Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ARAPKHANOVY v. RUSSIA

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 3, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 13 MRK
  Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Arapkhanovy v. Russia

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

  McCANN AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 2215/05

  Consequently, the force used must be strictly proportionate to the achievement of the permitted aims (see McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, §§ 146-50, Series A no. 324; Andronicou and Constantinou v. Cyprus, § 171, 9 October 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VI; OÄŸur v. Turkey [GC], no. 21594/93, § 78, ECHR 1999-III; Bazorkina v. Russia, no. 69481/01, § 103, 27 July 2006).
• EGMR, 20.12.2004 - 50385/99

  MAKARATZIS c. GRECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 2215/05

  In addition to setting out the circumstances when deprivation of life may be justified, Article 2 implies a primary duty on the State to secure the right to life by putting in place an appropriate legal and administrative framework defining the limited circumstances in which law enforcement officials may use force and firearms, in the light of the relevant international standards (see Makaratzis v. Greece [GC], no. 50385/99, §§ 57-59, ECHR 2004-XI, and Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria [GC], nos.
• EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 24746/94

  HUGH JORDAN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 2215/05

  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, §§ 105-09, ECHR 2001-III (extracts), and Douglas-Williams v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 56413/00, 8 January 2002).

 
• EGMR, 09.11.2006 - 7615/02

  IMAKAÏEVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 2215/05

  In previous cases the Court has found this explanation insufficient to justify the withholding of key information which it has requested (see Imakayeva v. Russia, no. 7615/02, § 123, ECHR 2006-... (extracts)).
• EGMR, 24.03.2005 - 21894/93

  AKKUM AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 2215/05

  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, 06.07.2005 - 43579/98

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 2215/05

  43577/98 and 43579/98, § 96, ECHR 2005-VII).
• EGMR, 10.04.2001 - 26129/95

  TANLI v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 2215/05

  The Court notes that while a family member of a "disappeared person" can claim to be a victim of treatment contrary to Article 3 (see Kurt v. Turkey, 25 May 1998, §§ 130-34, Reports 1998-III), the same principle would not usually apply to situations where the person taken into custody has later been found dead (see Tanlı v. Turkey, no. 26129/95, § 159, ECHR 2001-III (extracts)).
• EGMR, 08.01.2002 - 56413/00

  DOUGLAS-WILLIAMS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 2215/05

  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, §§ 105-09, ECHR 2001-III (extracts), and Douglas-Williams v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 56413/00, 8 January 2002).

• EGMR, 19.03.2020 - 41603/13

  FABRIS ET PARZIALE c. ITALIE

  S'il est vrai que celle-ci a accepté des requêtes introduites par des cousins soulevant des griefs liés au décès de leur proche (voir, Armani Da Silva c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 5878/08, §§ 186-189, 30 mars 2016 ; Van Melle et autres c. Pays-Bas (déc.), no 19221/08, 29 septembre 2009 ; Arapkhanovy c. Russie, no 2215/05 §§ 7 et 107, 3 octobre 2013), la Cour a déjà affirmé qu'un lien de parenté au quatrième degré ne justifie pas en soi la reconnaissance de la qualité de victime au sens de l'article 34 de la Convention (Belkiza Kaya et autres c. Turquie, nos 33420/96 et 36206/97, § 46, 22 novembre 2005).
• EGMR, 17.11.2020 - 81165/17

  BOUROS ET AUTRES c. GRÈCE

  S'il est vrai que celle-ci a accepté, dans certaines circonstances, des requêtes introduites par des cousins soulevant des griefs liés au décès de leur proche (voir Armani Da Silva c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 5878/08, §§ 186-189, 30 mars 2016 ; Van Melle et autres c. Pays-Bas (déc.), no 19221/08, 29 septembre 2009 ; et Arapkhanovy c. Russie, no 2215/05 §§ 7 et 107, 3 octobre 2013), la Cour a déjà affirmé qu'un lien de parenté au quatrième degré ne justifie pas en soi la reconnaissance de la qualité de victime au sens de l'article 34 de la Convention (Fabris et Parziale c. Italie, no 41603/13, § 38, 19 mars 2020 ; et Belkiza Kaya et autres c. Turquie, nos 33420/96 et 36206/97, § 46, 22 novembre 2005).