Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  DZHAMBEKOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 13.03.2008 - 27238/03
• EGMR, 12.03.2009 - 27238/03, 35078/04

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (9)

• EGMR, 28.09.1999 - 28114/95

  DALBAN v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2009 - 27238/03

  In so far as the Government can be understood to claim that the applicants were no longer victims of the violations alleged because the order for their detention had been quashed on appeal, the Court points out that an applicant may lose the status of a victim in instances where "the national authorities have acknowledged, either expressly or in substance, and then afforded redress for, the breach of the Convention" (see Dalban v. Romania [GC], no. 28114/95, § 44, ECHR 1999-VI).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2009 - 27238/03

  It prohibits in absolute terms torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the circumstances and the victim's behaviour (see, for example, Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 13.06.2000 - 23531/94

  TIMURTAS c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2009 - 27238/03

  The Court has on many occasions reiterated that the Contracting States are required to furnish all necessary facilities to the Court and that a failure on a Government's part to submit information which is in their hands, without a satisfactory explanation, may not only give rise to the drawing of inferences as to the well-foundedness of the applicant's allegations, but may also reflect negatively on the level of compliance by a respondent State with its obligations under Article 38 § 1 (a) of the Convention (see Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, § 66, ECHR 2000-VI).

 
• EGMR, 14.03.2002 - 46477/99

  PAUL ET AUDREY EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2009 - 27238/03

  These delays, for which there has been no explanation in the instant case, not only demonstrate the authorities" failure to act of their own motion but also constitute a breach of the obligation to exercise exemplary diligence and promptness in dealing with such a serious crime (see Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 86, ECHR 2002-II).
• EGMR, 24.03.2005 - 21894/93

  AKKUM AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2009 - 27238/03

  The burden of proof is thus shifted to the Government and if they fail in their arguments, issues will arise under Article 2 and/or Article 3 (see ToÄ?cu v. Turkey, no. 27601/95, § 95, 31 May 2005, and Akkum and Others v. Turkey, no. 21894/93, § 211, ECHR 2005-II).
• EGMR, 09.11.2006 - 69480/01

  LOULOUÏEV ET AUTRES c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2009 - 27238/03

  The Court notes with great concern that a number of cases have come before it which suggest that the phenomenon of "disappearances" is well known in Chechnya (see, among others, Bazorkina, cited above; Imakayeva, cited above; Luluyev and Others v. Russia, no. 69480/01, ECHR 2006-... (extracts); Baysayeva v. Russia, no. 74237/01, 5 April 2007; Akhmadova and Sadulayeva v. Russia, cited above; and Alikhadzhiyeva v. Russia, no. 68007/01, 5 July 2007).
• EGMR, 09.11.2006 - 7615/02

  IMAKAÏEVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2009 - 27238/03

  The Court notes that in previous cases it has already found a reference to Article 161 of the Criminal Procedural Code insufficient to justify the withholding of key information requested by the Court (see, among other authorities, Imakayeva v. Russia, no. 7615/02, § 123, ECHR 2006-... (extracts)).
• EGMR, 05.04.2007 - 74237/01

  BAYSAYEVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2009 - 27238/03

  The Court notes with great concern that a number of cases have come before it which suggest that the phenomenon of "disappearances" is well known in Chechnya (see, among others, Bazorkina, cited above; Imakayeva, cited above; Luluyev and Others v. Russia, no. 69480/01, ECHR 2006-... (extracts); Baysayeva v. Russia, no. 74237/01, 5 April 2007; Akhmadova and Sadulayeva v. Russia, cited above; and Alikhadzhiyeva v. Russia, no. 68007/01, 5 July 2007).
• EGMR, 05.07.2007 - 68007/01

  ALIKHADZHIYEVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2009 - 27238/03

  The Court notes with great concern that a number of cases have come before it which suggest that the phenomenon of "disappearances" is well known in Chechnya (see, among others, Bazorkina, cited above; Imakayeva, cited above; Luluyev and Others v. Russia, no. 69480/01, ECHR 2006-... (extracts); Baysayeva v. Russia, no. 74237/01, 5 April 2007; Akhmadova and Sadulayeva v. Russia, cited above; and Alikhadzhiyeva v. Russia, no. 68007/01, 5 July 2007).