Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  NIZOMKHON DZHURAYEV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 34, Art. 35, Art. 38, Art. 38 Abs. 1 Buchst. a, Art. 41 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Expulsion) (Conditional) (Tajikistan) Violation of Article 34 - Individual applications (Article 34 - Hinder the exercise of the right of petition) Violation of Article 38 - ...

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Nizomkhon Dzhurayev v. Russia

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (10)Neu Zitiert selbst (16)

• EGMR, 20.09.2007 - 664/05

  MERIE v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 31890/11

  Although the number of days taken by the relevant proceedings is obviously an important element, it is not necessarily in itself decisive for the question of whether a decision has been given with the requisite speed (see Merie v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 664/05, 20 September 2007).
• EGMR, 13.06.2000 - 23531/94

  TIMURTAS c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 31890/11

  A failure on a Government's part to submit such information which is in their hands without a satisfactory explanation may not only give rise to the drawing of inferences as to the well-foundedness of the applicants" allegations, but may also reflect negatively on the level of compliance by a respondent State with its obligations under Article 38 of the Convention (see Medova v. Russia, no. 25385/04, § 76, 15 January 2009, and Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, §§ 66 and 70, ECHR 2000-VI).
• EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22535/93

  MAHMUT KAYA v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 31890/11

  The Court reiterates that the obligation on Contracting Parties, under Article 1 of the Convention, to secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in the Convention, taken in conjunction with Article 3, requires States to take measures designed to ensure that individuals within their jurisdiction are not subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment, including such ill-treatment administered by private individuals (see El Masri, cited above, § 198, and Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 115, ECHR 2000-III).

 
• EGMR, 23.03.1995 - 15318/89

  LOIZIDOU c. TURQUIE (EXCEPTIONS PRÉLIMINAIRES)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 31890/11

  Any laxity on this question would unacceptably weaken protection of the core rights in the Convention and would not be compatible with its values and spirit (see Soering, cited above, § 88); it would also be inconsistent with the fundamental importance of the right of individual application and, more generally, undermine the authority and effectiveness of the Convention as a constitutional instrument of European public order (see Mamatkulov and Askarov, cited above, §§ 100 and 125, and, mutatis mutandis, Loizidou v. Turkey (preliminary objections), 23 March 1995, § 75, Series A no. 310).
• EGMR, 05.10.2000 - 57834/00

  KABLAN contre la TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 31890/11

  That means that the authorities must always make a serious attempt to find out what happened and should not rely on hasty or ill-founded conclusions to close their investigation or to use as the basis of their decisions (see Assenov and Others, cited above, § 103; Batı and Others v. Turkey, nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00, § 136, ECHR 2004-IV (extracts); and El Masri, cited above, § 183).
• EGMR, 29.10.1992 - 14234/88

  OPEN DOOR AND DUBLIN WELL WOMAN v. IRELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 31890/11

  This should not lead, however, to abdication of the Court's responsibility and a renunciation of all supervision of the result obtained from using domestic remedies, otherwise the rights guaranteed by the Convention would be devoid of any substance (see Open Door and Dublin Well Woman v. Ireland, 29 October 1992, § 69, Series A no. 246-A, and Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, § 192, ECHR 2006-V).
• EGMR, 13.11.2007 - 57325/00

  D.H. AND OTHERS v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 31890/11

  In certain circumstances, where the events at issue lie wholly, or in large part, within the exclusive knowledge of the authorities, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII; D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic [GC], no. 57325/00, § 179, ECHR 2007-XII; and Iskandarov, cited above, § 108).
• EGMR, 30.10.1991 - 13163/87

  VILVARAJAH ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 31890/11

  This may be of value in confirming or refuting the assessment that has been made by the Contracting Party or the well-foundedness or otherwise of an applicant's fears (see Cruz Varas and Others v. Sweden, 20 March 1991, §§ 75-76, Series A no. 201; Vilvarajah and Others v. the United Kingdom, 30 October 1991, § 107, Series A no. 215; and Mamatkulov and Askarov, cited above, § 69).
• EGMR, 06.03.2001 - 45276/99

  Tansania, CUF, Civic United Front, Oppositionelle, Inhaftierung, Folter, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 31890/11

  Those standards imply that the ill-treatment which the applicant alleges he will face if returned must attain a minimum level of severity if it is to fall within the scope of Article 3. The assessment of this is relative and depends on all the circumstances of the case (see Hilal v. the United Kingdom, no. 45276/99, § 60, ECHR 2001-II).
• EGMR, 20.05.2010 - 21055/09

  KHAYDAROV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 31890/11

  Furthermore, he referred to the Court's position in the case of Saadi v. Italy ([GC] no. 37201/06, ECHR 2008) and the cases concerning extradition to Tajikistan: Khodzhayev, cited above; Khaydarov v. Russia (no. 21055/09, 20 May 2010); and Gaforov, cited above, to the effect that diplomatic assurances were not sufficient to conclude that a State would refrain from subjecting the individual extradited to torture when various independent sources pointed to the existence of such practice in that State.
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …
• EGMR, 23.09.2010 - 17185/05

  ISKANDAROV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 06.07.2005 - 43579/98
• EGMR, 18.06.2002 - 25656/94

  ORHAN v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 07.07.1989 - 14038/88

  Jens Söring
• EGMR, 20.03.1991 - 15576/89

  CRUZ VARAS ET AUTRES c. SUÈDE

• EGMR, 23.03.2016 - 43611/11

  F.G. v. SWEDEN

  Moreover, where domestic proceedings have taken place, it is not the Court's task to substitute its own assessment of the facts for that of the domestic courts and, as a general rule, it is for those courts to assess the evidence before them (see, among other authorities, Giuliani and Gaggio v. Italy [GC], no. 23458/02, §§ 179-80, 24 March 2011; Nizomkhon Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 31890/11, § 113, 3 October 2013; and Savriddin Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 71386/10, § 155, ECHR 2013 (extracts).
• EGMR, 23.08.2016 - 59166/12

  J.K. AND OTHERS v. SWEDEN

  Moreover, where domestic proceedings have taken place, it is not the Court's task to substitute its own assessment of the facts for that of the domestic courts and, as a general rule, it is for those courts to assess the evidence before them (see, among other authorities, Giuliani and Gaggio v. Italy [GC], no. 23458/02, §§ 179-80, 24 March 2011; Nizomkhon Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 31890/11, § 113, 3 October 2013; and Savriddin Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 71386/10, § 155, ECHR 2013 (extracts).
• EGMR, 29.04.2022 - 28492/15

  KHASANOV ET RAKHMANOV c. RUSSIE

  De plus, lorsque des procédures internes ont été menées, la Cour n'a pas à substituer sa propre appréciation des faits à celle des juridictions nationales, auxquelles il appartient en principe d'établir les faits sur la base des éléments du dossier (voir, parmi d'autres, Giuliani et Gaggio c. Italie [GC], no 23458/02, §§ 179-180, CEDH 2011, Nizomkhon Dzhurayev c. Russie, no 31890/11, § 113, 3 octobre 2013, et Savriddin Dzhurayev, c. Russie, no 71386/10, § 155, 25 avril 2013).

 
• EGMR, 12.12.2013 - 77658/11

  LATIPOV c. RUSSIE

  Entre le moment de l'élargissement et le 15 octobre 2012, il a entretenu des contacts réguliers avec ses proches et son avocate et n'a exprimé aucune crainte ni demandé de mesures quelconques de protection aux autorités (voir, a contrario, Nizomkhon Dzhurayev c. Russie, no 31890/11, § 67, 3 octobre 2013, non définitif. Dans cette affaire la disparition du requérant eut lieu immédiatement après l'élargissement de la cour de la maison d'arrêt).
• EGMR, 29.03.2022 - 45761/18

  N.K. v. RUSSIA

  In so far as the applicant's complaint concerned the risk of ill-treatment that he ran in Tajikistan, the present case is identical to cases in which the Court previously established that individuals whose extradition was sought by Tajik authorities on charges of religiously or politically motivated crimes constituted a vulnerable group facing a real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 of the Convention in the event of their removal to Tajikistan (see K.I. v. Russia, no. 58182/14, 7 November 2017; Savriddin Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 71386/10, ECHR 2013 (extracts); Nizomkhon Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 31890/11, 3 October 2013; and Gaforov v. Russia, no. 25404/09, 21 October 2010).
• EGMR, 03.04.2014 - 14945/03

  ARTEMOV v. RUSSIA

  Bearing in mind the six-month requirement laid down in Article 35 § 1 of the Convention, the Court considers that it is not competent to examine these complaints (for the same approach see Nizomkhon Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 31890/11, § 159, 3 October 2013, and Khudoyorov v. Russia, (dec.), no. 6847/02, ECHR).
• EGMR, 10.05.2016 - 25923/15

  A.R. v. RUSSIA

  In fact, several such applications concerned the applicants" removal to Tajikistan (see Iskandarov, cited above, 23 September 2010; Abdulkhakov v. Russia, no. 14743/11, 2 October 2012; Savriddin Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 71386/10, ECHR 2013 (extracts); Nizomkhon Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 31890/11, 3 October 2013; and Latipov v. Russia, no. 77658/11, 12 December 2013).
• EGMR, 17.01.2023 - 29958/20

  A.Y. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  In so far as A.Y.'s and F.K.'s complaint concerns the risk of ill-treatment that they ran in Tajikistan, the present case is identical to cases in which the Court previously established that individuals whose extradition was sought by Tajik authorities on charges of religiously or politically motivated crimes constituted a vulnerable group facing a real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 of the Convention in the event of their removal to Tajikistan (see K.I. v. Russia, no. 58182/14, 7 November 2017; Savriddin Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 71386/10, ECHR 2013 (extracts); Nizomkhon Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 31890/11, 3 October 2013; and Gaforov v. Russia, no. 25404/09, 21 October 2010).
• EGMR, 13.09.2016 - 39707/13

  A.A. ET A.A. c. FRANCE

  La Cour considère également que lorsqu'il y a eu une procédure interne, il n'entre pas dans les attributions de la Cour de substituer sa propre vision des faits à celle des cours et tribunaux internes, auxquels il appartient en principe de peser les données recueillies par eux (voir, notamment, Giuliani et Gaggio c. Italie [GC], no 23458/02, §§ 179-180, CEDH 2011 (extraits), Nizomkhon Dzhurayev c. Russie, no 31890/11, § 113, 3 octobre 2013, et Savriddin Dzhurayev c. Russie, no 71386/10, § 155, CEDH 2013 (extraits)).
• EGMR, 03.01.2017 - 56167/16

  H.A. AND H.A. v. NORWAY

  Moreover, where domestic proceedings have taken place, it is not the Court's task to substitute its own assessment of the facts for that of the domestic courts and, as a general rule, it is for those courts to assess the evidence before them (see, among other authorities, Giuliani and Gaggio v. Italy [GC], no. 23458/02, §§ 179-80, 24 March 2011; Nizomkhon Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 31890/11, § 113, 3 October 2013; and Savriddin Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 71386/10, § 155, ECHR 2013 (extracts).