Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  RYABTSEV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41 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) Violation of Article 6 - Right to a ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (11)Neu Zitiert selbst (18)

• EGMR, 21.09.2006 - 46661/99

  SÖYLEMEZ c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.11.2013 - 13642/06

  The Court has found in earlier cases in respect of confessions that the admission of statements obtained as a result of torture (compare Örs and Others v. Turkey, no. 46213/99, § 60, 20 June 2006; Harutyunyan v. Armenia, no. 36549/03, §§ 63, 64 and 66, ECHR 2007-III; and Levinta v. Moldova, no. 17332/03, §§ 101 and 104-05, 16 December 2008) or of other ill-treatment in breach of Article 3 (see Söylemez v. Turkey, no. 46661/99, §§ 107, 21 September 2006, and Tangiyev v. Russia, no. 27610/05, § 74, 11 December 2012) as evidence to establish the relevant facts in criminal proceedings rendered the proceedings as a whole unfair.
• EGMR, 28.06.2007 - 36549/03

  Recht auf ein faires Strafverfahren (Beweisverwertungsverbot; Verwertungsverbot …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.11.2013 - 13642/06

  The Court has found in earlier cases in respect of confessions that the admission of statements obtained as a result of torture (compare Örs and Others v. Turkey, no. 46213/99, § 60, 20 June 2006; Harutyunyan v. Armenia, no. 36549/03, §§ 63, 64 and 66, ECHR 2007-III; and Levinta v. Moldova, no. 17332/03, §§ 101 and 104-05, 16 December 2008) or of other ill-treatment in breach of Article 3 (see Söylemez v. Turkey, no. 46661/99, §§ 107, 21 September 2006, and Tangiyev v. Russia, no. 27610/05, § 74, 11 December 2012) as evidence to establish the relevant facts in criminal proceedings rendered the proceedings as a whole unfair.
• EGMR, 16.12.2008 - 17332/03

  LEVINTA v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.11.2013 - 13642/06

  The Court has found in earlier cases in respect of confessions that the admission of statements obtained as a result of torture (compare Örs and Others v. Turkey, no. 46213/99, § 60, 20 June 2006; Harutyunyan v. Armenia, no. 36549/03, §§ 63, 64 and 66, ECHR 2007-III; and Levinta v. Moldova, no. 17332/03, §§ 101 and 104-05, 16 December 2008) or of other ill-treatment in breach of Article 3 (see Söylemez v. Turkey, no. 46661/99, §§ 107, 21 September 2006, and Tangiyev v. Russia, no. 27610/05, § 74, 11 December 2012) as evidence to establish the relevant facts in criminal proceedings rendered the proceedings as a whole unfair.

 
• EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 27610/05

  TANGIYEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.11.2013 - 13642/06

  The Court has found in earlier cases in respect of confessions that the admission of statements obtained as a result of torture (compare Örs and Others v. Turkey, no. 46213/99, § 60, 20 June 2006; Harutyunyan v. Armenia, no. 36549/03, §§ 63, 64 and 66, ECHR 2007-III; and Levinta v. Moldova, no. 17332/03, §§ 101 and 104-05, 16 December 2008) or of other ill-treatment in breach of Article 3 (see Söylemez v. Turkey, no. 46661/99, §§ 107, 21 September 2006, and Tangiyev v. Russia, no. 27610/05, § 74, 11 December 2012) as evidence to establish the relevant facts in criminal proceedings rendered the proceedings as a whole unfair.
• EGMR, 13.06.2000 - 23531/94

  TIMURTAS c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.11.2013 - 13642/06

  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, 18.10.2001 - 31143/96

  INDELICATO c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.11.2013 - 13642/06

  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, 14.11.2013 - 13642/06

  An obligation to investigate "is not an obligation of result, but of means": not every investigation should necessarily be successful or come to a conclusion which coincides with the claimant's account of events; 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, 14.11.2013 - 13642/06

  In relation to 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-XV (extracts); Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 77, 4 October 2005; and Mouisel v. France, no. 67263/01, § 40, ECHR 2002-IX).
• EGMR, 02.11.2006 - 43393/98

  MATKO v. SLOVENIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.11.2013 - 13642/06

  Taking into account the applicant's description of the alleged ill-treatment, which was credible and consistent throughout the proceedings, and the contents of the medical certificate of 29 March 2004, the Court takes the view that the burden of proof rested on the authorities to account for the injuries at issue by providing a satisfactory and convincing explanation of their cause (see Zelilof v. Greece, no. 17060/03, § 44, 24 May 2007, and Polyakov, cited above, §§ 25 and 26) and to demonstrate that in each case the use of force was not excessive (see, mutatis mutandis, Rehbock v. Slovenia, no. 29462/95, § 72, ECHR 2000-XII, and Matko v. Slovenia, no. 43393/98, § 104, 2 November 2006).
• EGMR, 14.12.2006 - 4353/03

  TARARIEVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.11.2013 - 13642/06

  In relation to 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-XV (extracts); Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 77, 4 October 2005; and Mouisel v. France, no. 67263/01, § 40, ECHR 2002-IX).
• EGMR, 24.05.2007 - 17060/03

  ZELILOF v. GREECE
• EGMR, 29.01.2009 - 77018/01

  POLYAKOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 28.11.2000 - 29462/95

  REHBOCK c. SLOVENIE
• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

  RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE
• EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22535/93

  MAHMUT KAYA v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …
• EGMR, 22.09.1993 - 15473/89

  KLAAS c. ALLEMAGNE
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

• 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, 30.04.2015 - 13810/04

  SHAMARDAKOV v. RUSSIA

  Dans ces conditions, la Cour considère que, indépendamment de l'influence que les déclarations initiales du requérant faites à la police à la suite du traitement inhumain et dégradant subi ont pu avoir sur l'issue de la procédure dirigée contre lui, leur maintien dans le dossier a privé d'équité cette procédure dans son ensemble (voir Jalloh, précité § 99 ; Haroutyounian, précité, § 63 ; Gladychev c. Russie, no 2807/04, § 79, 30 juillet 2009 ; Ryabtsev c. Russie, no 13642/06, §§ 93-94, 14 novembre 2013, et El Haski c. Belgique, no 649/08, § 85, 25 septembre 2012).
• EGMR, 16.07.2015 - 12008/06

  ALEKSEY BORISOV 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, précité, § 58, et Ryabtsev c. Russie, no 13642/06, § 82, 14 novembre 2013).

 
• EGMR, 22.03.2022 - 60844/11

  DAURBEKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  For the relevant provisions of domestic law on the prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment and the procedure for examining a criminal complaint, see Lyapin v. Russia, no. 46956/09, §§ 96-102, 24 July 2014, and Ryabtsev v. Russia, no. 13642/06, §§ 48-52, 14 November 2013.
• EGMR, 01.03.2022 - 32267/08

  SALA KHAMIDOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  For the relevant provisions of domestic law on the prohibition of torture and other forms of ill-treatment and the procedure for examining a criminal complaint, see Ryabtsev v. Russia (no. 13642/06, §§ 48-52, 14 November 2013), and Lyapin v. Russia (no. 46956/09, §§ 96-102, 24 July 2014).
• EGMR, 11.01.2022 - 15476/08

  FREDRIKSEN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  For the relevant domestic law on the prohibition of torture and other forms of ill-treatment, procedure for examining a criminal complaint and the rights of suspects, see Ryabtsev v. Russia (no. 13642/06, §§ 48-52, 14 November 2013); Lyapin v. Russia (no. 46956/09, §§ 96-102, 24 July 2014); and Turbylev v. Russia (no. 4722/09, §§ 46-49, 6 October 2015).
• 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, 16.07.2015 - 57467/10

  SAMACHISA v. ROMANIA

  In addition, in respect of recourse to physical force during an arrest, the Court reiterates that while Article 3 does not prohibit the use of force in order to carry out a lawful arrest, such force must not be excessive and must be necessary given the circumstances of the case (see, among others, Altay v. Turkey, no. 22279/93, § 54, 22 May 2001; Polyakov v. Russia, no. 77018/01, § 25, 29 January 2009; and Ryabtsev v. Russia, no. 13642/06, § 65, 14 November 2013).
• EGMR, 03.10.2017 - 36620/07

  SHEVTSOVA c. RUSSIE

  Les dispositions de la législation nationale relatives à l'usage de la force par la police sont décrites dans l'arrêt Ryabtsev c. Russie (no 13642/06, §§ 42-46, 14 novembre 2013).
• EGMR, 31.05.2022 - 66619/10

  MELNIK AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  For the relevant provisions of domestic law on the prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment and the procedure for examining a criminal complaint (see Lyapin v. Russia, no. 46956/09, §§ 96-102, 24 July 2014, and Ryabtsev v. Russia, no. 13642/06, §§ 48-52, 14 November 2013).
• EGMR, 11.01.2022 - 49290/06

  MARSHALOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA