Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ZABIYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (14)

• EGMR, 13.06.2002 - 38361/97

  ANGUELOVA v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2009 - 35052/04

  As regards the alleged lack of effective remedies in respect of the complaints under Articles 2 and 3 concerning Umar Zabiyev, as well as the first applicant's complaint of ill-treatment under Article 3, the Court emphasises that 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 for the deprivation of life and infliction of treatment contrary to Article 3, including effective access for the complainant to an investigation procedure leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, §§ 161-62, ECHR 2002-IV, and Süheyla Aydın v. Turkey, no. 25660/94, § 208, 24 May 2005).
• EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 34056/02

  GONGADZE c. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2009 - 35052/04

  However, if a period of initial disappearance is long it may in certain circumstances give rise to a separate issue under Article 3 (see Gongadze v. Ukraine, no. 34056/02, §§ 184-86, ECHR 2005-XI).
• EGMR, 09.11.2006 - 69480/01

  LOULOUÏEV ET AUTRES c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2009 - 35052/04

  In the Court's opinion, the period during which the applicants suffered uncertainty, anguish and distress characteristic of the specific phenomenon of disappearances was not sufficiently long to give rise to an issue under Article 3 of the Convention (see, by contrast, Luluyev and Others v. Russia, no. 69480/01, § 115, ECHR 2006-XIII, and Kukayev v. Russia, no. 29361/02, § 107, 15 November 2007).

 
• EGMR, 10.04.2001 - 26129/95

  TANLI v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2009 - 35052/04

  The Court notes that while a family member of a "disappeared person" can claim to be a victim of treatment contrary to Article 3 (see Kurt v. Turkey, 25 May 1998, §§ 130-34, Reports 1998-III), the same principle would not usually apply to situations where the person taken into custody has later been found dead (see Tanlı v. Turkey, no. 26129/95, § 159, ECHR 2001-III).
• EGMR, 15.11.2007 - 29361/02

  KUKAYEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2009 - 35052/04

  In the Court's opinion, the period during which the applicants suffered uncertainty, anguish and distress characteristic of the specific phenomenon of disappearances was not sufficiently long to give rise to an issue under Article 3 of the Convention (see, by contrast, Luluyev and Others v. Russia, no. 69480/01, § 115, ECHR 2006-XIII, and Kukayev v. Russia, no. 29361/02, § 107, 15 November 2007).
• EGMR, 24.05.2005 - 25660/94

  SÜHEYLA AYDIN v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2009 - 35052/04

  As regards the alleged lack of effective remedies in respect of the complaints under Articles 2 and 3 concerning Umar Zabiyev, as well as the first applicant's complaint of ill-treatment under Article 3, the Court emphasises that 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 for the deprivation of life and infliction of treatment contrary to Article 3, including effective access for the complainant to an investigation procedure leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, §§ 161-62, ECHR 2002-IV, and Süheyla Aydın v. Turkey, no. 25660/94, § 208, 24 May 2005).
• EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

  McCANN AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2009 - 35052/04

  In the light of the importance of the protection afforded by Article 2, the Court must subject deprivations of life to the most careful scrutiny, particularly where deliberate lethal force is used, taking into consideration not only the actions of State agents who actually administer the force but also all the surrounding circumstances including such matters as the planning and control of the actions under examination (see McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, §§ 146-50, Series A no. 324, and Andronicou and Constantinou v. Cyprus, 9 October 1997, § 171, Reports 1997-V).
• EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21594/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines türkischen Staatsangehörigen durch türkische …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2009 - 35052/04

  The Court also notes that the applicants were not promptly informed of significant developments in the investigation and considers therefore that the investigators failed to ensure that the investigation received the required level of public scrutiny, or to safeguard the interests of the next of kin in the proceedings (see OÄ?ur v. Turkey [GC], no. 21594/93, § 92, ECHR 1999-III).
• EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 24746/94

  HUGH JORDAN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2009 - 35052/04

  It should also be effective in the sense that it is capable of leading to a determination of whether the force used in such cases was or was not justified in the circumstances or otherwise unlawful, and should afford a sufficient element of public scrutiny of the investigation or its results (see Hugh Jordan v. the United Kingdom, no. 24746/94, §§ 105-09, ECHR 2001-III, and Douglas-Williams v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 56413/00, 8 January 2002).
• EGMR, 09.11.2006 - 7615/02

  IMAKAÏEVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2009 - 35052/04

  The Court observes that in previous cases it has found this explanation insufficient to justify the withholding of key information requested by the Court (see Imakayeva v. Russia, no. 7615/02, § 123, ECHR 2006-XIII).
• EGMR, 24.03.2005 - 21894/93

  AKKUM AND OTHERS v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 25.01.2000 - 34979/97

  WALKER v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 08.01.2002 - 56413/00

  DOUGLAS-WILLIAMS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 02.07.2002 - 76573/01

  DENNIS AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM