Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  DARAIBOU v. CROATIA

  Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-1) Exhaustion of domestic remedies;Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2 - Positive obligations;Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  DARAIBOU v. CROATIA

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 3 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2023 - 84523/17

  Relying on Osman v. the United Kingdom (no. 23452/94, 28 October 1998) and Salman v. Turkey (no. 21986/93, § 90, 27 June 2000), the applicant claimed that the State was under an obligation to take preventive measures when the authorities knew or ought to know of the existence of real and immediate danger to life of a particular individual.

  As a general rule, the mere fact that an individual dies in suspicious circumstances while in custody should raise an issue as to whether the State has complied with its obligation to protect that person's right to life (see Slimani v. France, no. 57671/00, § 27, ECHR 2004-IX (extracts); Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 99, 27 June 2000; and Tekin and Arlsan v Belgium, no. 37795/13, § 83, 5 September 2017).

• EGMR, 20.12.2004 - 50385/99

  MAKARATZIS c. GRECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2023 - 84523/17

  Indeed, the Court has emphasised on many occasions that Article 2 of the Convention may come into play even if a person whose right to life was allegedly breached did not die (see, among many other authorities, Makaratzis v. Greece [GC], no. 50385/99, § 55, ECHR 2004-XI; and Fergec v. Croatia, no. 68516/14, §§ 21-24, 9 May 2017 and the cases cited therein).
• EGMR, 14.03.2002 - 46477/99

  PAUL ET AUDREY EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2023 - 84523/17

  A positive obligation will arise, the Court has held, where it has been established that the authorities knew or ought to have known at the time of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual by a third party or himself and that they failed to take measures within the scope of their powers which, judged reasonably, might have been expected to avoid that risk (see Keenan, cited above, § 90; Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 55, ECHR 2002-III).

 
• EGMR, 13.06.2002 - 38361/97

  ANGUELOVA v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2023 - 84523/17

  Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (see, among many other authorities, Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, §§ 109-11, ECHR 2002-IV).
• EGMR, 27.07.2004 - 57671/00

  SLIMANI v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2023 - 84523/17

  As a general rule, the mere fact that an individual dies in suspicious circumstances while in custody should raise an issue as to whether the State has complied with its obligation to protect that person's right to life (see Slimani v. France, no. 57671/00, § 27, ECHR 2004-IX (extracts); Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 99, 27 June 2000; and Tekin and Arlsan v Belgium, no. 37795/13, § 83, 5 September 2017).
• EGMR, 17.10.2013 - 26824/04

  KELLER v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2023 - 84523/17

  However, even where it is not established that the authorities knew or ought to have known about any such risk, there are certain basic precautions which police officers and prison officers should be expected to take in all cases in order to minimise any potential risk to protect the health and well-being of the arrested person (see Fanziyeva v. Russia, no. 41675/08, § 48, 18 June 2015 ; Keller v. Russia, no. 26824/04, § 88, 17 October 2013; Eremiá?.ová and Pechová v. the Czech Republic, no. 23944/04, § 110, 16 February 2012; and Mi?¾igárová v. Slovakia, no. 74832/01, § 89, 14 December 2010).
• EGMR, 18.06.2015 - 41675/08

  FANZIYEVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2023 - 84523/17

  However, even where it is not established that the authorities knew or ought to have known about any such risk, there are certain basic precautions which police officers and prison officers should be expected to take in all cases in order to minimise any potential risk to protect the health and well-being of the arrested person (see Fanziyeva v. Russia, no. 41675/08, § 48, 18 June 2015 ; Keller v. Russia, no. 26824/04, § 88, 17 October 2013; Eremiá?.ová and Pechová v. the Czech Republic, no. 23944/04, § 110, 16 February 2012; and Mi?¾igárová v. Slovakia, no. 74832/01, § 89, 14 December 2010).
• EGMR, 09.05.2017 - 68516/14

  FERGEC v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2023 - 84523/17

  Indeed, the Court has emphasised on many occasions that Article 2 of the Convention may come into play even if a person whose right to life was allegedly breached did not die (see, among many other authorities, Makaratzis v. Greece [GC], no. 50385/99, § 55, ECHR 2004-XI; and Fergec v. Croatia, no. 68516/14, §§ 21-24, 9 May 2017 and the cases cited therein).

• VG München, 22.02.2024 - M 10 K 22.50479

  Dublin-Verfahren (Zielstaat Kroatien, Herkunftsstaat Türkei), …

  Dafür spricht nicht zuletzt, dass der Gerichtshof nur etwas mehr als ein Jahr nach der Verurteilung vom 18. November 2021 eine weitere Verletzung des Art. 2 EMRK (in prozeduraler Hinsicht) durch Kroatien festgestellt hat, nachdem ein Asylsuchender in einer Haftzelle in einer kroatischen Polizeidienststelle durch einen Brand gestorben war (vgl. EGMR, U.v. 17.1.2023 - Daraibou/Kroatien, Nr. 84523/17 - HUDOC).
• VG München, 22.02.2024 - M 10 K 23.50597

  Dublin-Verfahren (Zielstaat, Kroatien, Herkunftsstaat Demokratische, Republik …

  Dafür spricht nicht zuletzt, dass der Gerichtshof nur etwas mehr als ein Jahr nach der Verurteilung vom 18. November 2021 eine weitere Verletzung des Art. 2 EMRK (in prozeduraler Hinsicht) durch Kroatien festgestellt hat, nachdem ein Asylsuchender in einer Haftzelle in einer kroatischen Polizeidienststelle durch einen Brand gestorben war (vgl. EGMR, U.v. 17.1.2023 - Daraibou/Kroatien, Nr. 84523/17 - HUDOC).
• VG Braunschweig, 08.05.2023 - 2 A 269/22

  Dublin-Rückkehrer; Kettenabschiebungen; Kollektivausweisungen; Push-backs; …

  Der EuGH stellte fest, dass die kroatischen Behörden keine hinreichende institutionelle Untersuchung vorgenommen hätten, um die möglichen Unzulänglichkeiten, die zu dem Vorfall geführt hätten, festzustellen und zu beheben und ähnliche Fehler in Zukunft zu verhindern (Daraibou v. Croatia, 17.01.2023, Az. 84523/17).
• EGMR, 16.01.2024 - 15681/18

  MILJAK v. CROATIA

  Admissibility 11. As regards the Government's contention that the applicant had failed to exhaust domestic remedies by not having lodged a constitutional complaint, the Court notes that it has already rejected a similar preliminary objection in the context of both a procedural and a substantive complaint under Article 2 of the Convention in the case of Daraibou v. Croatia (no. 84523/17, §§ 66-70, 17 January 2023).
• EGMR, 14.09.2023 - 2264/12

  AINIS AND OTHERS v. ITALY

  The Court has also held that the obligation to protect the health and well-being of persons in detention clearly encompasses an obligation to take reasonable measures to protect them from harming themselves (see Mizigárová v. Slovakia, no. 74832/01, § 89, 14 December 2010; Eremiásová and Pechová v. the Czech Republic, no. 23944/04, § 115, 16 February 2012; and Daraibou v. Croatia, no. 84523/17, § 88, 17 January 2023).