Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KADIRZHANOV AND MAMASHEV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 4 MRK
  Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Extradition) (Conditional) (Kyrgyzstan) No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Procedural guarantees of review) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Kadirzhanov and Mamashev v. Russia

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 26.09.2000 - 36273/97

  OLDHAM c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 42351/13

  The question of whether periods comply with the requirement must be determined in the light of the circumstances of each case (see Sanchez-Reisse v. Switzerland, 21 October 1986, § 55, Series A no. 107, and Oldham v. the United Kingdom, no. 36273/97, § 31, ECHR 2000-X).
• EGMR, 12.05.1992 - 13770/88

  MEGYERI c. ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 42351/13

  It is not excluded that a system of automatic periodic review of the lawfulness of detention by a court may ensure compliance with the requirements of Article 5 § 4 (see Megyeri v. Germany, 12 May 1992, § 22, Series A no. 237-A).
• EGMR, 09.06.2005 - 55723/00

  FADEÏEVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 42351/13

  As regards the legal fees, regard being had to the documents in its possession and the above criteria (see Fadeyeva v. Russia, no. 55723/00, § 147, ECHR 2005-IV), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sum of EUR 6, 100, plus any tax which may be chargeable to the applicants on that amount, to be paid to the representatives" bank account.

 
• EGMR, 20.09.2007 - 664/05

  MERIE v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 42351/13

  Although the number of days taken by the relevant proceedings is obviously an important element, it is not necessarily in itself decisive for the question of whether a decision has been given with the requisite speed (see Merie v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 664/05, 20 September 2007).
• EGMR, 21.10.1986 - 9862/82

  SANCHEZ-REISSE c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 42351/13

  The question of whether periods comply with the requirement must be determined in the light of the circumstances of each case (see Sanchez-Reisse v. Switzerland, 21 October 1986, § 55, Series A no. 107, and Oldham v. the United Kingdom, no. 36273/97, § 31, ECHR 2000-X).
• EGMR, 24.09.1992 - 10533/83

  HERCZEGFALVY c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 42351/13

  Long intervals in the context of automatic periodic review may give rise to a violation of Article 5 § 4 (see, among other authorities, Herczegfalvy v. Austria, 24 September 1992, § 77, Series A no. 244).
• EGMR, 17.07.2008 - 25904/07

  Sri Lanka, Tamilen, Europäischer Menschenrechtsgerichtshof, menschenrechtswidrige …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 42351/13

  In those circumstances, the Court will not then insist that the applicant show the existence of further special distinguishing features (see Saadi v. Italy [GC], no. 37201/06, § 132, ECHR 2008, and NA. v. the United Kingdom, no. 25904/07, § 116, 17 July 2008).

• EGMR, 16.07.2015 - 7997/08

  KUTTNER v. AUSTRIA

  42351/13 and 47823/13, § 119, 17 July 2014).
• EGMR, 20.07.2017 - 11537/11

  LORENZ v. AUSTRIA

  "36. The Court reiterates that Article 5 § 4 of the Convention proclaims the right to a speedy judicial decision concerning the lawfulness of detention, and to an order for release if it proved unlawful (see Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, § 68, ECHR 2000-III, and Kadirzhanov and Mamashev v. Russia, nos. 42351/13 and 47823/13, § 119, 17 July 2014).
• EGMR, 14.02.2017 - 46721/15

  ALLANAZAROVA c. RUSSIE

  La Cour a toutefois relevé à plusieurs reprises dans des affaires qui concernaient des cas d'extradition que les autorités russes interprètent l'article 1 § 1-1 de la loi sur les réfugiés d'une manière stricte, excluant son application dans le cas d'allégations d'un risque d'être soumis à de mauvais traitements pour des raisons autres que celles qu'il énumère (voir, à titre d'exemples, Turgunov c. Russie, no 15590/14, §§ 20-24, 22 octobre 2015, Khalikov c. Russie, no 66373/13, §§ 21-24, 26 février 2015, Mamazhonov c. Russie, no 17239/13, §§ 42-47, 23 octobre 2014, Mamadaliyev c. Russie, no 5614/13, §§ 29-33, 24 juillet 2014, Kadirzhanov et Mamashev c. Russie, nos 42351/13 et 47823/13, §§ 53, 60 et 63, 17 juillet 2014, Ermakov c. Russie, no 43165/10, §§ 30-42, 7 novembre 2013, Savriddin Dzhurayev, précité, §§ 27-29, Makhmudzhan Ergashev c. Russie, no 49747/11, §§ 20-23 et 28-29, 16 octobre 2012, et Abdulkhakov c. Russie, no 14743/11, §§ 33-39, 2 octobre 2012).
• EGMR, 29.04.2022 - 28492/15

  KHASANOV ET RAKHMANOV c. RUSSIE

  La Cour note qu'entre 2012 et 2016 elle a été saisie de neuf affaires d'extradition d'Ouzbeks de souche de Russie vers le Kirghizistan (Makhmudzhan Ergashev c. Russie, no 49747/11, 16 octobre 2012, Gayratbek Saliyev c. Russie, no 39093/13, 17 avril 2014, Kadirzhanov et Mamashev c. Russie, nos 42351/13 et 47823/13, 17 juillet 2014, Mamadaliyev c. Russie, no 5614/13, 24 juillet 2014, Khamrakulov c. Russie, no 68894/13, 16 avril 2015, Nabid Abdullayev c. Russie, no 8474/14, 15 octobre 2015, Turgunov c. Russie, no 15590/14, 22 octobre 2015, Tadzhibayev c. Russie, no 17724/14, 1er décembre 2015, et R. c. Russie, no 11916/15, 26 janvier 2016).