Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  M.L. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention;Article 5-1-f - Expulsion);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Review of lawfulness of detention) ...

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Zitiert selbst (13)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR - 18570/19 (anhängig)

  F. AND Z. v. RUSSIA and 3 other applications

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.04.2021 - 25079/19

  (Applications nos. 25079/19 and 18570/19).

  the applications (nos. 18570/19 and 25079/19) against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") by three undocumented applicants who claimed to be North Korean nationals, Mr F., Z. and M.L. ("the applicants"), on 5 April 2019 and 13 May 2019 respectively;.

  the decisions to indicate an interim measure to the respondent Government under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court adopted on 5 April 2019 (18570/19) and 13 May 2019 (25079/19);.

  Accordingly, and in view of the complaints raised, the Court decides to strike out of its list of cases application no. 18570/19 in its entirety and application no. 25079/19 in part, so far as it concerns complaints of death and/or ill-treatment in the event of the M.L.'s expulsion to North Korea and the alleged absence of effective domestic remedies in respect of these claims.

• EGMR, 15.10.2015 - 40081/14

  Russland verurteilt - Keine Zwangsausweisung nach Syrien

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.04.2021 - 25079/19

  If such proceedings are not carried out promptly, the detention will cease to be permissible under Article 5 § 1 (f) of the Convention (see L.M. and Others v. Russia, nos. 40081/14 and 2 others, § 146, 15 October 2015).
• EGMR, 18.04.2013 - 67474/11

  AZIMOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.04.2021 - 25079/19

  M.L. relied on the violations that the Court found in Azimov v. Russia (no. 67474/11, §§ 152 and 171-173, 18 April 2013), Kim v. Russia (no. 44260/13, §§ 41-57, 17 July 2014) and A.N. and Others v. Russia [Committee], (no. 61689/16 and 3 others, § 34, 23 October 2018).

• EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 44260/13

  KIM v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.04.2021 - 25079/19

  M.L. relied on the violations that the Court found in Azimov v. Russia (no. 67474/11, §§ 152 and 171-173, 18 April 2013), Kim v. Russia (no. 44260/13, §§ 41-57, 17 July 2014) and A.N. and Others v. Russia [Committee], (no. 61689/16 and 3 others, § 34, 23 October 2018).
• EGMR, 12.12.2017 - 29957/14

  SHEYKH ALI v. RUSSIA and 1 other application

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.04.2021 - 25079/19

  This was because, (i) as was clear from the information available at the time of it making that decision (and for a considerable time thereafter) the applicant was not (and would not be) at risk of being expelled and subjected to treatment allegedly in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, and (ii) the applicant could challenge before the domestic authorities any removal order issued in the future (see F.G. v. Sweden [GC], no. 43611/11, § 74, ECHR 2016, with further references, and M.S.A. v. Russia [Committee], no. 29957/14 and 8 others, §§ 32-33, 12 December 2017).
• EGMR, 23.10.2018 - 61689/16

  A.N. v. RUSSIA and 3 other applications

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.04.2021 - 25079/19

  M.L. relied on the violations that the Court found in Azimov v. Russia (no. 67474/11, §§ 152 and 171-173, 18 April 2013), Kim v. Russia (no. 44260/13, §§ 41-57, 17 July 2014) and A.N. and Others v. Russia [Committee], (no. 61689/16 and 3 others, § 34, 23 October 2018).
• EGMR, 14.02.2017 - 52722/15

  Asyl: Russland darf Syrer nicht abschieben

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.04.2021 - 25079/19

  The relevant domestic law and practice relating to the expulsion and detention of foreign nationals in Russia, refugee status, and temporary asylum is summarised in S.K. v. Russia, no. 52722/15, §§ 23-41, 14 February 2017 and K.G. v. Russia (dec.), no. 31084/18, §§ 18-22, 2 October 2018.
• EGMR, 29.10.2015 - 44095/14

  A.L. (X.W.) v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.04.2021 - 25079/19

  Under Russian law a specific decision requiring a foreigner's removal from the country must be delivered before a foreigner can be removed - for instance, an extradition order, a decision imposing the penalty of administrative removal for an administrative offence, or a decision declaring his presence in Russia undesirable and ordering his deportation; any such removal order can be challenged (see A.R. v. Russia, no. 25923/15, § 57, 10 May 2016, and Razigdad v. Russia [Committee] (dec.), no. 30764/13, § 38, 20 November 2018; also contrast A.L. (X.W.) v. Russia, no. 44095/14, § 65, 29 October 2015, in which an exclusion order had been issued because the applicant's presence in Russia had been deemed to be undesirable, and the order explicitly mentioned deportation).
• EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 30764/13

  RAZIGDAD v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.04.2021 - 25079/19

  Under Russian law a specific decision requiring a foreigner's removal from the country must be delivered before a foreigner can be removed - for instance, an extradition order, a decision imposing the penalty of administrative removal for an administrative offence, or a decision declaring his presence in Russia undesirable and ordering his deportation; any such removal order can be challenged (see A.R. v. Russia, no. 25923/15, § 57, 10 May 2016, and Razigdad v. Russia [Committee] (dec.), no. 30764/13, § 38, 20 November 2018; also contrast A.L. (X.W.) v. Russia, no. 44095/14, § 65, 29 October 2015, in which an exclusion order had been issued because the applicant's presence in Russia had been deemed to be undesirable, and the order explicitly mentioned deportation).
• EGMR, 02.10.2018 - 31084/18

  K.G. v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.04.2021 - 25079/19

  The relevant domestic law and practice relating to the expulsion and detention of foreign nationals in Russia, refugee status, and temporary asylum is summarised in S.K. v. Russia, no. 52722/15, §§ 23-41, 14 February 2017 and K.G. v. Russia (dec.), no. 31084/18, §§ 18-22, 2 October 2018.
• EGMR, 13.02.2018 - 47741/16

  MSKHILADZE v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 10.05.2016 - 25923/15

  A.R. v. RUSSIA
• RG, 07.07.1925 - I 25/25

  1. Welche Strafvorschriften gelten für solche unter der Herrschaft des …

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR - 18570/19 (anhängig)

  F. AND Z. v. RUSSIA and 3 other applications

  The applicant M.L. (application no. 25079/19) also complains that his detention pending expulsion is incompatible with the requirements of Article 5 § 1 (f) of the Convention in terms of the foreseeability of the length of such detention and that he does not have at his disposal an effective procedure by which he could challenge the lawfulness of his detention, as required by Article 5 § 4 of the Convention.

  Having regard to the Court's conclusion in the case of Azimov v. Russia (Azimov v. Russia, no. 67474/11, 18 April 2013), was the M.L.'s (application no. 25079/19) detention compatible with the requirements of Article 5 § 1 (f) of the Convention in terms of the foreseeability of the length of such detention?.

  25079/19.

• EGMR, 19.03.2024 - 27584/20

  K.J. AND C.C. v. RUSSIA and 2 other applications

  It does not specify any rules requiring the persons in question to be notified or to be able to contest the transfer (for more details about this agreement, see M.L. and Others v. Russia [Committee], no. 25079/19, §§ 24-25, 6 April 2021).

  Rn. 97 Accordingly, in the light of these considerations, and given the Court's recurrent findings of violations of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention in respect of foreigners detained indefinitely in Russia with a view to administrative removal, the Court finds that the length of K.J.'s detention exceeded what was reasonably required for the purpose pursued (see L.M. and Others v. Russia, cited above, §§ 149-52, with further references, and S.K. v. Russia, no. 52722/15, §§ 115 and 116, 14 February 2017; see also M.L. and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 25079/19 and 2 others, 6 April 2021, in which the Court found that the detention of a North Korean national pending expulsion was in violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention).

• EGMR, 08.02.2022 - 16473/19

  F.T. AND RAKHMANOV v. RUSSIA

  25079/19 and 18570/19, § 35, 6 April 2021; also, by contrast, A.L. (X.W.) v. Russia, no. 44095/14, § 65, 29 October 2015).