Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BEKETOV v. UKRAINE

  Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading punishment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  BEKETOV v. UKRAINE

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 7, Art. 7 Abs. 1, Art. 13 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 15.07.2002 - 47095/99

  Russland, Haftbedingungen, EMRK, Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.2019 - 44436/09

  The Court reiterates that, in accordance with Article 3 of the Convention, the State must ensure that a person is detained in conditions which are compatible with respect for his or her human dignity, that the manner and method of the execution of the measure do not subject him or her 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 or her health and well-being are adequately secured (see, for instance, Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, § 95, ECHR 2002-VI).
• EGMR, 04.10.2005 - 3456/05

  SARBAN v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.2019 - 44436/09

  The authorities must also ensure that a comprehensive record is kept of the detainee's state of health and his treatment while in detention (see, for example, Khudobin v. Russia, no. 59696/00, § 83, ECHR 2006-XII), that the diagnoses and care are prompt and accurate (see Hummatov, cited above, § 115, and Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 104-106, 28 March 2006), and that - where necessitated by the nature of a medical condition - supervision is regular and systematic and involves a comprehensive therapeutic strategy aimed at curing the detainee's diseases or preventing their aggravation, rather than addressing them on a symptomatic basis (see Hummatov, cited above, §§ 109 and 114; Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 79, 4 October 2005; and Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 211, 13 July 2006).
• EGMR, 28.03.2006 - 72286/01

  MELNIK v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.2019 - 44436/09

  The authorities must also ensure that a comprehensive record is kept of the detainee's state of health and his treatment while in detention (see, for example, Khudobin v. Russia, no. 59696/00, § 83, ECHR 2006-XII), that the diagnoses and care are prompt and accurate (see Hummatov, cited above, § 115, and Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 104-106, 28 March 2006), and that - where necessitated by the nature of a medical condition - supervision is regular and systematic and involves a comprehensive therapeutic strategy aimed at curing the detainee's diseases or preventing their aggravation, rather than addressing them on a symptomatic basis (see Hummatov, cited above, §§ 109 and 114; Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 79, 4 October 2005; and Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 211, 13 July 2006).

 
• EGMR, 13.07.2006 - 26853/04

  POPOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.2019 - 44436/09

  The authorities must also ensure that a comprehensive record is kept of the detainee's state of health and his treatment while in detention (see, for example, Khudobin v. Russia, no. 59696/00, § 83, ECHR 2006-XII), that the diagnoses and care are prompt and accurate (see Hummatov, cited above, § 115, and Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 104-106, 28 March 2006), and that - where necessitated by the nature of a medical condition - supervision is regular and systematic and involves a comprehensive therapeutic strategy aimed at curing the detainee's diseases or preventing their aggravation, rather than addressing them on a symptomatic basis (see Hummatov, cited above, §§ 109 and 114; Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 79, 4 October 2005; and Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 211, 13 July 2006).
• EGMR, 26.10.2006 - 59696/00

  KHUDOBIN v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.2019 - 44436/09

  The authorities must also ensure that a comprehensive record is kept of the detainee's state of health and his treatment while in detention (see, for example, Khudobin v. Russia, no. 59696/00, § 83, ECHR 2006-XII), that the diagnoses and care are prompt and accurate (see Hummatov, cited above, § 115, and Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 104-106, 28 March 2006), and that - where necessitated by the nature of a medical condition - supervision is regular and systematic and involves a comprehensive therapeutic strategy aimed at curing the detainee's diseases or preventing their aggravation, rather than addressing them on a symptomatic basis (see Hummatov, cited above, §§ 109 and 114; Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 79, 4 October 2005; and Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 211, 13 July 2006).
• EGMR, 07.11.2006 - 30649/05

  HOLOMIOV v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.2019 - 44436/09

  The authorities must also show that the necessary conditions were created for the prescribed treatment to be actually followed through (see Hummatov, cited above, § 116, and Holomiov v. Moldova, no. 30649/05, § 117, 7 November 2006).
• EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 47848/08

  CENTRE FOR LEGAL RESOURCES ON BEHALF OF VALENTIN CÂMPEANU v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.2019 - 44436/09

  In particular, its exercise must not be unjustifiably hindered by the acts or omissions of the authorities of the respondent State (see Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 148, ECHR 2014).

• EGMR, 21.03.2024 - 26815/16

  PETRAKOVSKYY AND LEONTYEV v. Ukraine v. UKRAINE

  OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE CONVENTION UNDER THE WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 12. Having examined all the material before it, the Court further concludes that the complaints raised by Mr D.I. Leontyev (application no. 43612/16) under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention concerning the conditions of detention in the Zaporizhzhia pre-trial detention centre (SIZO) and the lack of domestic remedies in that regard (see appended table 2 for details) are admissible and disclose breaches of the Convention in the light of the Court's well-established case-law (see, in particular, Mursic v. Croatia, [GC], no. 7334/13, §§ 122-41, ECHR 2016; Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 110-12, 28 March 2006; and, as a more recent example, Beketov v. Ukraine [Committee], no. 44436/09, §§ 125-30, 19 February 2019).
• EGMR, 27.05.2021 - 7174/11

  DEBELYY AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE

  (a) violations of Articles 3 and 13 (application no. 7174/11) concerning the conditions of detention in the Kharkiv pre-trial detention centre (SIZO) and lack of domestic remedies for the relevant complaint, in the light of the Court's findings in Mursic v. Croatia ([GC], no. 7334/13, §§ 122-41, ECHR 2016); Melnik v. Ukraine (no. 72286/01, §§ 110-12, judgment of 28 March 2006); and, as a recent example, Beketov v. Ukraine [Committee], no. 44436/09, §§ 125-30, judgment of 19 February 2019);.