Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KHALIDOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (13)

• 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, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82

  BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  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, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2008 - 22877/04

  Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (see Tomasi v. France, 27 August 1992, Series A no. 241-A, pp. 40-41, §§ 108-11; Ribitsch, cited above, § 34; and Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 87, ECHR 1999-V).

 
• 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, 24.03.2005 - 21894/93

  AKKUM AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2008 - 22877/04

  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 ToÄ?cu v. Turkey, no. 27601/95, § 95, 31 May 2005, and Akkum and Others v. Turkey, no. 21894/93, § 211, ECHR 2005-II).
• EGMR, 02.08.2005 - 65899/01

  TANIS ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2008 - 22877/04

  When, as in the instant case, the respondent Government have exclusive access to information able to corroborate or refute the applicants" allegations, any lack of cooperation by the Government without a satisfactory explanation may give rise to the drawing of inferences as to the well-foundedness of the applicant's allegations (see Tanis and Others v. Turkey, no. 65899/01, § 160, ECHR 2005-...).
• 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, 09.11.2006 - 7615/02

  IMAKAÏEVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2008 - 22877/04

  The Court observes that in previous cases it has already 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-... (extracts)).
• 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, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

  McCANN AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

  RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE
• EGMR, 27.08.1992 - 12850/87

  TOMASI c. FRANCE