Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  PÂRVU v. ROMANIA

  Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-2 - Use of force) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  PÂRVU v. ROMANIA

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 2 Abs. 2 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Zitiert selbst (16)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 22.02.2011 - 24329/02

  SOARE ET AUTRES c. ROUMANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2022 - 13326/18

  RELEVANT DOMESTIC LAW AND PRACTICE 50. The relevant legal provisions concerning the use of firearms by the police, in the version in force at the material time, can be found in Soare and Others v. Romania (no. 24329/02, § 94, 22 February 2011) and Andreea-Marusia Dumitru v. Romania (no. 9637/16, §§ 62-64, 31 March 2020).

  For example, during the 1406th meeting held on 7-9 June 2021, the Ministers' Deputies adopted the following decision CM/Del/Dec(2021)1406/H46-24 concerning the Soare and Others group v. Romania (Application No. 24329/02):.

  The Court also recalls that, when it comes to the use of potentially lethal force by State agents, it is incumbent on the State to provide a plausible explanation of the events leading to the death of a person, respectively to demonstrate that the use of potentially lethal force has to be regarded as "absolutely necessary" and justified under paragraph 2 of Article 2 of the Convention (Andreea-Marusia Dumitru, cited above, §§ 105-112, and Soare and Others v. Romania, no. 24329/02, § 140, 22 February 2011).

• EGMR, 25.06.2013 - 6978/08

  [FRE]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2022 - 13326/18

  Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe 54. Resolution CM/ResDH(2021)106 on the execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in three cases against Romania (Gheorghe Cobzaru v. Romania and 2 other cases, nos. 6978/08, 14974/09 and 40374/11) adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9 June 2021 at the 1406th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies, in its relevant parts, reads as follows:.

  The Government argued, in this respect, that, contrary to Gheorghe Cobzaru v. Romania (no. 6978/08, 25 June 2013), the positive obligations to put in place a legislative framework for the use of force by the police had been complied with.

  The Court notes Resolution CM/ResDH(2021)106 on the execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in three cases against Romania (Gheorghe Cobzaru v. Romania and 2 other cases, nos. 6978/08, 14974/09 and 40374/11) adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9 June 2021 at the 1406th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies, regarding the question of general measures required to prevent unjustified use of potentially lethal force during law enforcement interventions and operations and to guarantee effective criminal investigations and proceedings into such incidents, which "continues to be examined within the framework of the Soare and Others group of cases"; the Committee emphasised that "the closure of these cases in no way prejudges the Committee's evaluation of the general measures" (see paragraph 54 above).

• EGMR, 30.03.2016 - 5878/08

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2022 - 13326/18

  In that connection the Court reiterates that the use of force by agents of the State in pursuit of one of the aims delineated in paragraph 2 of Article 2 of the Convention may be justified under this provision where it is based on an honest belief which is perceived, for good reasons, to be valid at the time but which subsequently turns out to be mistaken (see Armani Da Silva v. the United Kingdom ([GC], no. 5878/08, §§ 247-48, 30 March 2016).

  The Court reiterates the general principles regarding the effectiveness of investigations, described in Armani Da Silva v. the United Kingdom ([GC], no. 5878/08, §§ 229-38, 30 March 2016), Ciorcan and Others (cited above, §§ 118-20) and, more recently, Andreea-Marusia Dumitru (cited above, §§ 124-26).

• EGMR, 17.01.2017 - 40374/11

  BOACA AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2022 - 13326/18

  Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe 54. Resolution CM/ResDH(2021)106 on the execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in three cases against Romania (Gheorghe Cobzaru v. Romania and 2 other cases, nos. 6978/08, 14974/09 and 40374/11) adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9 June 2021 at the 1406th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies, in its relevant parts, reads as follows:.

  The Court notes Resolution CM/ResDH(2021)106 on the execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in three cases against Romania (Gheorghe Cobzaru v. Romania and 2 other cases, nos. 6978/08, 14974/09 and 40374/11) adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9 June 2021 at the 1406th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies, regarding the question of general measures required to prevent unjustified use of potentially lethal force during law enforcement interventions and operations and to guarantee effective criminal investigations and proceedings into such incidents, which "continues to be examined within the framework of the Soare and Others group of cases"; the Committee emphasised that "the closure of these cases in no way prejudges the Committee's evaluation of the general measures" (see paragraph 54 above).

• EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 14974/09

  [FRE]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2022 - 13326/18

  Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe 54. Resolution CM/ResDH(2021)106 on the execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in three cases against Romania (Gheorghe Cobzaru v. Romania and 2 other cases, nos. 6978/08, 14974/09 and 40374/11) adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9 June 2021 at the 1406th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies, in its relevant parts, reads as follows:.

  The Court notes Resolution CM/ResDH(2021)106 on the execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in three cases against Romania (Gheorghe Cobzaru v. Romania and 2 other cases, nos. 6978/08, 14974/09 and 40374/11) adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9 June 2021 at the 1406th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies, regarding the question of general measures required to prevent unjustified use of potentially lethal force during law enforcement interventions and operations and to guarantee effective criminal investigations and proceedings into such incidents, which "continues to be examined within the framework of the Soare and Others group of cases"; the Committee emphasised that "the closure of these cases in no way prejudges the Committee's evaluation of the general measures" (see paragraph 54 above).

• EGMR, 31.03.2020 - 9637/16

  DUMITRU c. ROUMANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2022 - 13326/18

  RELEVANT DOMESTIC LAW AND PRACTICE 50. The relevant legal provisions concerning the use of firearms by the police, in the version in force at the material time, can be found in Soare and Others v. Romania (no. 24329/02, § 94, 22 February 2011) and Andreea-Marusia Dumitru v. Romania (no. 9637/16, §§ 62-64, 31 March 2020).

  The Court reiterates the general principles regarding the right to life, especially in the context of policing operations, described in Ciorcan and Others v. Romania (nos. 29414/09 and 44841/09, §§ 104-07, 27 January 2015) and, more recently, Andreea-Marusia Dumitru v. Romania (no. 9637/16, §§ 85-88, 31 March 2020).

• EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2022 - 13326/18

  In particular, the force used must be strictly proportionate to the achievement of the permitted aims (see Wasilewska and Kalucka v. Poland, nos. 28975/04 and 33406/04, § 42, 23 February 2010, and McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, §§ 148-49, Series A no. 324).
• EGMR, 20.12.2004 - 50385/99

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2022 - 13326/18

  To hold otherwise would be to impose an unrealistic burden on the State and its law-enforcement personnel in the execution of their duty, perhaps to the detriment of their lives and those of others (see Makaratzis v. Greece [GC], no. 50385/99, § 66, ECHR 2004 XI, and McCann and Others, cited above, § 200).
• EGMR, 25.04.2017 - 61467/12

  REZMIVES c. ROUMANIE et 3 autres affaires

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2022 - 13326/18

  Admittedly, it is not for the Court to indicate how States are to ensure effective investigations, since these processes raise complex legal and practical issues going beyond the Court's judicial function (see, mutatis mutandis, Rezmives and Others v. Romania, nos. 61467/12 and 3 others, § 116, 25 April 2017).
• EGMR, 13.07.2000 - 39221/98

  SCOZZARI ET GIUNTA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2022 - 13326/18

  Subject to monitoring by the Committee of Ministers, the respondent State remains free to choose the means by which it will discharge its legal obligation under Article 46 of the Convention (see Scozzari and Giunta v. Italy [GC], nos. 39221/98 and 41963/98, § 249, ECHR 2000-VIII), in line with the principle of subsidiarity, so that the Court is not obliged to repeat its finding of a violation in a series of identical cases.
• EGMR, 17.02.2004 - 39748/98

  Maestri ./. Italien
• EGMR, 17.03.2005 - 50196/99

  BUBBINS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 24.05.2011 - 33810/07

  [FRE]
• EGMR, 24.06.2008 - 64536/01

  IAMBOR c. ROUMANIE (N° 1)
• EGMR, 23.02.2010 - 28975/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 16.04.2019 - 48474/14

  LINGURAR v. ROMANIA

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 26.08.2025 - 3524/22

  PÂRVU AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA

  The main facts, including the events leading to Mr Sorin Pârvu's death and the ensuing criminal investigation, are described in the judgement Pârvu v. Romania, (no. 13326/18, §§ 5-49, 30 August 2022), concerning the application brought by the widow of Mr Sorin Pârvu.

  Rn. 19 For the Government, the application should be dismissed as being essentially the same with the application no. 13326/18, brought by the widow of Mr Sorin Pârvu.

  The Court must therefore ascertain whether the two applications, no. 13326/18 and the present application, relate essentially to the same person, the same facts and the same complaints.

  Rn. 21 The Court notes that the present application is brought by the parents and the brother, respectively, of Mr Sorin Pârvu (see paragraph 1 above), while the application no. 13326/18 was brought by the widow of Mr Sorin Pârvu (see paragraph 2 above).

  Therefore, the present application is not substantially the same as application no. 13326/18 (see Ştefan-Gabriel Mocanu and Others v. Romania, nos. 34323/21 and 8 others, § 34, 12 December 2023).

  75527/01 and 11837/02, 28 March 2006), while their other argument that the applicants should have lodged their application with the Court earlier to be joined to the case no. 13326/18 for a one-time examination by the Court concerns rather their second preliminary objection (see paragraphs 22-23 below).

• EGMR, 10.10.2024 - 9375/20

  BAGIROVA v. AZERBAIJAN

  In particular, the force used must be strictly proportionate to the achievement of the permitted aims (see McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, §§ 148-49, Series A no. 324; Wasilewska and Kałucka v. Poland, nos. 28975/04 and 33406/04, § 42, 23 February 2010; and Pârvu v. Romania, no. 13326/18, § 72, 30 August 2022).
• EGMR, 14.10.2025 - 47429/21

  FLORI v. ROMANIA

  Cette conclusion contraste avec la position ultérieure des autorités nationales (paragraphe 15 ci-dessus) ainsi que celle du gouvernement roumain exposée tant dans ses observations présentées dans la présente affaire que devant le Comité des Ministres dans le cadre du processus de l'exécution des arrêts (Pârvu c. Roumanie, no 13326/18, § 56, 30 août 2022), position selon laquelle les dispositions en question sont toujours en vigueur.
• EGMR, 25.03.2025 - 22776/18

  ALMUKHLAS ET AL-MALIKI c. GRÈCE

  Bien qu'elle ait reconnu l'existence de ces divergences, la majorité ne les a pas examinées plus avant pour réaliser sa propre appréciation des faits de la cause et elle n'en a pas tiré de conclusions (voir, mutatis mutandis, Pârvu c. Roumanie, no 13326/18, § 82, 30 août 2022).
• EGMR, 06.03.2025 - 2474/21

  GARAND ET AUTRES c. FRANCE

  À cet égard, il peut être utile de rechercher si l'opération des forces de l'ordre a été préparée et conduite avec le souci de minimiser autant que possible le recours à la force meurtrière ou les décès accidentels (Bubbins c. Royaume-Uni, no 50196/99, § 136, CEDH 2005-II (extraits), et Pârvu c. Roumanie, no 13326/18, § 75, 30 août 2022).