{"id":999,"date":"2017-03-07T08:24:28","date_gmt":"2017-03-07T08:24:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rcstaging.co.uk\/ehrac\/?post_type=case-studies&p=999"},"modified":"2023-10-31T19:51:22","modified_gmt":"2023-10-31T19:51:22","slug":"kibalo-v-russia","status":"publish","type":"case-studies","link":"http:\/\/ehrac.org.uk\/en_gb\/key-ehrac-cases\/kibalo-v-russia\/","title":{"rendered":"Kibalo v Russia"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\t\t
<\/div><\/div>
<\/div><\/div>
\n\t
\n\t\t
<\/div><\/div>\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\r\n
\r\n\t
\r\n\t\t

Case No. 35845\/11
\nJudgment date: 3 March 2017<\/strong><\/p>\n

In May 2007 Mr Kh. was sentenced to twenty years\u2019 imprisonment and sent to a \u2018strict regime\u2019 facility in Blagoveschensk (in the far east of Russia). In February 2008, Mr Kh.\u2019s wife, Natalya Kibalo, and their two daughters (the applicants), requested his transfer to a nearer facility, but it was rejected. Ms Kibalo argued that in practice they have been deprived of the possibility of visiting Mr Kh. as it takes at least eight days to travel to Blagoveschensk from their home in Chechnya. Without sponsorship, the ticket price was prohibitively expensive: although Mr Kh. had the right to three four-hour visits and three three-day visits annually, his family were only able to make the journey on eight occasions over four years, and six of these trips were sponsored. Their youngest daughter, born in 2009, has never seen her father.<\/p>\n

The applicants were represented by EHRAC and Memorial Human Rights Centre.<\/p>\n

Read the full case summary in the Winter 2017 Bulletin.<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

Links<\/h3>\n