Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KABOULOV v. UKRAINE

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. f, Art. 5 Abs. 2, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 5 Abs. 5, Art. 13, Art. 34, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Art.... 6, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. a, Protokoll Nr. 6 Art. 2, Protokoll Nr. 7 Art. 3 MRK
  Preliminary objections dismissed No violation of Art. 2 (in case of extradition to Kazakhstan) Violation of Art. 3 (in case of extradition to Kazakhstan) Violation of Art. 13 Violation of Art. 5-1 Violation of Art. 5-1-f Violation of Art. 5-2 Violation of Art. 5-4 ...

Kurzfassungen/Presse

• RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)

Wird zitiert von ... (16)Neu Zitiert selbst (10)

• EGMR, 24.03.2005 - 9808/02

  STOICHKOV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.11.2009 - 41015/04

  The existence of the remedy required by Article 5 § 4 must be sufficiently certain, not only in theory but also in practice, failing which it will lack the accessibility and effectiveness required for the purposes of that provision (see, mutatis mutandis, Stoichkov v. Bulgaria, no. 9808/02, § 66 in fine, 24 March 2005, and Vachev v. Bulgaria, no. 42987/98, § 71, ECHR 2004-VIII (extracts)).

  Article 5 § 5 is complied with where it is possible to apply for compensation in respect of a deprivation of liberty effected in conditions contrary to paragraphs 1, 2, 3 or 4 (see Stoichkov v. Bulgaria, no. 9808/02, § 72, 24 March 2005).

• EGMR, 08.07.2004 - 42987/98

  VACHEV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.11.2009 - 41015/04

  The existence of the remedy required by Article 5 § 4 must be sufficiently certain, not only in theory but also in practice, failing which it will lack the accessibility and effectiveness required for the purposes of that provision (see, mutatis mutandis, Stoichkov v. Bulgaria, no. 9808/02, § 66 in fine, 24 March 2005, and Vachev v. Bulgaria, no. 42987/98, § 71, ECHR 2004-VIII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 08.04.2004 - 71503/01

  ASSANIDZE v. GEORGIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.11.2009 - 41015/04

  The Court recalls that Article 5 of the Convention guarantees the fundamental right to liberty and security of a person, that is to say, not to be deprived of their liberty (see Weeks v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 2 March 1987, Series A no. 114, p. 22, § 40), save in accordance with the conditions specified in paragraph 1 of Article 5. The list of exceptions set out in Article 5 § 1 is an exhaustive one and only a narrow interpretation of those exceptions is consistent with the aim of that provision (see Amuur v. France, judgment of 25 June 1996, Reports 1996-III, p. 848, § 42; Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 170, ECHR 2000-IV; and Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, § 170, ECHR 2004-II).

 
• EGMR, 02.10.2008 - 34082/02

  Abschiebungshaft, Inhaftierung, EMRK, Information, Unverzüglichkeit, Formular, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.11.2009 - 41015/04

  A violation of Article 5 § 2 was found on the basis of a delay of 76 hours in providing reasons for detention (see Saadi v the United Kingdom [GC], no. 13229/03, § 84, ECHR 2008-...) as well as a delay of ten days (see Rusu v. Austria, no. 34082/02, § 43, 2 October 2008).
• EGMR, 02.03.1987 - 9787/82

  WEEKS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.11.2009 - 41015/04

  The Court recalls that Article 5 of the Convention guarantees the fundamental right to liberty and security of a person, that is to say, not to be deprived of their liberty (see Weeks v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 2 March 1987, Series A no. 114, p. 22, § 40), save in accordance with the conditions specified in paragraph 1 of Article 5. The list of exceptions set out in Article 5 § 1 is an exhaustive one and only a narrow interpretation of those exceptions is consistent with the aim of that provision (see Amuur v. France, judgment of 25 June 1996, Reports 1996-III, p. 848, § 42; Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 170, ECHR 2000-IV; and Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, § 170, ECHR 2004-II).
• EGMR, 30.10.1991 - 13163/87

  VILVARAJAH ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.11.2009 - 41015/04

  The Court must examine the foreseeable consequences of sending the applicant to the receiving country, bearing in mind the general situation there and his personal circumstances (see Vilvarajah and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 30 October 1991, Series A no. 215, § 108 in fine).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.11.2009 - 41015/04

  The Court recalls that Article 5 of the Convention guarantees the fundamental right to liberty and security of a person, that is to say, not to be deprived of their liberty (see Weeks v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 2 March 1987, Series A no. 114, p. 22, § 40), save in accordance with the conditions specified in paragraph 1 of Article 5. The list of exceptions set out in Article 5 § 1 is an exhaustive one and only a narrow interpretation of those exceptions is consistent with the aim of that provision (see Amuur v. France, judgment of 25 June 1996, Reports 1996-III, p. 848, § 42; Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 170, ECHR 2000-IV; and Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, § 170, ECHR 2004-II).
• EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 13284/04

  BADER AND KANBOR v. SWEDEN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.11.2009 - 41015/04

  The Government analysed this complaint in context of the Court's judgment in Bader and Kanbor v. Sweden (no. 13284/04, § 42, ECHR 2005-XI) and stated that the applicant would not be subjected to an unfair trial in Kazakhstan the outcome of which would be the death penalty.
• EKMR, 05.07.1984 - 10819/84

  K. c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.11.2009 - 41015/04

  Furthermore, when a person is arrested with a view to extradition, the information given may be even less complete (see K. v. Belgium, no. 10819/84, Commission decision of 5 July 1984, DR 38, p. 230).
• EKMR, 13.12.1978 - 8098/77

  X. c. REPUBLIQUE FEDERALE D'ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.11.2009 - 41015/04

  Moreover, when a person is arrested on suspicion of having committed a crime, Article 5 § 2 neither requires that the necessary information be given in a particular form, nor that it consists of a complete list of the charges held against the arrested person (see X. v. Germany, no. 8098/77, Commission decision of 13 December 1978, DR 16, p. 111).

• OVG Nordrhein-Westfalen, 18.09.2014 - 4 A 2948/11

  Übergabe eines somalischen "Piraten" an Kenia rechtswidrig

  BVerfG, Beschluss vom 20. Dezember 2007 - 2 BvR 1996/07 -, juris (…Rn. 23); EGMR, Entscheidung vom 10. Mai 2010 - Nr. 41015/04 (Kaboulov/Ukraine); Entscheidung vom 19. September 2008 - Nr. 8320/04 (Ryabikin/Russland) - Lorz/Sauer, EuGRZ 2010, 389, 395 ff., 402 ff.

  Meinung S. 163; EGMR, Urteil vom 7. Juli 1989 - Nr. 1/1989/161/217 (Soering) -, NJW 1990, 2183; Entscheidung vom 10. Mai 2010 - Nr. 41015/04 (Kaboulov/Ukraine); umfassend Petrig, a. a. O., S. 342 ff.

  Schneider, EuGRZ 2014, 168 ff.; Roeser, EuGRZ 2009, 177, 196; BVerfG, Beschluss vom 6. Juli 2005 - 2 BvR 2259/04 -, BVerfGE 113, 154; EGMR, Entscheidung vom 28. Februar 2008 - 37201/06 (Saadi/Italien) NVwZ 2008, 1330, 1331ff.; vom 16. Oktober 2006 - 1101/04 -, juris (…Rn. 40 ff.) und vom 10. Mai 2010 - Nr. 41015/04 (Kaboulov/Ukraine); Lorz/Sauer, EuGRZ 2010, 389, 395 ff.

  Dazu allgemein EGMR, Entscheidung vom 10. Mai 2010 - Nr. 41015/04 (Kaboulov/Ukraine) - Entscheidung vom 19. September 2008 - Nr. 8320/04 (Ryabikin/Russland) - Lorz/Sauer, EuGRZ 2010, 389, 397 ff. m. w. N.

• EGMR, 24.07.2014 - 28761/11

  Polen zahlt Schmerzensgeld für Haft in CIA-Gefängnis

  Similar principles apply to cases where there are substantial grounds for believing that, if removed from a Contracting State, an applicant would be exposed to a real risk of being subjected to a flagrant denial of justice (see Othman (Abu Qatada), cited above, §§ 261 and 285) or sentenced to the death penalty (see Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi, cited above, § 123 and Kaboulov v. Ukraine, no. 41015/04, § 99, 19 November 2009).
• EGMR, 23.03.2016 - 43611/11

  F.G. v. SWEDEN

  The Court will therefore also examine the two Articles together (see, among other authorities, mutatis mutandis, Mocanu and Others v. Romania [GC], nos. 10865/09, 45886/07 and 32431/08, § 314, ECHR 2014 (extracts); T.A. v. Sweden, no. 48866/10, § 37, 19 December 2013; K.A.B. v. Sweden, no. 886/11, § 67, 5 September 2013; Kaboulov v. Ukraine, no. 41015/04, § 99, 19 November 2009; and F.H. v. Sweden, no. 32621/06, § 72, 20 January 2009).

 
• BVerwG, 19.09.2017 - 1 VR 8.17

  Keine Aussetzung der Abschiebung von zwei islamistischen Gefährdern

  Nach Inkrafttreten der Artikel 1 der Protokolle Nr. 6 und Nr. 13 zur EMRK, die die Abschaffung der Todesstrafe regeln (Satz 1) und bestimmen, dass niemand zu dieser Strafe verurteilt oder hingerichtet werden darf (Satz 2), hat der Gerichtshof in Fortentwicklung seiner Rechtsprechung entschieden, dass Art. 2 EMRK die Auslieferung oder Ausweisung einer Person in einen anderen Staat verbietet, wenn er dort der ernsthaften Gefahr ("real risk") ausgesetzt ist, durch die Verhängung und Vollstreckung der Todesstrafe sein Leben zu verlieren (EGMR, Urteile vom 19. November 2009 - Nr. 41015/04, Kaboulov/Ukraine - Rn. 99 ff.;… vom 2. März 2010 - Nr. 61498/08, Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi/U.K. - Rn. 115 ff., 123, 144 …und vom 24. Juli 2014 - Nr. 28761/11, Al-Nashiri/Polen - NVwZ 2015, 955 Rn. 576 ff.).

  Der Gerichtshof sieht jedoch nicht bereits in der (isolierten) Verhängung der Todesstrafe einen Verstoß gegen Art. 2 EMRK, sondern stellt darauf ab, ob die ernsthafte Gefahr einer Tötung aufgrund einer Todesstrafe ("real risk of execution") besteht (vgl. EGMR, Urteile vom 19. November 2009 - Nr. 41015/04, Kaboulov/Ukraine Rn. 103 …und vom 2. März 2010 - Nr. 61498/08, Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi/U.K. - Rn. 137, 144;… vgl. auch: Grabenwarter/Pabel, EMRK, 6. Aufl. 2016, § 20 Rn. 12).

• BVerwG, 26.03.2018 - 1 VR 1.18

  Eilantrag zur Verhinderung der Abschiebung eines islamistischen Gefährders nach …

  In der Rechtssache Kaboulov/Ukraine (Urteil vom 19. November 2009 - Nr. 41015/04 - Rn. 99 ff.) hat er seine rechtliche Prüfung bei einer aufgrund eines Moratoriums nicht vollstreckten Todesstrafe indes nicht auch darauf erstreckt, ob die (faktisch) als lebenslange Freiheitsstrafe anzusehende Strafe konventionskonform ist.
• BVerwG, 17.05.2023 - 1 VR 1.23

  Abschiebungsanordnung in die Republik Irak

  Im Lichte der Artt. 1 der Protokolle Nr. 6 und 13 zur Konvention zum Schutz der Menschenrechte und Grundfreiheiten über die Abschaffung der Todesstrafe, denen zufolge die Todesstrafe abgeschafft ist und niemand zu dieser Strafe verurteilt oder hingerichtet werden darf, verbietet Art. 2 EMRK die Auslieferung oder Ausweisung einer Person in einen anderen Staat, wenn ernsthafte Gründe für die Gefahr bewiesen sind, dass gegen sie die Todesstrafe nicht nur verhängt, sondern auch vollstreckt wird (EGMR, Urteile vom 19. November 2009 - Nr. 41015/04, Kaboulov/Ukraine - Rn. 99 ff., vom 2. März 2010 - Nr. 61498/08, Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi/U. K. - Rn. 115 ff., 123, 137 und 144 …und vom 24. Juli 2014 - Nr. 28761/11, Al-Nashiri/Polen - NVwZ 2015, 955 Rn. 576 ff.).
• EGMR, 31.05.2018 - 33234/12

  Litauen und Rumänien mitverantwortlich für CIA-Folter

  Similar principles apply to cases where there are substantial grounds for believing that, if removed from a Contracting State, an applicant would be exposed to a real risk of being subjected to a flagrant denial of justice (see Othman (Abu Qatada), cited above, §§ 261 and 285) or sentenced to the death penalty (see Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v. the United Kingdom, no. 61498/08, § 123, ECHR 2010; Kaboulov v. Ukraine, no. 41015/04, § 99, 19 November 2009; Al Nashiri v. Poland, cited above, § 456; and Husayn (Abu Zubaydah) v. Poland, cited above, § 453).
• EGMR, 16.01.2024 - 6383/17

  AL-HAWSAWI v. LITHUANIA

  (4) Similar principles apply to cases where there are substantial grounds for believing that, if removed from a Contracting State, an applicant would be exposed to a real risk of being subjected to a flagrant denial of justice (see Othman (Abu Qatada), cited above, §§ 261 and 285) or sentenced to the death penalty (see Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v. the United Kingdom, no. 61498/08, § 123, ECHR 2010; Kaboulov v. Ukraine, no. 41015/04, § 99, 19 November 2009; Al Nashiri v. Poland, cited above, § 456; Husayn (Abu Zubaydah), cited above, § 453; and Al Nashiri v. Romania, cited above, § 597).
• EGMR, 16.01.2014 - 43611/11

  F.G. v. SWEDEN

  Les principes ci-dessus s'appliquent également dans le contexte de l'article 2 de la Convention (voir, par exemple, Kaboulov c. Ukraine, no 41015/04, § 99, 19 novembre 2009).
• EGMR, 14.04.2015 - 65692/12

  TATAR v. SWITZERLAND

  The above principles apply also in regard to Article 2 of the Convention (see, for example, Kaboulov v. Ukraine, no. 41015/04, § 99, 19 November 2009).
• EGMR, 05.02.2013 - 67286/10

  ZOKHIDOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 03.03.2022 - 51853/19

  SHORAZOVA v. MALTA
• EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 70602/14

  J.G. v. THE NETHERLANDS
• EGMR, 13.12.2016 - 36384/16

  A.J. AND F.B. v. SWEDEN
• EGMR, 18.12.2012 - 45618/09

  SARRIA c. POLOGNE
• EGMR, 11.09.2012 - 37286/09

  GÖKALP c. POLOGNE ET CARDONA GIRALDO c. POLOGNE