefits >>
Family rights: competing private and public interests >>

Conditions in detention

The applicant in Benediktov v Russia (Application No 106/02) complained that he had been detained in prison cells in Moscow, which failed to meet the minimum standards demanded by the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention). On one occasion, his cell provided less than one square metre of personal space, and a shortage of beds required inmates to share sleeping facilities. He also complained about bed bugs, lice and a lack of fresh air and light due to windows being blocked with thick metal bars. It was extremely cold in winter and hot, stuffy and damp in summer. Similarly, the applicant in Andrev Frolov v Russia (Application No 205/02) complained that he had been held in 11 different cells over a period of four years—each measuring eight square metres which usually accommodated up to 14 inmates who all used the same lavatory pan.

Dignity & detainees

The Russian government could not provide information to refute

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll