Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VAGAPOVA AND ZUBIRAYEV v. RUSSIA

  (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Zitiert selbst (22)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.02.2009 - 21080/05

  In the light of the importance of the protection afforded by Article 2, the Court must subject deprivation of life to the most careful scrutiny, taking into consideration not only the actions of State agents but also all the surrounding circumstances (see McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, §§ 146-47, Series A no. 324, and Avsar, cited above, § 391).
• EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21594/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines türkischen Staatsangehörigen durch türkische …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.02.2009 - 21080/05

  Accordingly, 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 Oÿur v. Turkey [GC], no. 21594/93, § 92, ECHR 1999-III).
• EGMR, 14.03.2002 - 46477/99

  PAUL ET AUDREY EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.02.2009 - 21080/05

  Accordingly, this crucial procedural step was significantly delayed, which demonstrates the authorities" failure to act of their own motion and constitutes a breach of the obligation to exercise exemplary diligence and promptness in dealing with such a serious crime (see Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 86, ECHR 2002-II).

• EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 24746/94

  HUGH JORDAN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.02.2009 - 21080/05

  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 lawful and justified in the circumstances, 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 (extracts), and Douglas-Williams v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 56413/00, 8 January 2002).
• EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.02.2009 - 21080/05

  In view of the Court's above findings with regard to Article 2, this complaint is clearly "arguable" for the purposes of Article 13 (see Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom, 27 April 1988, § 52, Series A no. 131).
• EGMR, 18.06.2002 - 25656/94

  ORHAN v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.02.2009 - 21080/05

  It is especially in respect of the latter that a relative may claim directly to be a victim of the authorities" conduct (see Orhan v. Turkey, no. 25656/94, § 358, 18 June 2002, and Imakayeva, cited above, § 164).
• EGMR, 09.11.2006 - 69480/01

  LOULOUÏEV ET AUTRES c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.02.2009 - 21080/05

  Having regard to the previous cases concerning disappearances of persons in the Chechen Republic which have come before the Court (see, among others, Imakayeva, cited above; Luluyev and Others v. Russia, no. 69480/01, ECHR 2006-... (extracts); Baysayeva v. Russia, no. 74237/01, 5 April 2007; Akhmadova and Sadulayeva, cited above; and Alikhadzhiyeva v. Russia, no. 68007/01, 5 July 2007), the Court considers that in the context of the conflict in the Chechen Republic, when a person is detained by unidentified servicemen without any subsequent acknowledgement of the detention, this can be regarded as life-threatening.
• EGMR, 24.03.2005 - 21894/93

  AKKUM AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.02.2009 - 21080/05

  The burden of proof is thus shifted to the Government and if they fail in their arguments, issues will arise under Article 2 and/or Article 3 (see ToÄŸcu v. Turkey, no. 27601/95, § 95, 31 May 2005, and Akkum and Others v. Turkey, no. 21894/93, § 211, ECHR 2005-II).
• EGMR, 05.04.2007 - 74237/01

  BAYSAYEVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.02.2009 - 21080/05

  Having regard to the previous cases concerning disappearances of persons in the Chechen Republic which have come before the Court (see, among others, Imakayeva, cited above; Luluyev and Others v. Russia, no. 69480/01, ECHR 2006-... (extracts); Baysayeva v. Russia, no. 74237/01, 5 April 2007; Akhmadova and Sadulayeva, cited above; and Alikhadzhiyeva v. Russia, no. 68007/01, 5 July 2007), the Court considers that in the context of the conflict in the Chechen Republic, when a person is detained by unidentified servicemen without any subsequent acknowledgement of the detention, this can be regarded as life-threatening.
• EGMR, 05.07.2007 - 68007/01

  ALIKHADZHIYEVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.02.2009 - 21080/05

  Having regard to the previous cases concerning disappearances of persons in the Chechen Republic which have come before the Court (see, among others, Imakayeva, cited above; Luluyev and Others v. Russia, no. 69480/01, ECHR 2006-... (extracts); Baysayeva v. Russia, no. 74237/01, 5 April 2007; Akhmadova and Sadulayeva, cited above; and Alikhadzhiyeva v. Russia, no. 68007/01, 5 July 2007), the Court considers that in the context of the conflict in the Chechen Republic, when a person is detained by unidentified servicemen without any subsequent acknowledgement of the detention, this can be regarded as life-threatening.
• EGMR, 08.01.2002 - 56413/00

  DOUGLAS-WILLIAMS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 31.05.2005 - 27693/95

  CELIKBILEK v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Einstufung des in französischer Haft zugefügten Übels als Folter - Verpflichtung …
• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91
• EGMR, 27.08.1992 - 12850/87
• EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95
• EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 57942/00

  KHASHIYEV AND AKAYEVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 12.10.2006 - 60272/00

  ESTAMIROV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 10.07.2001 - 25657/94

  AVSAR c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 02.08.2005 - 65899/01

  TANIS ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 09.11.2006 - 7615/02

  IMAKAÏEVA c. RUSSIE
• EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 57945/00

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 2220/05

  VAKAYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Having regard to the previous cases concerning disappearances which have come before it (see, among others, Bazorkina, cited above, Imakayeva, cited above, and, more recently, Vagapova and Zubirayev v. Russia, no. 21080/05, 26 February 2009), the Court finds that in the context of the conflict in the Chechen Republic, when a person is detained by unidentified servicemen without any subsequent acknowledgment of the detention, this can be regarded as life-threatening.
• EGMR, 10.12.2013 - 13660/05

  [FRE]

  Dans les affaires de disparitions, la Cour rappelle que la présomption de décès n'est pas automatique et qu'elle n'est posée qu'après un examen des circonstances de l'affaire, la date à laquelle la personne a été vue pour la dernière fois étant à cet égard un élément pertinent (Varnava et autres c. Turquie [GC], nos 16064/90, 16065/90, 16066/90, 16068/90, 16069/90, 16070/90, 16071/90, 16072/90 et 16073/90, § 143, CEDH 2009, et Vagapova et Zoubiraïev c. Russie, no 21080/05, §§ 85-86, 26 février 2009).
• EGMR, 10.07.2012 - 21099/06

  [FRE]

  La Cour rappelle à titre liminaire que la présomption de décès n'est pas automatique et qu'elle n'est posée qu'après un examen des circonstances de l'affaire, la date à laquelle la personne a été vue pour la dernière fois étant à cet égard un élément pertinent (Varnava et autres c. Turquie [GC], nos 16064/90, 16065/90, 16066/90, 16068/90, 16069/90, 16070/90, 16071/90, 16072/90 et 16073/90, § 143, CEDH 2009, et Vagapova et Zoubiraïev c. Russie, no 21080/05, §§ 85-86, 26 février 2009).
• EGMR, 15.04.2014 - 7524/06

  [FRE]

  Dans les affaires de disparitions, la Cour rappelle que la présomption de décès n'est pas automatique et qu'elle n'est posée qu'après un examen des circonstances de l'affaire, la date à laquelle la personne a été vue pour la dernière fois étant à cet égard un élément pertinent (Varnava et autres c. Turquie [GC], nos 16064/90, 16065/90, 16066/90, 16068/90, 16069/90, 16070/90, 16071/90, 16072/90 et 16073/90, § 143, CEDH 2009, et Vagapova et Zoubiraïev c. Russie, no 21080/05, §§ 85-86, 26 février 2009).
• EGMR, 01.02.2011 - 7050/05

  [FRE]

  La Cour rappelle que la présomption de décès n'est pas automatique et qu'elle n'est posée qu'après un examen des circonstances de l'affaire, la date à laquelle la personne a été vue pour la dernière fois étant à cet égard un élément pertinent (Varnava et autres c. Turquie [GC], nos 16064/90, 16065/90, 16066/90, 16068/90, 16069/90, 16070/90, 16071/90, 16072/90 et 16073/90, § 143, CEDH 2009-..., et Vagapova et Zoubiraïev c. Russie, no 21080/05, §§ 85-86, 26 février 2009).