Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VIRABYAN v. ARMENIA

  Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 2, Art. 14, Art. 14+3, Art. 35, Art. 41 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Torture) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair ...

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VIRABYAN v. ARMENIA - [Deutsche Übersetzung] Zusammenfassung durch das Österreichische Institut für Menschenrechte (ÖIM)

  Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 2, Art. 14, Art. 14+3, Art. 35, Art. 41 MRK
  [DEU] Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Torture) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair ...

Kurzfassungen/Presse

• RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Virabyan v. Armenia

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (15)Neu Zitiert selbst (20)

• EGMR, 06.07.2005 - 43579/98

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 40094/05

  It is for this reason that the authorities must use all available means to combat racism and racist violence, thereby reinforcing democracy's vision of a society in which diversity is not perceived as a threat but as a source of its enrichment (see Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria [GC], nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98, § 145, ECHR 2005-VII; Bekos and Koutropoulos v. Greece, no. 15250/02, § 63, ECHR 2005-XIII (extracts); and Stoica v. Romania, no. 42722/02, § 126, 4 March 2008).

  A failure to make a distinction in the way in which situations that are essentially different are handled may constitute unjustified treatment irreconcilable with Article 14 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria, nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98, § 158, 26 February 2004, and Bekos and Koutropoulos, cited above, § 69).

• EGMR, 27.02.1980 - 6903/75

  DEWEER c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 40094/05

  The Court reiterates that the presumption of innocence enshrined in Article 6 § 2 is one of the elements of the fair criminal trial that is required by Article 6 § 1 (see Deweer v. Belgium, 27 February 1980, § 56, Series A no. 35, and Minelli v. Switzerland, 25 March 1983, § 27, Series A no. 62).
• EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 8660/79

  Minelli ./. Schweiz

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 40094/05

  The Court reiterates that the presumption of innocence enshrined in Article 6 § 2 is one of the elements of the fair criminal trial that is required by Article 6 § 1 (see Deweer v. Belgium, 27 February 1980, § 56, Series A no. 35, and Minelli v. Switzerland, 25 March 1983, § 27, Series A no. 62).

 
• EGMR, 07.10.1988 - 10519/83

  SALABIAKU c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 40094/05

  With reference to the judgment in the case of Salabiaku v. France, the Government argued that presumptions of fact or law operated in every legal system and the Convention did not prohibit such presumptions in principle (see Salabiaku v. France, 7 October 1988, § 28, Series A no. 141-A).
• EGMR, 10.02.1995 - 15175/89

  ALLENET DE RIBEMONT c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 40094/05

  Moreover, the principle of the presumption of innocence may be infringed not only by a judge or court but also by other public authorities, including prosecutors (see Allenet de Ribemont v. France, 10 February 1995, § 36, Series A no. 308, and Daktaras, cited above, § 42).
• EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21594/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines türkischen Staatsangehörigen durch türkische …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 40094/05

  The independence of the investigation implies not only the absence of a hierarchical or institutional connection, but also independence in practical terms (see OÄ?ur v. Turkey [GC], no. 21594/93, § 91, ECHR 1999-III; Mehmet Emin Yüksel v. Turkey, no. 40154/98, § 37, 20 July 2004; and also Ergi v. Turkey, 28 July 1998, § 83, Reports 1998-IV, where the public prosecutor investigating the death of a girl during an alleged clash between security forces and the PKK showed a lack of independence through his heavy reliance on the information provided by the gendarmes implicated in the incident).
• EGMR, 10.10.2000 - 42095/98

  DAKTARAS c. LITUANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 40094/05

  It suffices, even in the absence of any formal finding, that there is some reasoning to suggest that the official regards the accused as guilty (see Daktaras v. Lithuania, no. 42095/98, § 41, ECHR 2000-X).
• EGMR, 13.06.2000 - 23531/94

  TIMURTAS c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 40094/05

  Consideration was given to the starting of investigations, delays in taking statements (see Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, § 89, ECHR 2000-VI, and Tekin v. Turkey, 9 June 1998, § 67, Reports 1998-IV), and the length of time taken during the initial investigation (see Indelicato v. Italy, no. 31143/96, § 37, 18 October 2001).
• EGMR, 18.10.2001 - 31143/96

  INDELICATO c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 40094/05

  Consideration was given to the starting of investigations, delays in taking statements (see Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, § 89, ECHR 2000-VI, and Tekin v. Turkey, 9 June 1998, § 67, Reports 1998-IV), and the length of time taken during the initial investigation (see Indelicato v. Italy, no. 31143/96, § 37, 18 October 2001).
• EGMR, 11.06.2002 - 36042/97

  WILLIS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 40094/05

  Discrimination is treating differently, without an objective and reasonable justification, persons in relevantly similar situations (see Willis v. United Kingdom, no. 36042/97, § 48, ECHR 2002-IV).
• EGMR, 13.12.2005 - 15250/02

  BEKOS AND KOUTROPOULOS v. GREECE
• EGMR, 19.09.2006 - 23037/04

  MATIJASEVIC v. SERBIA
• EGMR, 22.10.2007 - 21279/02

  LINDON, OTCHAKOVSKY-LAURENS ET JULY c. FRANCE
• EGMR, 04.03.2008 - 42722/02

  STOICA v. ROMANIA
• EGMR, 20.05.2010 - 21055/09

  KHAYDAROV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …
• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

  RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 26.01.2006 - 77617/01

  MIKHEYEV v. RUSSIA

• EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 48144/09

  Verletzung der Unschuldsvermutung durch eine gerichtliche Schuldfeststellung, die …

  The Court shall examine the applicant's complaint under Article 6 § 2 alone in view of the fact that the presumption of innocence enshrined in Article 6 § 2 is one of the elements of a fair criminal trial as required by Article 6 § 1 (see, inter alia, Allenet de Ribemont v. France, 10 February 1995, § 35, Series A no. 308; Vassilios Stavropoulos v. Greece, no. 35522/04, § 35, 27 September 2007; and Virabyan v. Armenia, no. 40094/05, § 185, 2 October 2012) specifically addressed in the former provision.
• EGMR, 17.11.2015 - 60879/12

  RUPP v. GERMANY

  Während Ersteres den Grundsatz der Unschuldsvermutung verletzt, galt Letzteres in zahlreichen vom Gerichtshof geprüften Situationen als nicht zu beanstanden (vgl. L., a. a. O., Rdnr. 62; E., a. a. O., Rdnr. 39; N../. Deutschland, 25. August 1987, Rdnr. 39, Serie A Band 123; und Virabyan./. Armenien, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 40094/05, Rdnr. 186, 2.
• EGMR, 20.02.2020 - 68556/13

  KREBS v. GERMANY

  Er hat gleichermaßen eine Verletzung festgestellt, als ein Strafverfahren aufgrund der Annahme, dass die streitgegenständliche Tat erwiesenermaßen begangen worden sei, eingestellt wurde (siehe Virabyan ./. Armenien, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 40094/05, Rdnr. 191, 2. Oktober 2012).

 
• EGMR, 07.12.2023 - 26074/18

  V v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  Thus, the testimony of the intervening police officers had not constituted the only basis for the investigation (the Government pointed, a contrario, to Virabyan v. Armenia, no. 40094/05, § 165, 2 October 2012).
• EGMR, 29.08.2023 - 25276/15

  VERZILOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Treating violence and brutality with a discriminatory intent on an equal footing with cases that have no such overtones would be turning a blind eye to the specific nature of acts that are particularly destructive of fundamental rights (see Identoba and Others, cited above, § 67, and Virabyan v. Armenia, no. 40094/05, § 218, 2 October 2012).
• EGMR, 25.06.2013 - 33192/07

  KAÇIU AND KOTORRI v. ALBANIA

  The standard of proof, namely "beyond reasonable doubt", and the related evidentiary considerations set out above, must, in my opinion, be very carefully applied when it comes to allegations of torture - the gravest form of treatment proscribed by Article 3 - and therefore cannot be established by presumption, inference nor likeliness (compare with Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, §§ 91-106, ECHR 1999-V; Gäfgen, cited above, § 94; Dedovskiy and Others v. Russia, no. 7178/03, §§ 39-50, 59-61 and 80-86, ECHR 2008 (extracts); Savitskyy v. Ukraine, no. 38773/05, §§ 15-18 and 129-139, 26 July 2012; Virabyan v. Armenia, no. 40094/05, §§ 17-29 and 31, 2 October 2012; and, Lenev v. Bulgaria, no. 41452/07, §§ 111-18, 4 December 2012).
• EGMR, 28.10.2014 - 60101/09

  PELTEREAU-VILLENEUVE c. SUISSE

  Par conséquent, la Cour doit déterminer si, en l'espèce, l'issue de la procédure pénale met en doute l'innocence du requérant alors même qu'il n'a pas été déclaré coupable (voir Virabyan c. Arménie, no 40094/05, § 187, 2 octobre 2012).
• EGMR, 20.09.2018 - 23086/08

  MUSHEGH SAGHATELYAN v. ARMENIA

  An obligation to investigate "is not an obligation of result, but of means": not every investigation should necessarily be successful or come to a conclusion which coincides with the claimant's account of events; however, it should in principle be capable of leading to the establishment of the facts of the case and, if the allegations prove to be true, to the identification and, if justified, punishment of those responsible (see Virabyan v. Armenia, no. 40094/05, § 162, 2 October 2012).
• EGMR, 29.01.2019 - 31816/08

  STIRMANOV c. RUSSIE

  La Cour a appliqué ces principes à des situations dans lesquelles il y a eu extinction de l'action publique pour divers motifs, y compris pour prescription, par des décisions prises par un procureur (Virabyan c. Arménie, no 40094/05, §§ 185-193, 2 octobre 2012, et Peltereau-Villeneuve c. Suisse, no 60101/09, §§ 30-39, 28 octobre 2014), par un juge des investigations préliminaires (Marziano c. Italie, no 45313/99, §§ 27-36, 28 novembre 2002) ou par des tribunaux de différents degrés de juridiction (Minelli, précité, §§ 26-40, Didu c. Roumanie, no 34814/02, §§ 37-42, 14 avril 2009, Poncelet c. Belgique, no 44418/07, §§ 49-62, 30 mars 2010, Giosakis c. Grèce (no 3), no 5689/08, §§ 34-42, 3 mai 2011, et G.I.E.M. S.R.L. et autres, précité, §§ 317-318).
• EGMR, 12.07.2016 - 21048/12

  GEDRIMAS v. LITHUANIA

  In the absence of such explanation, the Court can draw inferences which may be unfavourable for the Government (see, among many other authorities, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 87, ECHR 1999-V; Virabyan v. Armenia, no. 40094/05, § 151, 2 October 2012; and Bouyid, cited above, §§ 83-84; also see, mutatis mutandis, Buntov v. Russia, no. 27026/10, § 161, 5 June 2012).
• EGMR, 09.07.2013 - 43943/07

  MALAESCU v. ROMANIA
• EGMR, 17.01.2017 - 59588/12

  BÉRES AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY
• EGMR, 03.05.2016 - 49448/08

  MANUKIAN v. GEORGIA
• EGMR - 9230/19 (anhängig)

  CANALE v. ITALY
• EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 55894/13

  YUSIV v. LITHUANIA