Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  AMERKHANOV v. TURKEY

  Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Expulsion) (Kazakhstan);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-2 - Information ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  AMERKHANOV v. TURKEY

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. f, Art. 5 Abs. 2, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 5 Abs. 5, Art. 13 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Neu Zitiert selbst (1)

• EGMR, 10.05.2016 - 49867/08

  BABAJANOV v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2018 - 16026/12

  Besides, in view of the fact that Article 3 enshrines one of the fundamental values of the democratic societies making up the Council of Europe and that it prohibits in absolute terms torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, a claim that there exist substantial grounds for fearing a risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 must be subjected to a close review and an independent and rigorous examination (see Babajanov v. Turkey, no. 49867/08, § 42, 10 May 2016, and the cases cited therein).

• EGMR, 24.10.2023 - 23048/19

  A.M.A. v. THE NETHERLANDS

  It therefore deems it unnecessary to rule separately on either the admissibility or the merits of the applicant's complaints under this head (see Amerkhanov v. Turkey, no. 16026/12, § 59, 5 June 2018).

  In the same paragraph, the judgment concludes that "[i]t therefore deems it unnecessary to rule separately on either the admissibility or the merits of the applicant's complaints under this head (see Amerkhanov v. Turkey, no. 16026/12, § 59, 5 June 2018)".

• EGMR, 06.02.2024 - 80206/17

  J.A. AND A.A. v. TÜRKIYE

  It therefore considers it unnecessary to rule separately on the merits of the applicants' complaint under this head (see Babajanov, cited above, § 52, and Amerkhanov v. Turkey, no. 16026/12, § 59, 5 June 2018).
• EGMR, 20.07.2021 - 29447/17

  D c. BULGARIE

  La Cour estime, compte tenu du contexte très particulier de l'époque en question en Turquie (paragraphes 78 et suiv. ci-dessus) qu'elle doit rechercher si le requérant a fait part de ses craintes aux autorités bulgares avant son renvoi en Turquie et, dans l'affirmative, si ces dernières ont, avant de le remettre aux autorités turques le 15 octobre 2016, conduit une évaluation adéquate du risque de voir ses craintes se concrétiser (voir, mutatis mutandis, Babajanov c. Turquie, no 49867/08, § 43, 10 mai 2016, Amerkhanov c. Turquie, no 16026/12, § 52, 5 juin 2018, et M.A. et autres c. Lituanie, no 59793/17, § 105, 11 décembre 2018).