Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ABLYAZOV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3 MRK
  Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) (englisch)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Ablyazov v. Russia

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (10)Neu Zitiert selbst (11)

• EGMR, 18.10.2001 - 31143/96

  INDELICATO c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 22867/05

  Consideration has been given to the starting of investigations, delays in taking statements (see Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, § 89, ECHR 2000-VI, and Tekin v. Turkey, 9 June 1998, § 67, Reports 1998-IV), and the length of time taken to complete the initial investigation (see Indelicato v. Italy, no. 31143/96, § 37, 18 October 2001).
• EGMR, 07.12.2006 - 65859/01

  SHEYDAYEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 22867/05

  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, 28.03.2000 - 22535/93

  MAHMUT KAYA v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 22867/05

  However, it should in principle be capable of leading to the establishment of the facts of the case and, if the allegations prove to be true, to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 71, ECHR 2002-II, and Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 124, ECHR 2000-III).

 
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 22867/05

  Even in the most difficult circumstances, such as the fight against terrorism and organised crime, the Convention prohibits, in absolute terms, torture and inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the victim's conduct (see, among many other authorities, Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV, and Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 95, ECHR 1999-V).
• EGMR, 13.06.2000 - 23531/94

  TIMURTAS c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 22867/05

  Consideration has been given to the starting of investigations, delays in taking statements (see Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, § 89, ECHR 2000-VI, and Tekin v. Turkey, 9 June 1998, § 67, Reports 1998-IV), and the length of time taken to complete the initial investigation (see Indelicato v. Italy, no. 31143/96, § 37, 18 October 2001).
• EGMR, 14.03.2002 - 46477/99

  PAUL ET AUDREY EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 22867/05

  However, it should in principle be capable of leading to the establishment of the facts of the case and, if the allegations prove to be true, to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 71, ECHR 2002-II, and Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 124, ECHR 2000-III).
• EGMR, 04.10.2005 - 3456/05

  SARBAN v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 22867/05

  In the context of detainees, the Court has emphasised that persons in custody are in a vulnerable position and that the authorities have a duty to protect their physical well-being (see Tarariyeva v. Russia, no. 4353/03, § 73, ECHR 2006-XV; Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 77, 4 October 2005; and Mouisel v. France, no. 67263/01, § 40, ECHR 2002-IX).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 22867/05

  Even in the most difficult circumstances, such as the fight against terrorism and organised crime, the Convention prohibits, in absolute terms, torture and inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the victim's conduct (see, among many other authorities, Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV, and Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 95, ECHR 1999-V).
• EGMR, 30.09.2004 - 50222/99

  KRASTANOV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 22867/05

  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, 30.10.2012 - 22867/05

  In the context of detainees, the Court has emphasised that persons in custody are in a vulnerable position and that the authorities have a duty to protect their physical well-being (see Tarariyeva v. Russia, no. 4353/03, § 73, ECHR 2006-XV; Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 77, 4 October 2005; and Mouisel v. France, no. 67263/01, § 40, ECHR 2002-IX).
• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

  RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE

• EGMR, 27.08.2019 - 32631/09

  Fall Magnitski: Russland verletzte mehrfach Menschenrechte

  The Court has already found in a number of cases where the authorities" failure to show diligence resulted in the prosecution becoming time-barred that the effectiveness of the investigation was irreparably damaged and the purpose of effective protection against acts of ill-treatment was frustrated (see, among many other authorities, V.K. v. Russia, no. 68059/13, § 189, 7 March 2017; Izci v. Turkey, no. 42606/05, § 72, 23 July 2013; Yazici and Others v. Turkey (no. 2), no. 45046/05, § 27, 23 April 2013; Ablyazov v. Russia, no. 22867/05, §§ 57 and 59, 30 October 2012; Nikiforov v. Russia, no. 42837/04, § 54, 1 July 2010; and Beganovic v. Croatia, no. 46423/06, § 85, 25 June 2009).
• EGMR, 24.07.2014 - 46956/09

  LYAPIN v. RUSSIA

  In many other police ill-treatment cases in which a "pre-investigation inquiry" was the only procedure employed by the investigative authority, the Court's approach was to identify specific deficiencies and omissions on the part of the investigating authority in the course of the "pre-investigation inquiry", which led it to conclude that the State's obligation under Article 3 to carry out an effective investigation had not been fulfilled (see Samoylov v. Russia, no. 64398/01, §§ 34-46, 2 October 2008; Valyayev v. Russia, no. 22150/04, §§ 61-73, 14 February 2012; Ablyazov v. Russia, no. 22867/05, §§ 58-60, 30 October 2012; Tangiyev v. Russia, no. 27610/05, §§ 58-63, 11 December 2012; Markaryan v. Russia, no. 12102/05, §§ 64-69, 4 April 2013; Davitidze v. Russia, no. 8810/05, §§ 110-118, 30 May 2013; Ryabtsev v. Russia, no. 13642/06, §§ 78-84, 14 November 2013; Aleksandr Novoselov v. Russia, no. 33954/05, §§ 72-78, 28 November 2013; and Velikanov v. Russia, no. 4124/08, §§ 57-66, 30 January 2014).
• EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 43098/09

  McCAUGHEY AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Or, selon une interprétation de cette jurisprudence, celle-ci exigerait qu'une procédure interne susceptible de conduire à l'identification et à la punition de l'auteur de la violation soit disponible pour que la Cour s'abstienne d'examiner le grief matériel soulevé dans le cadre du recours international exercé devant elle, non que la procédure en question ait effectivement abouti à ce résultat (voir, par exemple, les termes utilisés dans les arrêts Fadime et Turan Karabulut c. Turquie, no 23872/04, § 39, 27 mai 2010, et Ablyazov c. Russie, no 22867/05, § 54, 30 octobre 2012).

 
• EGMR, 07.11.2023 - 63543/09

  DURDAJ AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA

  The other measures necessary to provide redress are the obligation of the State to carry out an effective investigation (see Kelly and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 30054/96, § 105, 4 May 2001, and Nikolova and Velichkova, cited above, §§ 56-57; see also, mutatis mutandis, Vladimir Romanov v. Russia, no. 41461/02, §§ 78-79, 24 July 2008, and Ablyazov v. Russia, no. 22867/05, § 43, 30 October 2012).
• EGMR, 16.04.2015 - 36552/05

  ZAYEV c. RUSSIE

  Se tournant vers les circonstances de l'espèce, la Cour observe que les parties ne contestent pas le fait que le requérant a subi des lésions corporelles alors qu'il était sous le contrôle de la police (Ablyazov c. Russie, no 22867/05, § 50, 30 octobre 2012).
• EGMR, 16.07.2015 - 12008/06

  ALEKSEY BORISOV c. RUSSIE

  Se tournant vers les circonstances de l'espèce, la Cour observe qu'il n'y a pas de controverse entre les parties tant sur le nombre et la localisation des lésions corporelles relevées par le médecin légiste que sur le fait que ces lésions ont été subies par le requérant lorsqu'il était sous le contrôle de la police (Ablyazov c. Russie, no 22867/05, § 50, 30 octobre 2012).
• EGMR, 15.11.2016 - 43083/06

  ZOLOTAREV c. RUSSIE

  En l'absence de toute indication pertinente dans le registre susmentionné et de tout autre document médical attestant la présence de lésions au moment de l'arrivée du requérant au bureau de police, la Cour présume que celui-ci ne présentait aucune lésion au moment de son interpellation (Ablyazov c. Russie, no 22867/05, § 50, 30 octobre 2012, et Chernetskiy, précité, § 69).
• EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 21062/07

  IGOSHIN c. RUSSIE

  Aussi ces manquements ont-ils causé une perte de temps précieux et compliqué l'instruction ultérieure portant sur l'allégation du requérant (voir, pour un raisonnement similaire, Ablyazov c. Russie, no 22867/05, § 58, 30 octobre 2012, et Ryabtsev c. Russie, no 13642/06, § 82, 14 novembre 2013).
• EGMR, 03.10.2017 - 36620/07

  SHEVTSOVA c. RUSSIE

  En l'espèce, la Cour constate que les évènements du 6 novembre 2001 n'étaient pas connus exclusivement des autorités puisque l'incident litigieux ne s'était pas produit dans une zone placée sous le contrôle exclusif des autorités de l'État (voir, a contrario, Zolotarev c. Russie, no 43083/06, §§ 8 et 48, 15 novembre 2016, et Ablyazov c. Russie, no 22867/05, §§ 6 et 49, 30 octobre 2012).
• EGMR - 53373/14 (anhängig)

  ZHDAN v. RUSSIA

  has the applicant been subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention (see Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 87, ECHR 1999-V; and, among many other authorities, Polonskiy v. Russia, no. 30033/05, §§ 122-123, 19 March 2009; Gladyshev v. Russia, no. 2807/04, § 57, 30 July 2009; Alchagin v. Russia, no. 20212/05, §§ 53-54, 56, 17 January 2012; A.A. v. Russia, no. 49097/08, §§ 75, 77 and 80-81, 17 January 2012; Yudina v. Russia, no. 52327/08, §§ 67-68, 10 July 2012; Ablyazov v. Russia, no. 22867/05, §§ 49-50, 30 October 2012; Tangiyev v. Russia, no. 27610/05, §§ 53-55, 11 December 2012; Markaryan v. Russia, no. 12102/05, §§ 60-61, 4 April 2013; Nasakin v. Russia, no. 22735/05, §§ 52-53, 18 July 2013; Aleksandr Novoselov v. Russia, no. 33954/05, §§ 61-62, 28 November 2013; Velikanov v. Russia, no. 4124/08, § 51, 30 January 2014)?.