Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  P.M. v. BULGARIA

  Art. 3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 3, Art. 41 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Art. 3 (procedural aspect) Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  P.M. v. Bulgaria

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (14)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 04.12.2003 - 39272/98

  M.C. c. BULGARIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 49669/07

  It is true that the applicant also relied on Article 8 in the present case and that in the case of M.C. v. Bulgaria (no. 39272/98, ECHR 2003-XII) the Court referred to both Article 3 and Article 8, finding that there was an obligation on States to enact criminal-law provisions effectively punishing rape and to apply them in practice through effective investigation (see §§ 148-153 of that judgment).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 49669/07

  The promptness of the authorities" reaction to the complaints is an important factor (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, §§ 133 et seq., ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 12.02.2004 - 47287/99

  PEREZ c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 49669/07

  The Court notes that the applicant did not join the criminal proceedings against her aggressors as a civil party (see paragraph 46 above) and that therefore the proceedings at issue did not concern the determination of her civil rights within the meaning of Article 6 (see Perez v. France [GC], no. 47287/99, § 70, ECHR 2004-I).

 
• EGMR, 08.03.2006 - 59532/00

  BLECIC v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 49669/07

  Although the respondent Government have not raised any objection as to the Court's competence ratione temporis, this issue nevertheless calls for consideration by the Court (see Blecic v. Croatia [GC], no. 59532/00, §§ 63 et seq., ECHR 2006-III).
• EGMR, 17.12.2009 - 32704/04

  DENIS VASILYEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 49669/07

  The authorities must have taken the reasonable steps available to them to secure the evidence concerning the incident, such as witness testimony and forensic evidence, and a requirement of promptness and reasonable expedition is implicit in this context (see Denis Vasilyev v. Russia, no. 32704/04, § 100, 17 December 2009, with further references).
• EGMR, 18.10.2001 - 31143/96

  INDELICATO c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 49669/07

  Consideration has been given in the Court's judgments to matters such as the opening of investigations, delays in identifying witnesses or taking statements (see Matasaru and Savitchi v. Moldova, no. 38281/08, §§ 88 and 93, 2 November 2010), the length of time taken for the initial investigation (see Indelicato v. Italy, no. 31143/96, § 37, 18 October 2001), and unjustified protraction of the criminal proceedings resulting in the expiry of the statute of limitations (see Angelova and Iliev v. Bulgaria, no. 55523/00, §§ 101-103, 26 July 2007).
• EGMR, 02.11.2010 - 38281/08

  MATASARU AND SAVITCHI v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 49669/07

  Consideration has been given in the Court's judgments to matters such as the opening of investigations, delays in identifying witnesses or taking statements (see Matasaru and Savitchi v. Moldova, no. 38281/08, §§ 88 and 93, 2 November 2010), the length of time taken for the initial investigation (see Indelicato v. Italy, no. 31143/96, § 37, 18 October 2001), and unjustified protraction of the criminal proceedings resulting in the expiry of the statute of limitations (see Angelova and Iliev v. Bulgaria, no. 55523/00, §§ 101-103, 26 July 2007).

• EGMR, 28.05.2015 - 41107/10

  Y. v. SLOVENIA

  Having regard to the nature and the substance of the above complaints, the Court considers that the alleged delays and bias of the domestic courts fall to be examined solely under Article 3 of the Convention (see P.M. v. Bulgaria, no. 49669/07, § 58, 24 January 2012), which reads as follows:.
• EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 16605/09

  N.D. v. SLOVENIA

  However, as the applicant's complaints were limited to the effectiveness of the criminal proceedings concerning the continuous sexual assault committed against her, the Court considers that it is not necessary in the particular circumstances of the present case, where the offences against the applicant were committed from 1992 until 1994 and therefore at least to a large extent before the entry into force of the Convention in respect of Slovenia on 28 June 1994, to decide whether its temporal jurisdiction also extends to issues under Article 8 (see P.M. v. Bulgaria, no. 49669/07, § 58, 24 January 2012).

  Consideration has been given in the Court's judgments to matters such as the time taken to open investigations, delays in identifying witnesses or taking statements (see Matasaru and Savitchi v. Moldova, nos. 38281/08, §§ 88 and 93, 2 November 2010), the length of time taken for the initial investigation (see Indelicato v. Italy, no. 31143/96, § 37, 18 October 2001), and unjustified protraction of the criminal proceedings resulting in the expiry of the statute of limitations (see Angelova and Iliev v. Bulgaria, no. 55523/00, §§ 101-103, 26 July 2007, and P.M. v. Bulgaria, no. 49669/07, § 66, 24 January 2012).

• EGMR, 07.11.2023 - 63543/09

  DURDAJ AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA

  Only these proceedings, the applicants contended, had in principle been in conformity with the procedural requirements flowing from Article 2. On the other hand, they contended that they had not had at their disposal a remedy that would have enabled them to challenge the application of the Amnesty Act to the defendants in their cases and to request the continuation of the criminal proceedings (they referred, by analogy, to P.M. v. Bulgaria, no. 49669/07, § 59, 24 January 2012).

 
• EGMR, 07.07.2022 - 32715/19

  M.S. c. ITALIE

  Dans la présente affaire, la Cour estime, eu égard aux éléments qui précèdent, que la manière dont les autorités internes, d'une part, sur la base des mécanismes de prescription des infractions propres au cadre national (voir paragraphes 68-77 ci-dessus), ont maintenu un système dans lequel la prescription est étroitement liée à l'action judiciaire, même après l'ouverture d'une procédure, et - d'autre part - ont mené les poursuites pénales avec une passivité judiciaire incompatible avec ledit cadre juridique, ne saurait passer pour satisfaire aux exigences de l'article 3 de la Convention (voir, mutatis mutandis, W. c. Slovénie, no 24125/06, §§ 66-70, 23 janvier 2014, P.M. c. Bulgarie, no 49669/07, §§ 65-66, 24 janvier 2012, et M.C. et A.C., précité, §§ 120-125).
• EGMR, 14.09.2021 - 40419/19

  VOLODINA v. RUSSIA (No. 2)

  The Court has found violations of the obligation to conduct an effective investigation in cases where the proceedings had continued unduly or had ended by prescription allowing the perpetrators to escape accountability (see Opuz, cited above, § 151; P.M. v. Bulgaria, no. 49669/07, §§ 64-66, 24 January 2012, and, in a factually similar situation, Barsova v. Russia [Committee], no. 20289/10, §§ 35-40, 22 October 2019).
• EGMR, 03.03.2015 - 29263/12

  S.Z. c. BULGARIE

  Les autorités doivent prendre les mesures raisonnables dont elles disposent pour obtenir les preuves relatives aux faits en question (voir, dans le contexte de poursuites pénales pour viol, M.C. c. Bulgarie, § 151, M.N. c. Bulgarie, §§ 38-39, W. c. Slovénie, § 64, tous précités, et P.M. c. Bulgarie, no 49669/07, §§ 63-67, 24 janvier 2012).
• EGMR, 16.06.2022 - 23735/19

  DE GIORGI c. ITALIE

  Au vu de la manière dont les autorités ont traité les plaintes de violences domestiques déposées par la requérante - notamment le fait qu'elles n'ont pas enquêté de manière effective sur les allégations crédibles de mauvais traitements et qu'elles n'ont pas veillé à ce que l'auteur fût poursuivi et puni, l'enquête sur les allégations de mauvais traitements, trop longtemps pendante, ayant manqué d'effectivité - la Cour estime que l'État a failli à son devoir d'enquêter sur les mauvais traitements subis par la requérante [et ses enfants] et que la manière dont les autorités internes ont mené les poursuites pénales dans la présente affaire participe également d'une passivité judiciaire et ne saurait passer pour satisfaire aux exigences de l'article 3 de la Convention (voir, mutatis mutandis, W. c. Slovénie, no 24125/06, §§ 66-70, 23 janvier 2014, P.M. c. Bulgarie, no 49669/07, §§ 65-66, 24 janvier 2012, et M.C. et A.C., précité, §§ 120-125).
• EGMR, 23.01.2014 - 24125/06

  W. v. SLOVENIA

  Consideration has been given in the Court's judgments to matters such as the time taken to open investigations, delays in identifying witnesses or taking statements (see Matasaru and Savitchi v. Moldova, nos. 38281/08, §§ 88 and 93, 2 November 2010), the length of time taken for the initial investigation (see Indelicato v. Italy, no. 31143/96, § 37, 18 October 2001), and unjustified protraction of the criminal proceedings resulting in the expiry of the statute of limitations (see Angelova and Iliev v. Bulgaria, no. 55523/00, §§ 101-103, 26 July 2007, and P.M. v. Bulgaria, no. 49669/07, § 66, 24 January 2012).
• EGMR, 20.02.2020 - 41990/18

  Y v. BULGARIA

  It is settled that rape and serious sexual assault amount to treatment falling within the ambit of Article 3 of the Convention (see Aydin v. Turkey, 25 September 1997, § 83, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VI, and Maslova and Nalbandov v. Russia, no. 839/02, § 85, 24 January 2008, which concerned rape of detainees by State officials, and M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, §§ 149 and 151, ECHR 2003-XII; P.M. v. Bulgaria, no. 49669/07, § 63, 24 January 2012; D.J. v. Croatia, no. 42418/10, § 83, 24 July 2012; M.N. v. Bulgaria, no. 3832/06, § 34, 27 November 2012; W. v. Slovenia, no. 24125/06, § 63, 23 January 2014; M.A. v. Slovenia, no. 3400/07, § 46, 15 January 2015; N.D. v. Slovenia, no. 16605/09, § 56, 15 January 2015; S.Z. v. Bulgaria, no. 29263/12, § 41, 3 March 2015; I.P. v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 33708/12, § 32, 28 April 2015; Y. v. Slovenia, no. 41107/10, § 95, ECHR 2015 (extracts); S.M. v. Russia, no. 75863/11, § 67, 22 October 2015; I.C. v. Romania, no. 36934/08, § 52, 24 May 2016; and B.V. v. Belgium, no. 61030/08, § 55, 2 May 2017, which concerned rape or serious sexual assault by private persons).
• EGMR, 18.10.2016 - 16143/10

  G.U. c. TURQUIE

  Les autorités doivent prendre les mesures raisonnables dont elles disposent pour obtenir les preuves relatives aux faits en question (voir, dans le contexte de poursuites pénales pour viol, M.C., précité, § 151, M.N., précité, §§ 38-39, et P.M. c. Bulgarie, no 49669/07, §§ 63-67, 24 janvier 2012).
• EGMR, 01.07.2014 - 41694/07

  ISAKOVIC VIDOVIC v. SERBIA
• EGMR, 14.05.2013 - 8981/10

  S.L. ET AUTRES c. BULGARIE
• EGMR, 22.10.2019 - 20289/10

  BARSOVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 22.10.2015 - 75863/11

  S.M. v. RUSSIA