Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BUTKO v. RUSSIA

  Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment;Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 13 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (8)Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.11.2015 - 32036/10

  The State must ensure that a person is detained in conditions which are compatible with respect for human dignity, that the manner and method of the execution of the measure do not subject him to distress or hardship of an intensity exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention and that, given the practical demands of imprisonment, his health and well-being are adequately secured (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 92-94, ECHR 2000-XI, and Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 208, 13 July 2006).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.11.2015 - 32036/10

  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, 13.07.2006 - 26853/04

  POPOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.11.2015 - 32036/10

  The State must ensure that a person is detained in conditions which are compatible with respect for human dignity, that the manner and method of the execution of the measure do not subject him to distress or hardship of an intensity exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention and that, given the practical demands of imprisonment, his health and well-being are adequately secured (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 92-94, ECHR 2000-XI, and Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 208, 13 July 2006).

• EGMR, 08.06.2017 - 44137/12

  VOLKOV v. RUSSIA

  42525/07 and 60800/08, 10 January 2012 and Butko v. Russia, no. 32036/10, §§ 54-64, 12 November 2015, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.

  Regard being had to the documents in its possession, to its case-law (see, in particular, Mursic v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, § 181, ECHR 2016, Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, 10 January 2012 and Butko v. Russia, no. 32036/10, § 68, 12 November 2015), and the sum which the Government offered to pay the applicant under the unilateral declaration, the Court considers it reasonable to award the applicant 13, 800 euros, plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage.

• EGMR, 02.05.2023 - 36463/11

  S.P. ANS OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  It has emphasised, in particular, that the Government were unable to show what redress could have been afforded to the applicant by a prosecutor, a court, or any other State agency for a problem of a structural nature (see Ananyev and Others, cited above, §§ 100-19, as regards conditions of detention in remand prisons; Butko v. Russia, no. 32036/10, §§ 42-47, 12 November 2015, as regards conditions of detention in correctional facilities; and Tomov and Others v. Russia, nos. 18255/10 and 5 others, §§ 144-56, 9 April 2019, as regards conditions of prisoners' transport).
• EGMR, 25.07.2017 - 18496/16

  ESKERKHANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, Mursic v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, §§ 136-40, ECHR 2016; Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, 10 January 2012; and Butko v. Russia, no. 32036/10, 12 November 2015).

 
• EGMR, 10.01.2017 - 10727/07

  LAVEYKIN v. RUSSIA

  Since its first judgment concerning the inhuman and degrading conditions of detention in Russian penitentiary facilities (see Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, ECHR 2002-VI), the Court found similar violations in many cases against Russia which concerned the conditions of detention in remand prisons (see Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, 10 January 2012) and correctional colonies (see Sergey Babushkin v. Russia, no. 5993/08, 28 November 2013, and Butko v. Russia, no. 32036/10, 12 November 2015).
• EGMR - 33140/15 (anhängig)

  V.P. v. RUSSIA

  Were the conditions of the applicant's detention in the IK-2 facility compatible with Article 3 of the Convention (see Butko v. Russia, no. 32036/10, §§ 50-64, 12 November 2015)?.
• EGMR, 26.02.2019 - 22690/17

  GRIBOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, Mursic v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, §§ 136-40, ECHR 2016; Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, 10 January 2012; and Butko v. Russia, no. 32036/10, 12 November 2015).
• EGMR, 31.10.2017 - 26577/16

  OVCHINNIKOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, Mursic v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, §§ 136-40, ECHR 2016; Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, 10 January 2012; and Butko v. Russia, no. 32036/10, 12 November 2015).
• EGMR, 31.10.2017 - 8460/10

  GASYMOV v. RUSSIA

  The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, Mursic v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, §§ 136-40, ECHR 2016; Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, 10 January 2012; and Butko v. Russia, no. 32036/10, 12 November 2015).