Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 28.11.2017 - 63392/09 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2017,45162) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
SOKOLOV v. RUSSIA
Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article ...
Sonstiges
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (3)
- EGMR, 05.11.2015 - 31709/13
YAGUBLU v. AZERBAIJAN
Auszug aus EGMR, 28.11.2017 - 63392/09
It follows that the Russian courts did not make a genuine inquiry into the basic facts underlying the charge and that their presumption of the existence of a "reasonable suspicion" had had no basis in fact (compare Yagublu v. Azerbaijan, no. 31709/13, § 61, 5 November 2015). - EGMR - 43441/08 (anhängig)
[ENG]
Auszug aus EGMR, 28.11.2017 - 63392/09
The Court reiterates that the very essence of the Convention is respect for human dignity and that holding a person in a metal cage during a trial constitutes in itself - having regard to its objectively degrading nature which is incompatible with the standards of civilised behaviour that are the hallmark of a democratic society - an affront to human dignity in breach of Article 3 (see Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, § 138, ECHR 2014 (extracts)). - EGMR, 19.10.2000 - 27785/95
WLOCH v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 28.11.2017 - 63392/09
As regards the applicant's immediate arrest and re-detention on suspicion of theft (see paragraphs 7 and 8 above), the Court observes that it was carried out on the basis of a judicial order that did not fix a time-limit for the applicant's detention or mention any facts or information capable of satisfying an objective observer that he may have committed the theft (see Wloch v. Poland, no. 27785/95, § 108, ECHR 2000-XI).