Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 04.06.2019 - 51498/12, 69755/12, 36316/13, 1997/14, 25124/14, 30124/14, 31933/14, 40898/14, 78493/14 |
Zitiervorschläge
EGMR, 04.06.2019 - 51498/12, 69755/12, 36316/13, 1997/14, 25124/14, 30124/14, 31933/14, 40898/14, 78493/14 (https://dejure.org/2019,31558)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 04.06.2019 - 51498/12, 69755/12, 36316/13, 1997/14, 25124/14, 30124/14, 31933/14, 40898/14, 78493/14 (https://dejure.org/2019,31558)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 04. Juni 2019 - 51498/12, 69755/12, 36316/13, 1997/14, 25124/14, 30124/14, 31933/14, 40898/14, 78493/14 (https://dejure.org/2019,31558)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2019,31558) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
KOLTSOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (2)
- EGMR, 12.12.2017 - 2257/12
ZADUMOV v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2019 - 51498/12
The Court has carefully examined the applications listed in the appended table and concluded that, in the light of the Court's primary concern under Article 6 § 1 to evaluate the overall fairness of the criminal proceedings (see Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 26766/05 and 22228/06, § 118, ECHR 2011, and Schatschaschwili v. Germany [GC], no. 9154/10, § 101, ECHR 2015), the presumption that in principle the Russian legal system offers robust procedural guarantees securing the right of an accused to examine witnesses testifying against him, ensuring that the reading out of absent witnesses" testimony is possible only as an exception (see Zadumov v. Russia, no. 2257/12, § 63, 12 December 2017, recently reiterated in Kiba and Others (dec.), nos. - EGMR, 17.04.2018 - 38047/08
KIBA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2019 - 51498/12
38047/08 and 2 others, § 16, 17 April 2018), the material in its possession, and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, the applications are manifestly ill-founded as well as the accessory complaints of all the applicants except for Mr Tomochinskiy, Mr Darmayev and Mr Kuklin (applications nos. 30124/14, 40898/14 and 78493/14 respectively), under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, complaint of Mr Smurov (application no. 1997/14) under Article 6 § 3 (d) of the Convention, which were not communicated to the Government, and thus must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.