Illegal detention of innocent man and reforms to protect the right to liberty

Sergey Solovyev v. Russia  | 2012

Illegal detention of innocent man and reforms to protect the right to liberty

For detention to meet the standard of ‘lawfulness’ it must have a basis in the domestic law

Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights


Falsely accused of manslaughter, Sergey Solovyev was locked up in a cell where he lost three years of his life. His pre-trial detention was extended even when this had not been ordered by a judge and had not been allowed under Russian law.

Mr Solovyev was eventually acquitted of the crime and released.

Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

The European court found that Mr Solovyev’s detention had been extended without a valid judicial order, contrary to Russian law. This meant that he had been locked up arbitrarily, in violation of his basic rights. 

A series of similar cases before the European Ccurt involved arbitrary, unlawful or improper detention in Russia.

As a result [of these cases], Russian courts are justifying the lawfulness and the length of detention on remand with greater precision, while the number of alternative measures of restraint is steadily growing.

Report on the group of cases in 20 cases that have changed the Russian legal system


Reforms were made to protect the right to liberty in Russia, in particular following rulings by the Constitutional and Supreme Courts. Measures were taken to establish the following:

  • Pre-trial detention must be ordered by a court decision;
  • These decisions must contain reasons and a time-limit for the detention;
  • The court hearings must be carried out in the presence of the defendant and their lawyer.

Related examples

Arbitrary detention in psychiatric hospital leads to reforms to protect liberty

Frits Winterwerp was detained in a psychiatric hospital. He said that he was not mentally ill and he should be released. However, he was repeatedly prevented from making his case in the Dutch courts, which kept extending his detention without hearing from him. The European court ruled this had violated his right to liberty. Reforms were made to protect people in Mr Winterwerp’s situation.

Read more

Legal reforms after innocent hotel director was jailed for 14 months without proper evidence

Hotel director Juozas Jėčius was held for over 14 months whilst awaiting trial for murder. However, there had never been any proper evidence against him, and he was acquitted at trial. The Strasbourg court ruled that Mr Jėčius’ incarceration had violated his right to liberty. Following the Court’s judgment, new measures were introduced to help avoid unjustified detention.

Read more

Reforms to prevent detention without a court’s permission

Allar Harkmann was arrested and detained, without a court hearing his case or examining the legality of his detention. He was only released after 15 days. The Strasbourg court ruled that the failure to have Mr Harkmann’s detention promptly reviewed by a judge, and the lack of any opportunity for him to obtain compensation, had violated his right to liberty.

Read more

Woman’s 4-year detention without trial leads to freedom protections

Josette Prencipe was in her mid-sixties when she was arrested and detained for almost 4 years, without facing trial. She was accused of making illegal bank transfers. The Strasbourg court ruled that the authorities had breached Mrs Prencipe’s right to liberty. The case triggered a series of reforms, including a new time limit on pre-trial detention.

Read more

Changes to legal procedures after detainee denied the opportunity to make his case in court

Peter Frommelt asked to be released whilst awaiting trial for financial crimes. When this was considered on appeal, neither he nor his lawyer were allowed to make any legal arguments. The Strasbourg court ruled that this had been unfair. The procedures were changed, allowing people to make comments to a court in such circumstances.

Read more

There must be proper rules on detention without trial

Giuseppe Toniolo was detained in San Marino for five weeks whilst awaiting extradition. The Strasbourg court ruled that the law in San Marino did not set out clear rules for his imprisonment, meaning that he could be detained arbitrarily and could not effectively make a claim to be released.

Read more