Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 08.02.2018 - 33566/11 |
Volltextveröffentlichungen (6)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
RAMKOVSKI v. \
Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Reasonableness of pre-trial detention);No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6-2 - Presumption of innocence) (englisch)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
RAMKOVSKI v. \
[ALB] Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Reasonableness of pre-trial detention);No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6-2 - Presumption of innocence)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
RAMKOVSKI v. \
[MAC] Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Reasonableness of pre-trial detention);No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6-2 - Presumption of innocence)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
RAMKOVSKI v. \
[MAC] Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Reasonableness of pre-trial detention);No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6-2 - Presumption of innocence)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
RAMKOVSKI v. \
[MAC] Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Reasonableness of pre-trial detention);No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6-2 - Presumption of innocence)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
RAMKOVSKI v. \
[ALB] Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Reasonableness of pre-trial detention);No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6-2 - Presumption of innocence)
Wird zitiert von ... (5) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 48183/99
Auszug aus EGMR, 08.02.2018 - 33566/11
In exercising this function, the Court has to ensure that the domestic decisions were not in stereotypically worded or summary form (see Panchenko v. Russia, no. 45100/98, § 107, 8 February 2005), and that the reasoning was not merely general or abstract (see Smirnova v. Russia, nos. 46133/99 and 48183/99, § 63, ECHR 2003-IX (extracts)). - EGMR, 28.10.2010 - 28169/08
VASILKOSKI AND OTHERS v.
Auszug aus EGMR, 08.02.2018 - 33566/11
It is incumbent on the domestic authorities to establish the existence of concrete facts relevant to the grounds for continued detention (see Vasilkoski and Others v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 28169/08, § 57, 28 October 2010). - EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 57541/09
VALERIY SAMOYLOV v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 08.02.2018 - 33566/11
It is however necessary, among other conditions, that the danger be a plausible one and the measure appropriate, in the light of the circumstances of the case and in particular the history and personality of the person concerned (see Valeriy Samoylov v. Russia, no. 57541/09, § 109, 24 January 2012, with further references). - EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95
LABITA c. ITALIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 08.02.2018 - 33566/11
Continued detention can be justified only if there are specific indications of a genuine requirement of public interest which, notwithstanding the presumption of innocence, outweighs the rule of respect for individual liberty (see, among other authorities, Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 152, ECHR 2000-IV).
- EGMR, 14.11.2023 - 57325/19
JANAKIESKI v. NORTH MACEDONIA
Lastly, it is noteworthy that in previous cases against the respondent State concerning complaints lodged under Article 5 § 3 (see Vasilkoski and Others v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 28169/08, 28 October 2010; Miladinov and Others v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, nos. 46398/09 and 2 others, 50570/09 and 50576/09, 24 April 2014; and Ramkovski v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 33566/11, 8 February 2018) the Government did not argue that a compensation claim was an effective remedy for the purposes of that provision.The Court has previously found such delays to be excessive (see, for example, Snyatovskiy v. Russia, no. 10341/07, § 65, 13 December 2016, and contrast Ramkovski v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 33566/11, § 75, 8 February 2018).
- EGMR, 27.08.2019 - 32631/09
Fall Magnitski: Russland verletzte mehrfach Menschenrechte
In this connection, the Court would once again stress that the gravity of the charges cannot by itself serve to justify long periods of detention (see Ramkovski v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 33566/11, § 59, 8 February 2018; Novruz Ismayilov v. Azerbaijan, no. 16794/05, § 53, 20 February 2014; and Zayidov v. Azerbaijan, no. 11948/08, § 59, 20 February 2014). - EGMR, 16.01.2024 - 18678/18
PESHOV AND RISTOVSKI v. NORTH MACEDONIA
The courts did not demonstrate the existence of any concrete fact in support of their conclusions that there was a risk of flight (compare also Ramkovski v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 33566/11, § 63, 8 February 2018). - EGMR, 15.06.2021 - 13610/12
VARDAN MARTIROSYAN v. ARMENIA
46398/09 and 2 others, §§ 74-77, 24 April 2014; and Ramkovski v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 33566/11, §§ 83-85, 8 February 2018). - EGMR, 18.12.2018 - 72408/14
KUZMANOVIK v.