Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  A.A. v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3 MRK
  Violation of Art. 3 (procedural aspect) Violation of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) (englisch)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  A.A. v. Russia

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21594/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines türkischen Staatsangehörigen durch türkische …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 49097/08

  Furthermore, the Court reiterates its finding made on a number of occasions that the "investigation" in terms of Article 2 or 3 of the Convention should be carried out by competent, qualified and impartial experts who are independent of the suspected perpetrators and the agency they serve (see OÄ?ur v. Turkey [GC], no. 21594/93, §§ 91 and 92, ECHR 1999-III, and Ramsahai and Others v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 52391/99, § 325, ECHR 2007-II).
• EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22535/93

  MAHMUT KAYA v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 49097/08

  While not every investigation should necessarily come to a conclusion which coincides with the claimant's account of events, any investigation should in principle be capable of leading to the establishment of the facts of the case and, if the allegations prove to be true, to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 124, ECHR 2000-III, and Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 71, ECHR 2002-II).
• EGMR, 14.03.2002 - 46477/99

  PAUL ET AUDREY EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 49097/08

  While not every investigation should necessarily come to a conclusion which coincides with the claimant's account of events, any investigation should in principle be capable of leading to the establishment of the facts of the case and, if the allegations prove to be true, to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 124, ECHR 2000-III, and Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 71, ECHR 2002-II).
• EGMR, 08.01.2009 - 36220/02

  BARABANSHCHIKOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 49097/08

  A conclusion indicating the degree of support for the alleged description of ill-treatment should be based on a discussion of different possible diagnoses (injuries not relating to ill-treatment, including self-inflicted injuries and diseases) (see Barabanshchikov v. Russia, no. 36220/02, § 59, 8 January 2009).
• EGMR, 22.09.1993 - 15473/89

  KLAAS c. ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 49097/08

  The Court reiterates that where domestic proceedings have taken place, it is not the Court's task to substitute its own assessment of the facts for that of the domestic courts, and, as a general rule, it is for those courts to assess the evidence before them (see Klaas v. Germany, 22 September 1993, § 29, Series A no. 269).

• EGMR, 01.09.2020 - 30050/09

  SHISHKIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  It was therefore incumbent on the national authorities to respond to the applicant's claim, which was clearly credible, without undue delay and to provide a plausible explanation for his injuries (see A.A. v. Russia, no. 49097/08, § 92, 17 January 2012, and Davitidze v. Russia, no. 8810/05, § 109, 30 May 2013).
• EGMR, 16.07.2015 - 12008/06

  ALEKSEY BORISOV c. RUSSIE

  Dès lors, il est difficilement concevable qu'une telle enquête puisse être considérée comme ayant été conduite de manière indépendante au sens de l'article 3 de la Convention (Kopylov, précité, § 138, et A.A. c. Russie, no 49097/08, § 94, 17 janvier 2012).
• EGMR, 30.04.2015 - 13810/04

  SHAMARDAKOV v. RUSSIA

  Elle considère que le retard dans le début des investigations est essentiellement dû à l'inertie des autorités face à la situation décrite ci-dessus et leur est donc imputable (voir A.A. c. Russie, no 49097/08, § 88, 17 janvier 2012 ; Shanin c. Russie, no 24460/04, § 68, 27 janvier 2011, et Davitidze c. Russie, no 8810/05, § 108, 30 mai 2013).
• EGMR, 19.12.2017 - 29729/09

  KHAYRULLINA v. RUSSIA

  Although it appears that the pre-investigation inquiry was terminated by the issuing by the local prosecutor's office (whose independence the Court was given no reason to doubt) of a refusal to prosecute, the Court has no information explaining who specifically carried out the various measures relating to this inquiry and whether those officials were impartial and independent of the suspected perpetrators and the agency that they served (see Ramsahai and Others v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 52391/99, § 325, ECHR 2007-II; Ogur v. Turkey [GC], no. 21594/93, §§ 91 and 92, ECHR 1999-III; see also A.A. v. Russia, no. 49097/08, § 94, 17 January 2012, and Davitidze v. Russia, no. 8810/05, § 107, 30 May 2013).
• EGMR - 53373/14 (anhängig)

  ZHDAN v. RUSSIA

  has the applicant been subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention (see Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 87, ECHR 1999-V; and, among many other authorities, Polonskiy v. Russia, no. 30033/05, §§ 122-123, 19 March 2009; Gladyshev v. Russia, no. 2807/04, § 57, 30 July 2009; Alchagin v. Russia, no. 20212/05, §§ 53-54, 56, 17 January 2012; A.A. v. Russia, no. 49097/08, §§ 75, 77 and 80-81, 17 January 2012; Yudina v. Russia, no. 52327/08, §§ 67-68, 10 July 2012; Ablyazov v. Russia, no. 22867/05, §§ 49-50, 30 October 2012; Tangiyev v. Russia, no. 27610/05, §§ 53-55, 11 December 2012; Markaryan v. Russia, no. 12102/05, §§ 60-61, 4 April 2013; Nasakin v. Russia, no. 22735/05, §§ 52-53, 18 July 2013; Aleksandr Novoselov v. Russia, no. 33954/05, §§ 61-62, 28 November 2013; Velikanov v. Russia, no. 4124/08, § 51, 30 January 2014)?.