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 ... (17)Zitiert selbst (16)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• 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, 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, 17.03.2009 - 15828/03

  SALMANOGLU AND POLATTAS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 22867/05

  Lastly, the Court reiterates that, in a number of cases concerning alleged ill-treatment in custody where the prosecution of the alleged perpetrators has been time-barred following lengthy proceedings, it has noted that the criminal-law system has proved to be far from rigorous in ensuring the effective prevention of unlawful acts such as those complained of by the applicants (see, among other authorities, Müdet Kömürcü v. Turkey (no. 2), no. 40160/05, § 30, 21 July 2009; SalmanoÄŸlu and Polattas v. Turkey, no. 15828/03, § 101; 17 March 2009; and ErdoÄŸan Yılmaz and Others v. Turkey, no. 19374/03, § 57, 14 October 2008).

• EGMR, 14.10.2008 - 19374/03

  ERDOGAN YILMAZ AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 22867/05

  Lastly, the Court reiterates that, in a number of cases concerning alleged ill-treatment in custody where the prosecution of the alleged perpetrators has been time-barred following lengthy proceedings, it has noted that the criminal-law system has proved to be far from rigorous in ensuring the effective prevention of unlawful acts such as those complained of by the applicants (see, among other authorities, Müdet Kömürcü v. Turkey (no. 2), no. 40160/05, § 30, 21 July 2009; SalmanoÄŸlu and Polattas v. Turkey, no. 15828/03, § 101; 17 March 2009; and ErdoÄŸan Yılmaz and Others v. Turkey, no. 19374/03, § 57, 14 October 2008).
• EGMR, 21.07.2009 - 40160/05

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 22867/05

  Lastly, the Court reiterates that, in a number of cases concerning alleged ill-treatment in custody where the prosecution of the alleged perpetrators has been time-barred following lengthy proceedings, it has noted that the criminal-law system has proved to be far from rigorous in ensuring the effective prevention of unlawful acts such as those complained of by the applicants (see, among other authorities, Müdet Kömürcü v. Turkey (no. 2), no. 40160/05, § 30, 21 July 2009; SalmanoÄŸlu and Polattas v. Turkey, no. 15828/03, § 101; 17 March 2009; and ErdoÄŸan Yılmaz and Others v. Turkey, no. 19374/03, § 57, 14 October 2008).
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Einstufung des in französischer Haft zugefügten Übels als Folter - Verpflichtung …

  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, 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, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

  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, 14.03.2002 - 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, 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, 24.07.2008 - 41461/02

  VLADIMIR ROMANOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 04.10.2005 - 3456/05

  SARBAN v. MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 30.09.2004 - 50222/99

  KRASTANOV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 15.02.2007 - 18/03

  VANZHULA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 14.12.2006 - 4353/03

  TARARIEVA c. RUSSIE
• EGMR, 07.12.2006 - 65859/01

  SHEYDAYEV v. RUSSIA

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• 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; İzci v. Turkey, no. 42606/05, § 72, 23 July 2013; Yazıcı 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 Beganović v. Croatia, no. 46423/06, § 85, 25 June 2009).
• EGMR, 24.07.2014 - 46956/09

  [ENG]

  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, 03.07.2014 - 37966/07

  ANTAYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Bearing in mind the authorities" obligation to account for injuries caused to persons within their control (see Ablyazov v. Russia, no. 22867/05, § 49, 30 October 2012), the Court finds it established that the injuries recorded in the medical reports resulted from the treatment of which the applicants complained and for which the Government bear responsibility.

• EGMR, 14.11.2013 - 13642/06

  [ENG]

  Such deficiencies on the part of the authorities caused, in the Court's view, a loss of precious time and complicated, if not made impossible, any further investigation of the applicant's allegations (see, for similar reasoning, Ablyazov v. Russia, no. 22867/05, § 58, 30 October 2012).
• EGMR, 07.03.2017 - 68059/13

  V.K. v. RUSSIA

  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, Beganović v. Croatia, no. 46423/06, § 85, 25 June 2009; Nikiforov v. Russia, no. 42837/04, § 54, 1 July 2010; Ablyazov v. Russia, no. 22867/05, §§ 57 and 59, 30 October 2012; Yazıcı and Others v. Turkey (no. 2), no. 45046/05, § 27, 23 April 2013; and İzci v. Turkey, no. 42606/05, § 72, 23 July 2013).
• 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, 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, 23.10.2014 - 33856/05

  [ENG]

  Such deficiencies on the part of the authorities caused, in the Court's view, precious time to be lost and made any further investigation of the applicant's allegations complicated, if not impossible (see, for similar reasoning, Ablyazov v. Russia, no. 22867/05, § 58, 30 October 2012).
• EGMR, 28.11.2013 - 33954/05

  [ENG]

  Bearing in mind the authorities" obligation to account for injuries caused to persons within their control (Ablyazov v. Russia, no. 22867/05, § 49, 30 October 2012) and in the absence of a convincing and plausible explanation by the Government in the instant case, the Court finds it established that the injuries recorded in the medical report were the result of the treatment of which the applicant complained and for which the Government bears responsibility (see Polonskiy v. Russia, no. 30033/05, § 123, 19 March 2009).
• EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 58559/09

  [ENG]

  On one reading of this case-law, it requires that, for the Court to refrain from considering the substantive complaint in the international proceedings brought before it, there must be a domestic procedure capable of leading to the identification and punishment of the perpetrator, not that that procedure must have in fact have done so (see, for example, the language used in Fadime and Turan Karabulut v. Turkey, no. 23872/04, 27 May 2010, § 39; and Ablyazov v. Russia, no. 22867/05, 30 October 2012, § 54).
• EGMR, 11.04.2013 - 17828/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 02.05.2013 - 44283/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 16.07.2015 - 12008/06

  BORISOV c. RUSSIE
• EGMR, 03.10.2017 - 36620/07

  SHEVTSOVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 21062/07

  IGOSHIN c. RUSSIE
• EGMR, 15.11.2016 - 43083/06

  ZOLOTAREV c. RUSSIE
• EGMR - 53373/14 (anhängig)

  ZHDAN v. RUSSIA