Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  TAGAYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Remainder inadmissible (Article 35-3-a - Ratione personae);Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2 - Positive obligations;Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural ...

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  TAGAYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - [Deutsche Übersetzung] Zusammenfassung durch das Österreichische Institut für Menschenrechte (ÖIM)

  [DEU] Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Ratione personae;Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2 - Positive obligations;Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective ...

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Kurzfassungen/Presse (2)

• archive.is (Pressebericht, 13.04.2017)

  Geiseldrama von Beslan - Russland verurteilt

• sueddeutsche.de (Pressemeldung, 13.04.2017)

  Menschenrechte: Russland will Urteil zu Beslan anfechten

Sonstiges (3)

• lto.de (Meldung mit Bezug zur Entscheidung, 20.09.2017)

  Geiseldrama in Beslan: EGMR-Urteil gegen Russland rechtskräftig

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Videoaufzeichnung der mündlichen Verhandlung)

  Tagayeva and Others v. Russia

  [14.10.2014]

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  TAGAYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 13 MRK
  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 09.06.2015 - 26562/07
• EGMR, 13.04.2017 - 26562/07, 14755/08, 49339/08, 49380/08, 51313/08, 21294/11, 37096/11

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Neu Zitiert selbst (14)

• EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

  McCANN AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.04.2017 - 26562/07

  The Court has on many occasions stated that Article 2 of the Convention contains a positive obligation of a procedural character: it requires by implication that there should be some form of effective official investigation when individuals have been killed as a result of the use of force by the authorities (see McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, § 161, Series A no. 324 § 161, and Kaya v. Turkey, 19 February 1998, Reports 1998-I, § 105).
• EGMR, 20.12.2004 - 50385/99

  MAKARATZIS c. GRECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.04.2017 - 26562/07

  The Court reiterates, next, that in previous cases it has examined the legal or regulatory framework existing for the use of lethal force (see McCann and Others, cited above, § 150, and Makaratzis v. Greece [GC], no. 50385/99, §§ 56-59, ECHR 2004-XI).
• EGMR, 16.09.2014 - 29750/09

  HASSAN c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.04.2017 - 26562/07

  In other words, in interpreting Article 2, the Court clearly refused to yield to the temptation of reading into the Convention the standards of the law on armed conflicts with a view to lowering the level of protection of human rights enshrined in the Convention, as it did in Hassan v. the United Kingdom ([GC], no. 29750/09, ECHR 2014).

 
• EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 47848/08

  CENTRE FOR LEGAL RESOURCES ON BEHALF OF VALENTIN CÂMPEANU v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.04.2017 - 26562/07

  Where a right of such fundamental importance as the right to life or the prohibition against torture, inhuman and degrading treatment is at stake, Article 13 requires, in addition to the payment of compensation where appropriate, a thorough and effective investigation capable of leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible, including effective access for the complainant to the investigation procedure (see Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, §§ 148-49, ECHR 2014, with further references).
• EGMR, 08.04.2004 - 71503/01

  ASSANIDZE v. GEORGIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.04.2017 - 26562/07

  It follows, inter alia, that a judgment in which the Court finds a violation of the Convention or its Protocols imposes on the respondent State a legal obligation not just to pay those concerned the sums awarded by way of just satisfaction, but also to choose, subject to supervision by the Committee of Ministers, the general and/or, if appropriate, individual measures to be adopted in its domestic legal order to put an end to the violation found by the Court and to make all feasible reparation for its consequences in such a way as to restore as far as possible the situation existing before the breach (see Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, § 198, ECHR 2004-II).
• EGMR, 30.03.2016 - 5878/08

  ARMANI DA SILVA c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.04.2017 - 26562/07

  The relevant principles applicable to the effective investigation have been summarised by the Court on many occasions (see, for example, Finogenov and Others, cited above, §§ 268-72, and for a more recent authoritative summary, Armani Da Silva v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 5878/08, §§ 229-39, ECHR 2016).
• EGMR, 13.07.2000 - 39221/98

  SCOZZARI ET GIUNTA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.04.2017 - 26562/07

  As the Court's judgments are essentially declaratory, the respondent State remains free, subject to the supervision of the Committee of Ministers, to choose the means by which it will discharge its legal obligation under Article 46 of the Convention, provided that such means are compatible with the conclusions set out in the Court's judgment (see Scozzari and Giunta v. Italy [GC], nos. 39221/98 and 41963/98, § 249, ECHR 2000-VIII).
• EGMR, 12.02.2004 - 47287/99

  PEREZ c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.04.2017 - 26562/07

  At the same time, neither Article 13 nor any other provision of the Convention guarantees an applicant a right to secure the prosecution and conviction of a third party or a right to "private revenge" (see, mutatis mutandis, Perez v. France ([GC], no. 47287/99, §§ 70-71, ECHR 2004-I).
• EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82

  BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.04.2017 - 26562/07

  The complaint is therefore "arguable" for the purposes of Article 13 (see Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom, 27 April 1988, § 52, Series A no. 131).
• EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 43098/09

  McCAUGHEY AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.04.2017 - 26562/07

  It is incumbent on the Committee of Ministers, acting under Article 46 of the Convention, to address the issue of what may be required of the respondent Government by way of compliance, through both individual and general measures (see also McCaughey and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 43098/09, § 145, ECHR 2013).
• EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 46846/08

  CHOREFTAKIS ET CHOREFTAKI c. GRECE
• EGMR, 23.10.2012 - 24604/04

  NIHAYET ARICI ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 15.03.2011 - 39358/05

  TSECHOYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 26.02.2008 - 43443/98

  MANSUROGLU c. TURQUIE

• EGMR, 14.09.2022 - 24384/19

  Europas IS-Anhänger: Großeltern klagen auf Rückholung

  Néanmoins, en tant qu'organe chargé de contrôler le respect par l'État de ses obligations en matière de droits de l'homme découlant de la Convention, elle considère devoir opérer une distinction entre les choix politiques faits dans le cadre de la lutte contre le terrorisme, lesquels par leur nature même échappent à un tel contrôle, et les autres volets plus concrets de l'action des autorités, lesquels ont une incidence directe sur le respect des droits protégés (Tagayeva et autres c. Russie, nos 26562/07 et 6 autres, § 481, 13 avril 2017).
• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 06.12.2018 - C-24/17

  Österreichischer Gewerkschaftsbund - Vorlage zur Vorabentscheidung - …

  89 Vgl. u. a. EGMR, 13. Dezember 2012, De Souza Ribeiro/Frankreich (CE:ECHR:2012:1213JUD002268907, § 79), und EGMR, 13. April 2017, Tagayeva u. a./Russland (CE:ECHR:2017:0413JUD002656207, § 618).
• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 06.12.2018 - C-396/17

  Leitner - Vorlage zur Vorabentscheidung - Sozialpolitik - Richtlinie 2000/78/EG - …

  75 Vgl. u. a. EGMR, 13. Dezember 2012, De Souza Ribeiro/Frankreich (CE:ECHR:2012:1213JUD002268907, § 79), und EGMR, 13. April 2017, Tagayeva u. a./Russland (CE:ECHR:2017:0413JUD002656207, § 618).
• EGMR, 19.01.2023 - 24203/16

  PAGERIE c. FRANCE

  Ainsi, en matière de lutte contre le terrorisme, la Convention impose aux États membres autant de prendre des mesures préventives pour protéger la vie de la population en cas de risque réel et immédiat d'attentat (Tagayeva et autres c. Russie, nos 26562/07 et 6 autres, §§ 481-493, 13 avril 2017) que d'assurer la garantie effective des droits protégés (voir, par exemple, Saadi c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 13229/03, §§ 140-141, CEDH 2008 et Ramirez Sanchez c. France [GC], no 59450/00, §§ 115-116, CEDH 2006-IX sous l'angle de l'article 3, A. et autres c. Royaume-Uni, précité, §§ 171-172 sous l'angle de l'article 5, 1brahim et autres c. Royaume-Uni [GC], nos 50541/08 et 3 autres, § 252, 13 septembre 2016 sous l'angle de l'article 6, Klass et autres c. Allemagne, 6 septembre 1978, § 49, série A no 28 sous l'angle de l'article 8, ou encore Sürek c. Turquie (no 4) [GC], no 24762/94, § 58, 8 juillet 1999 et Selahattin Demirta?Ÿ, précité, § 276 sous l'angle de l'article 10).
• EGMR, 20.07.2021 - 19699/18

  AKGÜN c. TURQUIE

  Le Gouvernement tient également à rappeler que, compte tenu de l'obligation positive pesant sur l'État de protéger ses citoyens face à la menace terroriste (Tagayeva et autres c. Russie, nos 26562/07 et 6 autres, 13 avril 2017, et Dujardin c. France, no 16734/90, décision de la Commission du 2 septembre 1991), les services de renseignements de l'État ont considéré la menace que représentait l'organisation terroriste armée FETÖ/PDY pour la sécurité nationale comme un danger imminent, et ils ont pris les mesures nécessaires dans le cadre de la législation pertinente.