2 RUDYAK v. UKRAINE JUDGMENT THE FACTS THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 5. The applicant was born in 1974 and lives in Gadyach. A. Events of 2004 6. On 25 February 2004 the applicant was arrested in Gadyach by the Kharkiv Chervonozavodskiy District Police Drug Squad (Відділ по боротьбі із незаконним обігом наркотиків Червонозаводського районного відділу Харківського міського управління Міністерства внутрішніх справ України – “the Drug Squad”) and taken to Kharkiv. The applicant stated that he had been ill-treated by the police and that upon his arrest a police officer had hit him in the left eye. 7. On 19 July 2004 the Gadyachskiy District Court convicted the applicant of unlawful possession of weapons and drug trafficking and sentenced him to five years’ imprisonment, suspended for three years. On the same date the applicant was released. 8. On 27 November 2004 the applicant was diagnosed with a cataract and a subatrophy of the left eyeball. The only recommendation after the diagnosis was to avoid hypothermia. According to the applicant, he planned to have eye surgery. No medical evidence was submitted in this respect. B. The applicant’s arrest in 2005 and subsequent events 9. On 19 April 2005 the applicant was again arrested in Gadyach after selling drugs to D. and taken to Kharkiv by the Drug Squad. The applicant stated that he “had been beaten by the police after his arrest for three days simply because he had wanted to have a lawyer”. He further stated that “pending investigation” a gas mask had been put on his face with lit cigarettes inserted into the air valve. 10. On 20 April 2005 Kharkiv Hospital no. 11 issued a certificate stating that the applicant had head and left shoulder injuries, a haematoma on the left ear and had possibly suffered a closed craniocerebral injury. However, the certificate stated that the applicant could be detained, so long as he was under the supervision of a neurosurgeon. 11. On 22 April 2005 criminal proceedings on drug trafficking charges were instituted against the applicant and it was decided to arrest him. 12. On 29 April 2005 the Kharkiv Chervonozavodskiy District Court (“the Chervonozavodskiy Court”) remanded the applicant in custody. 13. On 5 May 2005 Kharkiv Hospital no. 11 issued a certificate stating that the applicant was suffering from the after-effects of a head injury but

Select target paragraph3