Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KHALIDOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Zitiert selbst (20)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 10.07.2001 - 25657/94

  AVSAR c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2008 - 22877/04

  As to the facts that are in dispute, the Court reiterates its jurisprudence confirming the standard of proof "beyond reasonable doubt" in its assessment of evidence (see Avsar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, § 282, ECHR 2001-VII (extracts)).

  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, among other authorities, McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 September 1995, Series A no. 324, pp. 45-46, §§ 146-147, and Avsar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, § 391, ECHR 2001-VII (extracts)).

• EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2008 - 22877/04

  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, among other authorities, McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 September 1995, Series A no. 324, pp. 45-46, §§ 146-147, and Avsar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, § 391, ECHR 2001-VII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 14.03.2002 - 46477/99

  PAUL ET AUDREY EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2008 - 22877/04

  Such delays, for which there has been no explanation in the instant case, not only demonstrate the authorities" failure to act of their own motion but also constitute 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, 02.10.2008 - 22877/04

  This investigation should be independent, accessible to the victim's family, carried out with reasonable promptness and expedition, 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 afford a sufficient element of public scrutiny of the investigation or its results (see Hugh Jordan v. the United Kingdom, no. 24746/94, §§ 105-109, 4 May 2001, and Douglas-Williams v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 56413/00, 8 January 2002).
• EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2008 - 22877/04

  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, judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, § 52).
• EGMR, 18.06.2002 - 25656/94

  ORHAN v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2008 - 22877/04

  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, 02.10.2008 - 22877/04

  Having regard to the previous cases concerning disappearances of people in Chechnya 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 v. Russia, 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, 05.04.2007 - 74237/01

  BAYSAYEVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2008 - 22877/04

  Having regard to the previous cases concerning disappearances of people in Chechnya 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 v. Russia, 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, 02.10.2008 - 22877/04

  Having regard to the previous cases concerning disappearances of people in Chechnya 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 v. Russia, 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

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2008 - 22877/04

  This investigation should be independent, accessible to the victim's family, carried out with reasonable promptness and expedition, 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 afford a sufficient element of public scrutiny of the investigation or its results (see Hugh Jordan v. the United Kingdom, no. 24746/94, §§ 105-109, 4 May 2001, and Douglas-Williams v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 56413/00, 8 January 2002).
• EGMR, 10.02.2005 - 27806/02

  STAMATIOS KARAGIANNIS c. GRECE
• EGMR, 26.09.2000 - 30024/96

  SINGH AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• 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, 02.08.2005 - 65899/01

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

  IMAKAÏEVA c. RUSSIE
• EGMR, 24.03.2005 - 21894/93

  AKKUM AND OTHERS v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 26.07.2007 - 74239/01

  MUSAYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 14.03.2013 - 47215/07

  [ENG]

  Nonetheless, having regard to the available documents, it considers that as of 25 May 2001 at the latest the domestic authorities became aware of the crime allegedly committed and it was for them to report the matter to the appropriate prosecutor's office via the official channels of communication that should exist between various law-enforcement agencies (see Khalidova and Others v. Russia, no. 22877/04, § 93, 2 October 2008, and Vakayeva and Others v. Russia, no. 2220/05, §§ 141-42, 10 June 2010).
• EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 2220/05

  VAKAYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  In its view, once the military prosecutor's office became aware of the crime allegedly committed, it was for them to report the incident to a civilian prosecutor's office via the official channels of communication that should exist between various law enforcement agencies (see Khalidova and Others v. Russia, no. 22877/04, § 93, 2 October 2008).
• EGMR, 07.06.2011 - 28566/07

  [ENG]

  Nonetheless, having regard to the available documents it considers that as of 31 May 2000 the republican prosecutor's office became aware of the crime allegedly committed and it was for them to report the matter to the appropriate prosecutor's office via the official channels of communication that should exist between various law-enforcement agencies (see Khalidova and Others v. Russia, no. 22877/04, § 93, 2 October 2008, and Vakayeva and Others v. Russia, no. 2220/05, §§ 141-42, 10 June 2010).
• EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 26966/06

  [ENG]

  Accordingly, it was for them to report the incident to a prosecutor's office via official channels of communication that should exist between various law-enforcement agencies (see Khalidova and Others v. Russia, no. 22877/04, § 93, 2 October 2008).
• EGMR, 22.04.2010 - 43418/06

  [ENG]

  Bearing in mind its findings concerning the Government's unjustified refusal to provide the documents from the case file and the fact that it had been incumbent on the law-enforcement bodies to report the information on the abduction to the district prosecutor's office (see Khalidova and Others v. Russia, no. 22877/04, § 93, 2 October 2008), the Court cannot but conclude that the three-month delay in opening the investigation was attributable to the domestic authorities.