Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ALIKHANOVY v. RUSSIA

  Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Inhuman treatment) ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

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

• EGMR, 18.04.2013 - 54765/09

  ASKHABOVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 17054/06

  In this connection, the Court notes that discord within the law-enforcement agencies should not have precluded the domestic authorities from discharging their obligation to demonstrate diligence and promptness in dealing with such a serious matter (see Öneryildiz v. Turkey [GC], no. 48939/99, § 94, ECHR 2004-XII) and notes that their reluctance to do so led to the loss of precious time and could not but have had a negative impact on the overall conduct of the criminal proceedings (see, for example, Askhabova v. Russia, no. 54765/09, § 153, 18 April 2013).
• EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

  McCANN AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 17054/06

  A summary of the principles concerning the effectiveness of the investigation into an alleged violation of Article 2 of the Convention may be found in McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, § 161, Series A no. 324, and Mustafa Tunç and Fecire Tunç v. Turkey [GC], no. 24014/05, §§ 169-82, 14 April 2015.
• EGMR, 10.04.2001 - 26129/95

  TANLI v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 17054/06

  The Court notes that while a member of the family of a "disappeared person" can claim to be a victim of treatment contrary to Article 3 in view of the suffering endured as a result of uncertainty about the fate of their relatives and the authorities" inadequate reaction (see Bazorkina v. Russia, no. 69481/01, §§ 139-41, 27 July 2006), the same principle would not usually apply to cases where the person taken into custody has later been found dead (see, for example, Tanli v. Turkey, no. 26129/95, § 159, ECHR 2001-III).

 
• EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 34056/02

  GONGADZE c. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 17054/06

  In such cases the Court would limit its findings to Article 2. However, if a period of initial disappearance is long it may in certain circumstances give rise to a separate issue under Article 3 (see Gongadze v. Ukraine, no. 34056/02, §§ 184-86, ECHR 2005-XI, and Luluyev and Others v. Russia, no. 69480/01, §§ 114-15, ECHR 2006-XIII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 27.07.2006 - 69481/01

  BAZORKINA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 17054/06

  The Court notes that while a member of the family of a "disappeared person" can claim to be a victim of treatment contrary to Article 3 in view of the suffering endured as a result of uncertainty about the fate of their relatives and the authorities" inadequate reaction (see Bazorkina v. Russia, no. 69481/01, §§ 139-41, 27 July 2006), the same principle would not usually apply to cases where the person taken into custody has later been found dead (see, for example, Tanli v. Turkey, no. 26129/95, § 159, ECHR 2001-III).
• EGMR, 09.11.2006 - 69480/01

  LOULOUÏEV ET AUTRES c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 17054/06

  In such cases the Court would limit its findings to Article 2. However, if a period of initial disappearance is long it may in certain circumstances give rise to a separate issue under Article 3 (see Gongadze v. Ukraine, no. 34056/02, §§ 184-86, ECHR 2005-XI, and Luluyev and Others v. Russia, no. 69480/01, §§ 114-15, ECHR 2006-XIII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 18.12.2012 - 2944/06

  ASLAKHANOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 17054/06

  The Court has already found that a criminal investigation does not constitute an effective remedy in respect of disappearances in Chechnya and Ingushetia between 1999 and 2006, and that such a situation constitutes a systemic problem in Convention terms (see Aslakhanova and Others v. Russia, nos. 2944/06 and 4 others, § 217, 18 December 2012).

• EGMR, 21.01.2020 - 44658/12

  VATSAYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Regard being had to the seriousness of the alleged offence and the importance of taking prompt investigative steps, such a delay seems to be unacceptable (see, for a similar situation, Luluyev and Others v. Russia, no. 69480/01, § 96, ECHR 2006-XIII (extracts), and Alikhanovy v. Russia, no. 17054/06, § 81, 28 August 2018).
• EGMR, 21.01.2020 - 19/16

  IDRISOVA v. RUSSIA

  Regard being had to the seriousness of the alleged offence and the importance of taking prompt investigative steps, such a delay seems unacceptable (see, for a similar situation, Luluyev and Others v. Russia, no. 69480/01, § 96, ECHR 2006-XIII (extracts), and Alikhanovy v. Russia, no. 17054/06, § 81, 28 August 2018).