Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 25.07.2013 - 11082/06, 13772/05   

Sie müssen eingeloggt sein, um diese Funktion zu nutzen.

Sie haben noch kein Nutzerkonto? In weniger als einer Minute ist es eingerichtet und Sie können sofort diese und weitere kostenlose Zusatzfunktionen nutzen.

| | Was ist die Merkfunktion?
Ablegen in
Benachrichtigen, wenn:




 
Alle auswählen
 

Zitiervorschläge

https://dejure.org/2013,17600
EGMR, 25.07.2013 - 11082/06, 13772/05 (https://dejure.org/2013,17600)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 25.07.2013 - 11082/06, 13772/05 (https://dejure.org/2013,17600)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 25. Juli 2013 - 11082/06, 13772/05 (https://dejure.org/2013,17600)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2013,17600) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    KHODORKOVSKIY AND LEBEDEV v. RUSSIA

    Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 6, Art. 6+6 Abs. 3 Buchst. c, Art. 6+6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. b, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. c, Art. 6 ... Abs. 3 Buchst. d, Art. 7, Art. 7 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 18, Art. 34, Art. 41, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
    No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Length of pre-trial detention Reasonableness of pre-trial detention) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Procedural guarantees of review Review of lawfulness of detention Speediness of review) No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Procedural guarantees of review No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 - Impartial tribunal) Violation of Article 6+6-3-c - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 - Fair hearing) (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial Article 6-3-c - Defence through legal assistance) Violation of Article 6+6-3-d - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 - Fair hearing Equality of arms) (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial Article 6-3-d - Examination of witnesses) No violation of Article 7 - No punishment without law (Article 7-1 - Nullum crimen sine lege Criminal offence) Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for family life Respect for private life) Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions Possessions) No violation of Article 18 - Limitation on use of restrictions on rights (Article 18 - Restrictions for unauthorised purposes) Violation of Article 34 - Individual applications (Article 34 - Hinder the exercise of the right of petition) Non-pecuniary damage - award Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (englisch)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    KHODORKOVSKIY AND LEBEDEV v. RUSSIA - [Deutsche Übersetzung] by the Austrian Institute for Human Rights (ÖIM)

    [DEU] No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment;Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Length of pre-trial detention;Reasonableness of pre-trial detention);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Procedural guarantees of review;Review of lawfulness of detention;Speediness of review);No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Procedural guarantees of review;Review of lawfulness of detention;Speediness of review);No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Impartial tribunal);Violation of Article 6+6-3-c - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing) (Article 6-3-c - Defence through legal assistance;Article 6 - Right to a fair trial);Violation of Article 6+6-3-d - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing;Equality of arms) (Article 6-3-d - Examination of witnesses;Article 6 - Right to a fair trial);No violation of Article 7 - No punishment without law (Article 7-1 - Nullum crimen sine lege;Criminal offence);Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for family life;Respect for private life);Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions;Possessions);No violation of Article 18 - Limitation on use of restrictions on rights (Article 18 - Restrictions for unauthorised purposes);Violation of Article 34 - Individual applications (Article 34 - Hinder the exercise of the right of petition);Non-pecuniary damage - award;Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed

  • juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Kurzfassungen/Presse (5)

  • zeit.de (Pressemeldung, 25.07.2013)

    Russland wegen Chodorkowski-Prozess verurteilt

  • lto.de (Kurzinformation)

    Kremlkritiker Chodorkowskij - EGMR kritisiert Menschenrechtsverletzungen

  • RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)
  • orf.at (Pressemeldung, 25.07.2013)

    Chodorkowski-Prozess nicht politisch

  • taz.de (Pressemeldung, 25.07.2013)

    Chodorkowski: Moskauer Prozesse sind unfair

Sonstiges

Verfahrensgang




Kontextvorschau:





Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (87)  

  • EGMR, 15.12.2015 - 9154/10

    Recht auf Konfrontation und Befragung von Zeugen (Al-Khawaja-Test; Recht auf ein

    In yet other cases a differentiated approach was taken: the lack of good reason for a prosecution witness's absence was considered conclusive of the unfairness of the trial unless the witness testimony was manifestly irrelevant for the outcome of the case (see Khodorkovskiy and Lebedev v. Russia, nos. 11082/06 and 13772/05, §§ 709-16, 25 July 2013; Cevat Soysal v. Turkey, no. 17362/03, §§ 76-79, 23 September 2014; and Suldin v. Russia, no. 20077/04, §§ 56-59, 16 October 2014).

    In other cases the approach seems less clear, but there has at least been a trend towards finding that the unjustified absence of a main witness amounts to a breach of the Convention (see Khodorkovskiy and Lebedev v. Russia, nos. 11082/06 and 13772/05, § 715, 25 July 2013, and Cevat Soysal v. Turkey, no. 17362/03, §§ 77-78, 23 September 2014).

  • EGMR, 16.11.2017 - 919/15

    ILGAR MAMMADOV v. AZERBAIJAN (No. 2)

    Furthermore, the Court observes that the question whether Article 6 of the Convention contains any express or implied restrictions which may form the subject of the Court's examination under Article 18 of the Convention remains open (compare, for example, Navalnyy and Ofitserov v. Russia, nos. 46632/13 and 28671/14, § 129, 23 February 2016, where, in the circumstances relevant to that case, it rejected as incompatible ratione materiae a complaint under Article 18 raised in conjunction with Articles 6 and 7; Nastase v. Romania (dec.), no. 80563/12, §§ 105-09, 18 November 2014, where it rejected as manifestly ill-founded a complaint under Article 18 raised in conjunction with Article 6; and Khodorkovskiy v. Russia (no. 2), no. 11082/06, § 16, 8 November 2011, and Lebedev v. Russia (no. 2), no. 13772/05, §§ 310-14, 27 May 2010, where it declared admissible the applicants" complaints under Article 18 raised in conjunction with Articles 5, 6, 7 and 8 and subsequently, having examined the merits of those complaints in the judgment of Khodorkovskiy and Lebedev v. Russia, nos.

    11082/06 and 13772/05, §§ 897-909, 25 July 2013, found no violation of Article 18).

    As indicated in paragraph 261 of the Chamber judgment, in some cases the Court has applied Article 18 in conjunction with Article 6. In Nastase v. Romania (dec.), no. 80563/12, §§ 105-09, 18 November 2014, for example, a complaint raised under Article 18 in conjunction with Article 6 was examined and rejected as manifestly ill-founded; in Khodorkovskiy v. Russia (no. 2) (dec.), no. 11082/06, § 16, 8 November 2011, and Lebedev v. Russia (no. 2) (dec.), no. 13772/05, §§ 310-14, 27 May 2010, complaints under Article 18 in conjunction with Articles 5, 6, 7 and 8 were declared admissible; and subsequently in the judgment of Khodorkovskiy and Lebedev v. Russia, nos.

    11082/06 and 13772/05, §§ 897-909, 25 July 2013, a violation of Article 18 in conjunction with these articles was not found.

  • EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 32541/08

    Keine Käfige für Angeklagte

    Elle a recherché au cas par cas s'il pouvait se justifier par des considérations de sécurité tenant aux circonstances particulières de l'affaire, comme la personnalité du requérant (Ramichvili et Kokhreidzé, précité, § 101), la nature des infractions dont il était accusé, même si cet élément n'a pas été jugé suffisant à lui seul (Piruzyan, précité, § 71), son casier judiciaire (Khodorkovskiy, précité, § 125, et Khodorkovskiy et Lebedev c. Russie, nos 11082/06 et 13772/05, §§ 485-486, 25 juillet 2013), son comportement (Ashot Haroutyounian, précité, § 127) ou d'autres éléments établissant l'existence d'un risque pour la sécurité dans le prétoire ou d'un risque de fuite (ibidem).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Neu: Die Merklistenfunktion erreichen Sie nun über das Lesezeichen oben.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht