7.  The applicant was born in 1980 and lived in St Petersburg until her arrest. 8.  On 6 February 2013 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of drug trafficking. She remained in detention throughout the ensuing investigation and trial. 9.  On 28 March 2013 the Krasnogvardeiyskiy District Court of St Petersburg found her guilty and sentenced her to one year in prison. Regard being had to her previous convictions for similar offences, the applicant was ordered to spend four years and one month in a correctional colony. 10.  At the time of her arrest the applicant suffered from HIV and chronic hepatitis C. 11.  She underwent a routine medical examination by a general practitioner on admission to her remand prison. Several days later, on 18 February 2013, she was examined by a gynaecologist, who diagnosed cervical erosion and carried out basic tests. 12.  In late April 2013 the applicant was sent to correctional colony no. 2 in St Petersburg. 13.  She had the necessary treatment for HIV and other illnesses in the correctional colony. She was examined by various doctors, including a gynaecologist. She consulted the latter on 6 and 22 May 2013 on account of a vaginal infection. 14.  On 9 June 2015 the applicant complained of intense pain in the lower abdomen, which she had been experiencing for four months. A gynaecologist tested her for sexually transmitted diseases and prescribed treatment with hormones and painkillers. 15.  Six days later the doctor examined her again and suggested that she might have developed cervical cancer and needed to go to hospital for an in‑depth examination. 16.  On 17 June 2015 the applicant, referring to “personal circumstances”, asked for the admission to hospital to be suspended. The doctor talked to her, insisting that she urgently needed to be admitted to hospital, but she refused. 17.  A cervical smear test was carried out next day. It revealed cell pathology which resembled cervical cancer, requiring a histological examination to confirm the diagnosis. 18.  On 21 July 2015 the applicant was admitted to Gaaza Prison Hospital in St Petersburg (“the prison hospital”). It appears that it was not licensed to provide healthcare services, although certain services for cancer patients were provided by St Petersburg City Cancer Hospital under a special agreement (see paragraph 42 below). 19.  The applicant had a histological examination two days later, which confirmed cervical cancer. Local chemotherapy was prescribed. 20.  On 22 September 2015 the custodial authorities asked a gynaecological cancer specialist to examine the applicant. The doctor noted that her cancer had progressed to such an advanced stage that it could not be cured by surgery. Radiotherapy was prescribed. 21.  The applicant suffered from “unbearable pain” which ordinary painkillers could not alleviate. On 30 October 2015 the prison hospital’s medical board therefore authorised the use of narcotic pain relief. 22.  In November 2015 the head of the prison hospital applied for the applicant’s early release on medical grounds. 23.  At a hearing on 25 November 2015 before the Smolninskiy District Court of St Petersburg, the applicant’s doctor supported the application, stating that she was very ill, was in constant, severe pain, and that the prison hospital had no drugs to treat her. The drugs accessible in detention were unable to relieve the pain. He argued that if released the applicant would benefit from the wider range of painkillers available in civilian hospitals. 24.  A representative of the detention authorities left the issue to the court’s discretion, only making positive comments about the applicant’s work while in detention and about her character. 25.  The prosecutor in the case objected to the applicant’s release, stating that the detention facility could provide her with the requisite treatment. 26.  The court dismissed the application, finding that the treatment she would receive in the prison hospital was similar to what she would get in a civilian one. 27.  On 1 March 2016 the St Petersburg City Court quashed the decision of 25 November 2015 on appeal and remitted the case for fresh examination. No hearings were held. 28.  By a letter delivered to the Court on 2 March 2016 the applicant asked to apply interim measures under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court. She complained of a lack of medical care in detention, including an absence of effective painkillers. On the same day the Court indicated to the Government, under Rule 39, that the applicant should immediately be given access to the entire range of medication available for cancer patients in accordance with Russian laws, including appropriate pain relief drugs. It noted that if such drugs were not available in prison medical institutions, the applicant should be transferred to a civilian hospital. 29.  Following the Court’s decision on interim measures the authorities continued treating the applicant in the prison hospital, which mostly consisted of treating her symptoms. 30.  The applicant’s condition deteriorated rapidly. She complained of constant pain and asked to consult a psychiatrist. She was afraid that she would have no chance to say farewell to her mother, who was dying of cervical cancer in a hospital. On 16 March 2016 the prison psychiatrist prescribed her sedatives. 31.  On 25 March 2016 the applicant was examined by a cancer specialist. He recorded that “additional prescriptions” were necessary to address the applicant’s severe and increasing pain. It does not appear that any changes in the pain relief therapy were made. 32.  The applicant died on 9 April 2016.