5.  The applicant was born in 1955 and lives in Marusino, Moscow Region. 6.  On 1 August 2000 the Ministry of the Interior of Belarus ordered the applicant’s arrest on suspicion of her having committed several criminal offences. On an unspecified date her name was put on the international wanted persons list. 7.  On 18 February 2014 the applicant was arrested in Lyubertsy, Moscow Region. 8.  On 20 February 2014 the Lyubertsy Town Court of the Moscow Region authorised the applicant’s detention for forty days pending her extradition to Belarus. 9.  On 28 March 2014 the Town Court extended the applicant’s detention until 18 August 2014. 10.  On 18 August 2014 the Town Court extended the applicant’s detention until 18 February 2015. On 18 September 2014 the Moscow Regional Court upheld the decision of 18 August 2014 on appeal. The applicant did not attend the hearing. The applicant’s lawyers were present and made submissions to the court. 11.  On 10 February 2015 the Town Prosecutor ordered the applicant’s release on an undertaking not to leave town. 12.  On 20 August and 21 September 2015 the investigative committee of the Republic of Belarus discontinued the criminal proceedings against the applicant. 13.  On 4 February 2016 the Town Prosecutor discontinued the extradition proceedings against the applicant. 14.  From 21 February 2014 to 10 February 2015 the applicant was detained in remand prison SIZO-6 in the Moscow Region. According to the Government, she was held in the following cells:
Cell no.
Period of detention
Cell size (sq. m)
28
From 21 to 22 February 2014 15.  According to the Government, the personal space afforded to the applicant during her detention in the remand prison was approximately 3.27 sq. m, which was below the statutory minimum standard of 4 sq. m. She was provided with an individual sleeping place, a mattress, a pillow, two bed sheets, a pillowcase, a towel and a blanket. She also received a bowl, a spoon and a mug. The inmates were allowed to take a shower once a week for at least fifteen minutes. The bed sheets were changed on a weekly basis. The applicant was provided with access to a radio, books and board games. The temperature in the cells was 22oC in summer and at least 18oC in winter. The food provided to the inmates was in compliance with the relevant norms and standards. 16.  According to the applicant, the cells in which she was held were overcrowded and dirty. The walls were covered with mould and fungus. The lighting was insufficient during the day and was not turned off at night. The heating was also insufficient. On numerous occasions it was completely turned off. The mattresses, pillows and bed linen were too old and worn-out. The inmates were allowed to take a fifteen-minute shower once a week. The food was of poor quality. No fruit or vegetables were available. The inmates were allowed one hour of exercise a day in a prison yard with no sports facilities. If one of the inmates were sick or refused to take part in the daily exercise, the administration cancelled it for all the inmates held in the same cell. 17.  During her transfers between the remand prison and court, the applicant was placed in a compartment measuring 1 by 0.7 m, often with another inmate. The journey lasted for two and a half to three hours. 18.  Upon her return to the remand prison, the applicant was placed in a holding cell measuring 1 by 1.5 m with three other inmates. Prior to being admitted to their cells, the inmates were required to take off their clothes, do several sit-ups and then remain crouched down. 19.  On 26 February 2014 the Deputy Town Prosecutor carried out an inspection of remand prison SIZO-6. He established, inter alia, that it was overcrowded, noting in particular that the average personal space afforded to inmates varied from 1 to 3 sq. m and that in cells nos. 8, 69 and 97 the inmates were not provided with individual beds. According to the prison administration, the remand prison capacity was 327 inmates. However, at the time of the inspection the prison population exceeded that limit by 62%, holding a total of 530 inmates. 20.  On an unspecified date in 2014 the Regional Prosecutor’s Office carried out an inspection of the conditions of detention in remand prison SIZO-6. On 21 March 2014 the Regional Prosecutor issued a notice to the head of the regional penal service (FSIN), advising that the conditions of detention in the prison be brought in line with the statutory requirements. As to the issue of overcrowding, the prosecutor indicated as follows:
“As regards the number of beds ... in the cells ... the [statutory] requirement of 4 sq. m of personal space per inmate is not being complied with ... The average personal space afforded to detainees is 2.6 sq. m and in cells nos. 10, 14, 16, 25 etc. it varies from 1.6 to 1.55 sq. m per inmate.” 21.  According to the applicant, between February and March 2014 the Town Prosecutor authorised the applicant’s mother to visit her at the remand prison on three occasions. 22.  On 10 October 2014, in response to a request by the applicant to meet with her family, the Prosecutor General’s Office responded that, as stipulated in the Pre-trial Detention Act, suspects and defendants could have no more than two family visits per month, subject to written authorisation from the official or authority in charge of the criminal case, and advised the applicant to apply to the law-enforcement bodies in Belarus for approval of her relatives’ visits. 23.  On 21 January 2015 the Tverskoy District Court of Moscow dismissed a complaint by the applicant against the prosecutor’s decision of 10 October 2014, without considering the merits. 24.  On 11 March 2015 the Moscow City Court quashed the decision of 21 January 2015 and remitted the matter to the District Court for fresh consideration. 25.  On 6 May 2015 the District Court dismissed the applicant’s complaint against the decision of 10 October 2014. 26.  On 17 August 2015 the City Court upheld the decision of 6 May 2015 on appeal. 27.  On 24 January 2001 the applicant was issued with a Russian passport by the Russian Embassy in Minsk, Belarus. On an unspecified date she moved to Moscow, Russia. 28.  On 20 August 2004 a district police department in Moscow issued an internal passport in the applicant’s name. 29.  On 16 February 2012 the Moscow City Department of the Federal Migration Service decided, on the basis of an earlier inquiry, that the applicant had been wrongly issued with a Russian passport. They based their findings, inter alia, on information received from the Russian Embassy in Minsk indicating that there was no information in the relevant database confirming the issuance of a Russian passport in the applicant’s name in 2001. 30.  On 5 February 2015 the Lyublinskiy District Court of Moscow dismissed a complaint by the applicant against the decision of 16 February 2012. On 26 June 2015 the City Court upheld the decision of 5 February 2015. 31.  On an unspecified date the applicant, being a Belorussian citizen, applied for a residency permit in Russia. On 17 April 2017 the Federal Migration Service issued a residency permit.