Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 09.04.2015 - 29823/13 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2015,6516) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
NJEZIC AND STIMAC v. CROATIA
Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1 MRK
No violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) (englisch)
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
NJEZIC AND STIMAC v. CROATIA
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (12)
- EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 24746/94
HUGH JORDAN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2015 - 29823/13
This investigation should be thorough, independent, accessible to the victim's family, carried out with reasonable promptness and expedition, effective in the sense that it is capable of leading to a determination of whether the force used in such cases was or was not justified in the circumstances or otherwise unlawful, and afford a sufficient element of public scrutiny of the investigation or its results (see Hugh Jordan v. the United Kingdom, no. 24746/94, §§ 105-09, ECHR 2001-III (extracts); Douglas-Williams v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 56413/00, 8 January 2002; Esmukhambetov and Others v. Russia, no. 23445/03, §§ 115-18, 29 March 2011; and Umarova and Others v. Russia, no. 25654/08, §§ 84-88, 31 July 2012). - EGMR, 11.03.2014 - 60441/13
GÜRTEKIN AND OTHERS v. CYPRUS
Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2015 - 29823/13
There is no right, however, to obtain a prosecution or conviction (see Szula v. the United Kingdom, (dec.) no. 18727/06, 4 January 2007, and Gürtekin and others v. Cyprus (dec.), no. 60441/13 et al., § 20, 11 March 2014) and the fact that an investigation ends without concrete, or with only limited, results is not indicative of any failings as such. - EGMR, 08.01.2002 - 56413/00
DOUGLAS-WILLIAMS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2015 - 29823/13
This investigation should be thorough, independent, accessible to the victim's family, carried out with reasonable promptness and expedition, effective in the sense that it is capable of leading to a determination of whether the force used in such cases was or was not justified in the circumstances or otherwise unlawful, and afford a sufficient element of public scrutiny of the investigation or its results (see Hugh Jordan v. the United Kingdom, no. 24746/94, §§ 105-09, ECHR 2001-III (extracts); Douglas-Williams v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 56413/00, 8 January 2002; Esmukhambetov and Others v. Russia, no. 23445/03, §§ 115-18, 29 March 2011; and Umarova and Others v. Russia, no. 25654/08, §§ 84-88, 31 July 2012).
- EGMR, 31.07.2012 - 25654/08
UMAROVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2015 - 29823/13
This investigation should be thorough, independent, accessible to the victim's family, carried out with reasonable promptness and expedition, effective in the sense that it is capable of leading to a determination of whether the force used in such cases was or was not justified in the circumstances or otherwise unlawful, and afford a sufficient element of public scrutiny of the investigation or its results (see Hugh Jordan v. the United Kingdom, no. 24746/94, §§ 105-09, ECHR 2001-III (extracts); Douglas-Williams v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 56413/00, 8 January 2002; Esmukhambetov and Others v. Russia, no. 23445/03, §§ 115-18, 29 March 2011; and Umarova and Others v. Russia, no. 25654/08, §§ 84-88, 31 July 2012). - EGMR, 29.03.2011 - 23445/03
ESMUKHAMBETOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2015 - 29823/13
This investigation should be thorough, independent, accessible to the victim's family, carried out with reasonable promptness and expedition, effective in the sense that it is capable of leading to a determination of whether the force used in such cases was or was not justified in the circumstances or otherwise unlawful, and afford a sufficient element of public scrutiny of the investigation or its results (see Hugh Jordan v. the United Kingdom, no. 24746/94, §§ 105-09, ECHR 2001-III (extracts); Douglas-Williams v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 56413/00, 8 January 2002; Esmukhambetov and Others v. Russia, no. 23445/03, §§ 115-18, 29 March 2011; and Umarova and Others v. Russia, no. 25654/08, §§ 84-88, 31 July 2012). - EGMR, 15.11.2005 - 57952/00
ELSANOVA v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2015 - 29823/13
The Court observes that in a number of cases concerning ongoing investigations into the deaths of applicants" relatives it has examined the period of time from which the applicant could or should start doubting the effectiveness of a remedy and its bearing on the six-month time-limit provided for in Article 35 § 1 of the Convention (see Sükran Aydin and Others v. Turkey (dec.), no. 46231/99, 26 May 2005; Elsanova v. Russia (dec.) no. 57952/00, 15 November 2005; and Narin v. Turkey, no. 18907/02, § 50, 15 December 2009). - EGMR, 13.06.2002 - 38361/97
ANGUELOVA v. BULGARIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2015 - 29823/13
The object and purpose of the Convention as an instrument for the protection of individual human beings require that Article 2 be interpreted and applied so as to make its safeguards practical and effective (see, among many other authorities, Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, § 109, ECHR 2002-IV). - EGMR, 26.05.2005 - 46231/99
AYDIN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2015 - 29823/13
The Court observes that in a number of cases concerning ongoing investigations into the deaths of applicants" relatives it has examined the period of time from which the applicant could or should start doubting the effectiveness of a remedy and its bearing on the six-month time-limit provided for in Article 35 § 1 of the Convention (see Sükran Aydin and Others v. Turkey (dec.), no. 46231/99, 26 May 2005; Elsanova v. Russia (dec.) no. 57952/00, 15 November 2005; and Narin v. Turkey, no. 18907/02, § 50, 15 December 2009). - EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91
McCANN AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2015 - 29823/13
The obligation to protect the right to life under Article 2 of the Convention, read in conjunction with the State's general duty under Article 1 of the Convention to "secure to everyone within [its] jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in [the] Convention", also requires by implication that there should be some form of effective official investigation when individuals have been killed as a result of the use of force (see, mutatis mutandis, McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, § 161, Series A no. 324, and Kaya v. Turkey, 19 February 1998, § 86, Reports 1998-I). - EGMR, 15.12.2009 - 18907/02
NARIN v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2015 - 29823/13
The Court observes that in a number of cases concerning ongoing investigations into the deaths of applicants" relatives it has examined the period of time from which the applicant could or should start doubting the effectiveness of a remedy and its bearing on the six-month time-limit provided for in Article 35 § 1 of the Convention (see Sükran Aydin and Others v. Turkey (dec.), no. 46231/99, 26 May 2005; Elsanova v. Russia (dec.) no. 57952/00, 15 November 2005; and Narin v. Turkey, no. 18907/02, § 50, 15 December 2009). - EGMR, 04.01.2007 - 18727/06
SZULA v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
- EGMR, 10.07.2001 - 25657/94
AVSAR c. TURQUIE