Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  NAJAFLI v. AZERBAIJAN

  Art. 3, Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 35, Art. 41 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) Violation of ...

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Najafli v. Azerbaijan

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (8)Neu Zitiert selbst (10)

• EGMR, 10.07.2001 - 25657/94

  AVSAR c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 2594/07

  Such proof may follow from the coexistence of sufficiently strong, clear and concordant inferences or of similar unrebutted presumptions of fact (see, among many other authorities, Avsar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, § 282, ECHR 2001-VII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 24.04.2003 - 24351/94

  AKTAS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 2594/07

  In the Court's view, in such circumstances an investigation by the police force of an allegation of misconduct by its own officers could not be independent in the present case (compare, mutatis mutandis, Ramsahai and Others v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 52391/99, § 295-96, ECHR 2007-II; Aktas v. Turkey, no. 24351/94, § 301, ECHR 2003-V (extracts); and McKerr, § 128, cited above).
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 2594/07

  Ill-treatment must attain a minimum level of severity if it is to fall within the scope of Article 3. Assessment of this minimum level depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as the duration of the treatment, its physical or mental effects and, in some cases, the sex, age and state of health of the victim (see Ireland v. the United Kingdom, 18 January 1978, § 162, Series A no. 25; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 91, ECHR 2000-XI; and Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, § 67, ECHR 2001-III).

 
• EGMR, 26.11.1991 - 13585/88

  OBSERVER ET GUARDIAN c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 2594/07

  Were it otherwise, the press would be unable to play its vital role of "public watchdog" (see, among other authorities, Observer and Guardian v. the United Kingdom, 26 November 1991, § 59, Series A no. 216, and The Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no. 2), 26 November 1991, § 50, Series A no. 217).
• EGMR, 19.04.2001 - 28524/95

  PEERS v. GREECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 2594/07

  Ill-treatment must attain a minimum level of severity if it is to fall within the scope of Article 3. Assessment of this minimum level depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as the duration of the treatment, its physical or mental effects and, in some cases, the sex, age and state of health of the victim (see Ireland v. the United Kingdom, 18 January 1978, § 162, Series A no. 25; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 91, ECHR 2000-XI; and Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, § 67, ECHR 2001-III).
• EGMR, 23.04.1992 - 11798/85

  CASTELLS v. SPAIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 2594/07

  The Court has repeatedly stressed the pre-eminent role of the press in a democratic State governed by the rule of law (see the Castells v. Spain, 23 April 1992, § 43, Series A no. 236; Thorgeir Thorgeirson v. Iceland, 25 June 1992, § 63, Series A no. 239; Goodwin v. the United Kingdom, 27 March 1996, § 39, Reports 1996-II; Jersild v. Denmark, 23 September 1994, § 31, Series A no. 298; and Fatullayev v. Azerbaijan, no. 40984/07, § 88, 22 April 2010).
• EGMR, 25.06.1992 - 13778/88

  THORGEIR THORGEIRSON v. ICELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 2594/07

  The Court has repeatedly stressed the pre-eminent role of the press in a democratic State governed by the rule of law (see the Castells v. Spain, 23 April 1992, § 43, Series A no. 236; Thorgeir Thorgeirson v. Iceland, 25 June 1992, § 63, Series A no. 239; Goodwin v. the United Kingdom, 27 March 1996, § 39, Reports 1996-II; Jersild v. Denmark, 23 September 1994, § 31, Series A no. 298; and Fatullayev v. Azerbaijan, no. 40984/07, § 88, 22 April 2010).
• EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 15890/89

  JERSILD v. DENMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 2594/07

  The Court has repeatedly stressed the pre-eminent role of the press in a democratic State governed by the rule of law (see the Castells v. Spain, 23 April 1992, § 43, Series A no. 236; Thorgeir Thorgeirson v. Iceland, 25 June 1992, § 63, Series A no. 239; Goodwin v. the United Kingdom, 27 March 1996, § 39, Reports 1996-II; Jersild v. Denmark, 23 September 1994, § 31, Series A no. 298; and Fatullayev v. Azerbaijan, no. 40984/07, § 88, 22 April 2010).
• EGMR, 02.04.2009 - 22684/05

  MURADOVA v. AZERBAIJAN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 2594/07

  Nevertheless, where allegations are made under Article 3 of the Convention, the Court must apply a particularly thorough scrutiny even if certain domestic proceedings and investigations have already taken place (see Muradova v. Azerbaijan, no. 22684/05, § 99, 2 April 2009, and Avsar v. Turkey, §§ 283-84, cited above).
• EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95

  McKERR c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 2594/07

  The Court is sensitive to the subsidiary nature of its role and recognises that it must be cautious in taking on the role of a first-instance tribunal of fact, where this is not rendered unavoidable by the circumstances of a particular case (see, for example, McKerr v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 28883/95, 4 April 2000).

• EGMR, 28.06.2022 - 20762/19

  BOUTAFFALA c. BELGIQUE

  En outre, il ne pouvait être exclu que lesdits policiers aient pu être réticents aÌ€ témoigner contre des collègues directs, de même qu'il pouvait être considéré aux yeux du requérant qu'ils n'étaient pas suffisamment indépendants à leur égard (voir, mutatis mutandis, sur le volet procédural de l'article 3 de la Convention, Najafli c. Azerbaïdjan, no 2594/07, §§ 52-54, 2 octobre 2012).
• EGMR, 24.10.2023 - 21882/09

  ISRAILOV v. RUSSIA

  The Court reiterates in this respect that the requirement of an independent investigation includes not only a lack of hierarchical or institutional connection but also practical independence, as a solid basis allowing to maintain public confidence in the authorities' adherence to the rule of law and to prevent any appearance of collusion in or tolerance of unlawful acts (see, mutatis mutandis, Najafli v. Azerbaijan, no. 2594/07, §§ 46 and 48, 2 October 2012).
• EGMR, 07.07.2022 - 72611/14

  TAGIYEVA v. AZERBAIJAN

  Turning to the circumstances of the present case, the Court observes that the present application should be distinguished from cases in which it found a violation of Articles 2 or 3 of the Convention under their substantive limb because the State had failed to protect the right to life of a journalist (compare Dink, cited above, § 137) or a journalist was subjected to the use of force by a State agent (compare Najafli v. Azerbaijan, no. 2594/07, § 67, 2 October 2012).

 
• EGMR, 21.01.2016 - 61701/11

  BORIS KOSTADINOV v. BULGARIA

  However, in view of the absolute nature of the protection afforded by Article 3 of the Convention (see, among other authorities, Ireland v. the United Kingdom, 18 January 1978, § 163, Series A no. 25; Chahal v. the United Kingdom, 15 November 1996, §§ 79-80, Reports 1996-V; and Saadi v. Italy [GC], no. 37201/06, §§ 137 and 140, ECHR 2008), the use of force by the police will not give rise to a breach of this Article only if it is shown that recourse to it was made indispensable by the applicant's own conduct (see, mutatis mutandis, Najafli v. Azerbaijan, no. 2594/07, §§ 38-39, 2 October 2012).
• EGMR, 08.07.2021 - 1172/12

  MAMMADOV AND ABBASOV v. AZERBAIJAN

  The Court's assessment 60. The Court reiterates that public measures preventing journalists from doing their work or adversely affecting the exercise of their journalistic functions may raise issues under Article 10 (see Gsell v. Switzerland, no. 12675/05, § 49, 8 October 2009; Najafli v. Azerbaijan, no. 2594/07, § 36, 2 October 2012; and Pentikäinen v. Finland [GC], no. 11882/10, § 83, ECHR 2015).
• EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 46505/08

  IGBAL HASANOV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Moreover, a wide variety of other evidence, such as witness statement, video recording, tape recording or photograph, may also be submitted in support of the allegation of ill-treatment (see, among many other authorities, Muradova v. Azerbaijan, no. 22684/05, § 108, 2 April 2009; Rizvanov v. Azerbaijan, no. 31805/06, § 48, 17 April 2012; and Najafli v. Azerbaijan, no. 2594/07, § 37, 2 October 2012).
• EGMR, 13.05.2014 - 46903/07

  MAMMADOV v. AZERBAIJAN

  In this connection, the Court notes that it already found in numerous cases against Azerbaijan that lodging a criminal complaint with the police or the prosecution authorities about the alleged ill-treatment or the unlawful use of force by the law-enforcement authorities constituted an effective remedy to be exhausted before lodging a complaint with the Court (see Mammadov v. Azerbaijan, no. 34445/04, §§ 23-27, 11 January 2007; Rizvanov v. Azerbaijan, no. 31805/06, §§ 16-20, 17 April 2012; and Najafli v. Azerbaijan, no. 2594/07, §§ 18-21, 2 October 2012).
• EGMR - 4106/24 (anhängig)

  SADAGHASHVILI AND GELITASHVILI v. GEORGIA

  In so far as the investigation into the assault on the applicants is concerned, did the Government discharge their positive obligation under Article 10 of the Convention to take all necessary measures to investigate conduct designed to restrict journalistic activity, including private violent acts committed against journalists (see, among other authorities, Khadija Ismayilova v. Azerbaijan, nos. 65286/13 and 57270/14, §§ 158-66, 10 January 2019; see also Özgür Gündem v. Turkey, no. 23144/93, §§ 42-46, ECHR 2000-III, and Najafli v. Azerbaijan, no. 2594/07, §§ 57-70, 2 October 2012)?.