Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 06.11.2012 - 23185/03 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2012,55516) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
MAKSIM PETROV v. RUSSIA
Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 2 MRK
Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings Article 6-2 - Presumption of innocence) ...
Sonstiges (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
Maksim Petrov v. Russia
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (2) Neu Zitiert selbst (11)
- EGMR, 16.06.2005 - 62208/00
LABZOV v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2012 - 23185/03
The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of a lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., ECHR 2002-VI; and Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, §§ 69 et seq., ECHR 2001-III). - EGMR, 19.04.2001 - 28524/95
PEERS v. GREECE
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2012 - 23185/03
The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of a lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., ECHR 2002-VI; and Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, §§ 69 et seq., ECHR 2001-III). - EGMR, 13.06.2000 - 23531/94
TIMURTAS c. TURQUIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2012 - 23185/03
A failure on the Government's part to submit such information without a satisfactory explanation may give rise to the drawing of inferences as to the well-foundedness of these allegations (see Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, §§ 66 and 70, ECHR 2000-VI).
- EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 8660/79
Minelli ./. Schweiz
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2012 - 23185/03
It prohibits the premature expression by the tribunal itself of the opinion that the person "charged with a criminal offence" is guilty before he has been so proved according to law (see Minelli v. Switzerland, 25 March 1983, § 37, Series A no. 62) but it also covers statements made by other public officials, including police officers or prosecutors, about pending criminal investigations which could encourage the public to believe the suspect to be guilty and to prejudge the assessment of the facts by the relevant judicial authority (see Allenet de Ribemont, cited above, § 41; Daktaras v. Lithuania, no. 42095/98, §§ 41-43, ECHR 2000-X; Butkevicius v. Lithuania, no. 48297/99, § 49, ECHR 2002-II; Y.B. and Others v. Turkey, nos. 48173/99 and 48319/99, §§ 46-51, 28 October 2004 and Samoila and Cionca v. Romania, no. 33065/03, §§ 91-101, 4 March 2008). - EGMR, 20.01.2005 - 63378/00
MAYZIT v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2012 - 23185/03
The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of a lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., ECHR 2002-VI; and Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, §§ 69 et seq., ECHR 2001-III). - EGMR, 10.02.1995 - 15175/89
ALLENET DE RIBEMONT c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2012 - 23185/03
The presumption of innocence enshrined in paragraph 2 of Article 6 is one of the elements of the fair criminal trial that is required by paragraph 1 of that Convention (see Allenet de Ribemont v. France, 10 February 1995, § 35, Series A no. 308). - EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 6847/02
KHOUDOÏOROV c. RUSSIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2012 - 23185/03
The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of a lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., ECHR 2002-VI; and Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, §§ 69 et seq., ECHR 2001-III). - EGMR, 02.06.2005 - 66460/01
NOVOSELOV v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2012 - 23185/03
The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of a lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., ECHR 2002-VI; and Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, §§ 69 et seq., ECHR 2001-III). - EGMR, 10.10.2000 - 42095/98
DAKTARAS c. LITUANIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2012 - 23185/03
It prohibits the premature expression by the tribunal itself of the opinion that the person "charged with a criminal offence" is guilty before he has been so proved according to law (see Minelli v. Switzerland, 25 March 1983, § 37, Series A no. 62) but it also covers statements made by other public officials, including police officers or prosecutors, about pending criminal investigations which could encourage the public to believe the suspect to be guilty and to prejudge the assessment of the facts by the relevant judicial authority (see Allenet de Ribemont, cited above, § 41; Daktaras v. Lithuania, no. 42095/98, §§ 41-43, ECHR 2000-X; Butkevicius v. Lithuania, no. 48297/99, § 49, ECHR 2002-II; Y.B. and Others v. Turkey, nos. 48173/99 and 48319/99, §§ 46-51, 28 October 2004 and Samoila and Cionca v. Romania, no. 33065/03, §§ 91-101, 4 March 2008). - EGMR, 28.10.2004 - 48173/99
Y.B. ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2012 - 23185/03
It prohibits the premature expression by the tribunal itself of the opinion that the person "charged with a criminal offence" is guilty before he has been so proved according to law (see Minelli v. Switzerland, 25 March 1983, § 37, Series A no. 62) but it also covers statements made by other public officials, including police officers or prosecutors, about pending criminal investigations which could encourage the public to believe the suspect to be guilty and to prejudge the assessment of the facts by the relevant judicial authority (see Allenet de Ribemont, cited above, § 41; Daktaras v. Lithuania, no. 42095/98, §§ 41-43, ECHR 2000-X; Butkevicius v. Lithuania, no. 48297/99, § 49, ECHR 2002-II; Y.B. and Others v. Turkey, nos. 48173/99 and 48319/99, §§ 46-51, 28 October 2004 and Samoila and Cionca v. Romania, no. 33065/03, §§ 91-101, 4 March 2008). - EGMR, 15.07.2002 - 47095/99
Russland, Haftbedingungen, EMRK, Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, …
- EGMR, 09.07.2019 - 40834/11
KALINICHENKO c. RUSSIE
La Cour estime que l'utilisation sans nuance ni réserve de ces qualificatifs au sujet du requérant était de nature à inciter le public à croire à la culpabilité de celui-ci et qu'elle préjugeait de l'appréciation des faits par les juges compétents, et ce au mépris du principe de la présomption d'innocence (Ürfi Çetinkaya c. Turquie, no 19866/04, §§ 132-151, 23 juillet 2013, et Maksim Petrov c. Russie, no 23185/03, §§ 102-107, 6 novembre 2012). - EGMR, 12.11.2019 - 60677/10
KOROBOV c. RUSSIE
Eu égard à ces éléments, la Cour estime que, par ses articles des 12 et 19 octobre 2005, K. a informé le public de l'enquête pénale dont il avait la charge, et qu'il l'a fait avec la discrétion et la réserve voulues en respectant la présomption d'innocence à l'égard du requérant (voir, a contrario, Maksim Petrov c. Russie, no 23185/03, §§ 104-107, 6 novembre 2012).