Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  RUDAKOV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3 MRK
  Violation of Art. 3 (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (12)

• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2010 - 43239/04

  Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII).

  In addition to the severity of the treatment, there is a purposive element which defines torture in terms of the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering with the aim, inter alia, of obtaining information, inflicting punishment or intimidation (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 114, ECHR 2000-VII).

• EGMR, 30.09.2004 - 50222/99

  KRASTANOV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2010 - 43239/04

  In respect of a person deprived of his liberty, any recourse to physical force which has not been made strictly necessary by his own conduct diminishes human dignity and is in principle an infringement of the right set forth in Article 3 of the Convention (see Sheydayev v. Russia, no. 65859/01, § 59, 7 December 2006; Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 38, Series A no. 336; and Krastanov v. Bulgaria, no. 50222/99, § 53, 30 September 2004).

  The authorities thus had an obligation to carry out an effective investigation into the circumstances in which the applicant sustained his injuries (see Krastanov v. Bulgaria, no. 50222/99, § 58, 30 September 2004).

• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2010 - 43239/04

  In accordance with Article 3 of the Convention the State must ensure that a person is detained under conditions which are compatible with respect for his human dignity and that the manner and method of the execution of the measure do not subject him to distress or hardship exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 92-94, ECHR 2000-XI).

 
• EGMR, 04.10.2005 - 3456/05

  SARBAN v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2010 - 43239/04

  In the context of detainees, the Court has emphasised that persons in custody are in a vulnerable position and that the authorities are under a duty to protect their physical well-being (see Tarariyeva v. Russia, no. 4353/03, § 73, ECHR 2006-... (extracts); Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 77, 4 October 2005; and Mouisel v. France, no. 67263/01, § 40, ECHR 2002-IX).
• EGMR, 07.12.2006 - 65859/01

  SHEYDAYEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2010 - 43239/04

  In respect of a person deprived of his liberty, any recourse to physical force which has not been made strictly necessary by his own conduct diminishes human dignity and is in principle an infringement of the right set forth in Article 3 of the Convention (see Sheydayev v. Russia, no. 65859/01, § 59, 7 December 2006; Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 38, Series A no. 336; and Krastanov v. Bulgaria, no. 50222/99, § 53, 30 September 2004).
• EGMR, 14.12.2006 - 4353/03

  TARARIEVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2010 - 43239/04

  In the context of detainees, the Court has emphasised that persons in custody are in a vulnerable position and that the authorities are under a duty to protect their physical well-being (see Tarariyeva v. Russia, no. 4353/03, § 73, ECHR 2006-... (extracts); Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 77, 4 October 2005; and Mouisel v. France, no. 67263/01, § 40, ECHR 2002-IX).
• EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 7178/03

  DEDOVSKIY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2010 - 43239/04

  In these circumstances, bearing in mind the authorities" obligation to account for injuries caused to persons within their control in custody, and in the absence of a convincing and plausible explanation by the Government in the instant case, the Court considers that it can draw inferences from the Government's conduct and finds it established to the standard of proof required in the Convention proceedings that the injuries sustained by the applicant were the result of the treatment to which he had been subjected by officer L. in the prison and for which accordingly the Government bore responsibility (see Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 88, ECHR 1999-V; Mehmet Emin Yüksel v. Turkey, no. 40154/98, § 30, 20 July 2004; Mikheyev, cited above, §§ 104-105; and Dedovskiy and Others v. Russia, no. 7178/03, §§ 78-79, 15 May 2008).
• EGMR, 08.01.2009 - 36220/02

  BARABANSHCHIKOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2010 - 43239/04

  A conclusion indicating the degree of support to the allegations of ill-treatment should be based on a discussion of possible differential diagnoses (non-ill-treatment-related injuries - including self-inflicted injuries - and diseases) (see Barabanshchikov v. Russia, no. 36220/02, § 59, 8 January 2009).
• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

  RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2010 - 43239/04

  In respect of a person deprived of his liberty, any recourse to physical force which has not been made strictly necessary by his own conduct diminishes human dignity and is in principle an infringement of the right set forth in Article 3 of the Convention (see Sheydayev v. Russia, no. 65859/01, § 59, 7 December 2006; Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 38, Series A no. 336; and Krastanov v. Bulgaria, no. 50222/99, § 53, 30 September 2004).
• EGMR, 19.04.2001 - 28524/95

  PEERS v. GREECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2010 - 43239/04

  The question whether the purpose of the treatment was to humiliate or debase the victim is a factor to be taken into account, but the absence of any such purpose cannot conclusively rule out a violation of Article 3 (see, for example, Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, § 74, ECHR 2001-III, and Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, § 101, ECHR 2002-VI).
• EGMR, 22.09.1993 - 15473/89

  KLAAS c. ALLEMAGNE
• EGMR, 10.10.2000 - 22947/93

  AKKOC v. TURKEY