Background
Fedor Valentinovich Belous, a Ukrainian life prisoner with partial paralysis who uses a wheelchair, had been held in Zhytomyr Prison no. 8 since 2012. From 11 September 2019 onward, he shared small cells with another prisoner and generally had between 2.9 and 3.3 square metres of personal space. The prison was not adapted for wheelchair users: he could not independently access the exercise yard, bathhouse, or other out-of-cell activities, and depended on his cellmate for bathing, using the toilet, and other daily needs.
After his Strasbourg application was communicated to the Government, Belous alleged that prison staff pressured him to withdraw it. He said an officer threatened him, his cell was repeatedly searched, belongings were seized, and his cellmate—his only regular source of assistance—was twice placed in a punishment cell. The Government supplied limited material about the searches and internal inquiries, but did not provide the underlying investigation report or address several allegations directly.
The Court’s Holding
The Court unanimously found violations of Articles 3 and 13. It held that the conditions in Zhytomyr Prison no. 8 since 11 September 2019 amounted to degrading treatment. The finding reflected both inadequate personal space and, crucially, the applicant’s detention in an ordinary facility inaccessible to a wheelchair user. He was effectively confined to his cell around the clock and required another detainee’s help for basic personal care, without assistance from prison staff or medical personnel.
The Court also found that Ukraine lacked an effective domestic remedy for those ongoing detention conditions. Separately, it held that Ukraine had failed to comply with Article 34, which protects the right to petition the Court. Given the applicant’s extreme vulnerability, the timing and nature of the measures taken after he applied to Strasbourg, unanswered allegations, and missing investigation material, the Court concluded that he could reasonably have felt intimidated and that the measures were capable of discouraging his application.
Key Takeaways
- Prison conditions must be assessed in light of a detainee’s disability, not solely by reference to cell size.
- Holding a wheelchair user in a facility where he cannot leave his cell independently or meet basic needs without another prisoner’s help can constitute degrading treatment.
- Pressure or measures capable of intimidating a vulnerable prisoner after a Strasbourg application may breach the State’s Article 34 duty not to hinder individual petition.
Why It Matters
The judgment reinforces that prisons must provide practical accessibility and adequate assistance for detainees with disabilities. Reliance on a cellmate for toileting, washing, mobility, and everyday care is not an adequate substitute for adapted facilities and institutional support.
It also underscores the heightened duty of authorities when a prisoner has brought a case to Strasbourg. In a custodial setting, unexplained searches, threats, or action against the prisoner’s essential helper can be sufficiently intimidating to interfere with the right of individual petition. The Court awarded EUR 12,000 in non-pecuniary damage and EUR 1,000 in costs and expenses.