|EGMR, 09.02.2016 - 40852/05|
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
SHLYCHKOV v. RUSSIA
Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment;Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect);Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing) (englisch)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
- EGMR, 01.06.2017 - 21571/05
MINDADZE AND NEMSITSVERIDZE v. GEORGIAIn such circumstances, the Court, bearing in mind the authorities" obligation to account for injuries caused to persons within their control in custody (see Shlychkov v. Russia, no. 40852/05, § 68, 9 February 2016, and Ryabtsev v. Russia, no. 13642/06, § 71, 14 November 2013), finds it to have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the first applicant was subjected to police brutality after his arrest on 13 May 2004 at Tbilisi police headquarters.
- EGMR - 14043/09 (anhängig)
KAPRANOV v. RUSSIA(a) In particular, having regard to the injuries found on the applicant after the time spent in State custody, such as bruises and burns, has the applicant been subjected to treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention by either inmates or State agents? If so, in respect of the former, was the violence incited or sanctioned by State agents with a view to obtaining self-incriminating statements? If so, were the applicant's injuries the result of treatment for which the respondent State bore responsibility (see, mutatis mutandis, Shlychkov v. Russia, no. 40852/05, § 68, 9 February 2016)? If not, did the authorities know or ought to have known that the applicant was at risk of being subjected to ill-treatment at the hands of his inmates, and if so, did the administration of remand prison IZ-63/1 in Samara take, within the limits of their official powers, reasonably available measures to eliminate that risk and to protect the applicant from abuse (see Premininy v. Russia, no. 44973/04, § 84, 10 February 2011, and M.C. v. Poland, no. 23692/09, § 89, 3 March 2015)?.
Neu: Die Merklistenfunktion erreichen Sie nun über das Lesezeichen oben.