Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KOLESNIK v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 4 MRK
  Violation of Art. 3 (in case of extradition) Violation of Art. 5-1 Violation of Art. 5-4 (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (7)Zitiert selbst (7)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 11.10.2007 - 656/06

  NASRULLOYEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.06.2010 - 26876/08

  The Court has already found above that the first applicant's detention was not authorised in accordance with the relevant national law, and therefore she was unable to benefit from the provisions governing judicial review of the extensions (see Nasrulloyev v. Russia, no. 656/06, § 88, 11 October 2007; Ismoilov and Others v. Russia, no. 2947/06, § 153, 24 April 2008; and Ryabikin, cited above, § 139).
• EGMR, 07.07.1989 - 14038/88

  Jens Söring

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.06.2010 - 26876/08

  The Court notes the exceptional nature of the application of the "victim" notion in Article 3 cases involving extradition, namely, "by reason of foreseeable consequences" (see Soering v. the United Kingdom, 7 July 1989, § 90 Series A no. 161).
• EGMR, 11.01.2007 - 1948/04

  Somalia, Abschiebungshindernis, zielstaatsbezogene Abschiebungshindernisse, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.06.2010 - 26876/08

  However, it reiterates that in cases concerning aliens facing expulsion or extradition it is entitled to compare material made available by the Government with material from other reliable and objective sources (see Salah Sheekh v. the Netherlands, no. 1948/04, § 136, ECHR 2007-I (extracts), and Saadi v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 13229/03, §§ 131, ECHR 2008-...).

• EGMR, 07.06.2007 - 38411/02

  GARABAYEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.06.2010 - 26876/08

  The Court reiterates that it has held previously that extradition to Turkmenistan on criminal charges may entail a violation of Article 3. The following relevant factors were taken into account: credible and consistent reports from various reputable sources of widespread torture, beatings and use of force against criminal suspects by the Turkmen law-enforcement authorities; very poor conditions of detention; discrimination against persons of non-Turkmen ethnicity, which made them particularly vulnerable to abuses; the cumulative effect of the poor conditions of detention in view of the potential length of prison sentences; systematic refusal of the Turkmen authorities to allow any monitoring of the places of detention by international or non-government observers (see Soldatenko, cited above, § 71; Ryabikin, cited above, §§ 116, 119; and Garabayev v. Russia, no. 38411/02, § 78, ECHR 2007-VII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 19.06.2008 - 8320/04

  RYABIKIN v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.06.2010 - 26876/08

  For an overview of relevant international reports about the situation in Turkmenistan prior to the end of 2006, see Ryabikin v. Russia, no. 8320/04, §§ 91-98, 19 June 2008.
• EGMR, 08.01.2009 - 13476/04

  KHUDYAKOVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.06.2010 - 26876/08

  For a recent summary of the relevant Russian law and practice on issues of extradition of foreign nationals see Khudyakova v. Russia, no. 13476/04, §§ 33-48, 8 January 2009.
• EGMR, 04.12.2008 - 20113/07

  Y v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.06.2010 - 26876/08

  Since she has not yet been extradited, owing to an indication by the Court of an interim measure under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, the material date for the assessment of that risk is that of the Court's consideration of the case (for an overview of the relevant case-law on this matter see, for example, Y. v. Russia, no. 20113/07, §§ 74-82, 4 December 2008, with further references).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 07.01.2014 - 58802/12

  Sudan, unmenschliche Behandlung, Folter, SLM, Sudanese Liberation Movement, …

  Relying on the Court's case-law, they submitted that this factor had to be taken into account when assessing the applicant's risk of persecution (N. v. Finland, no. 38885/02, § 165, 26 July 2005, and Kolesnik v. Russia, no. 26876/08, § 70, 17 June 2010).
• EGMR, 11.10.2011 - 46390/10

  [ENG]

  It notes, firstly, that the order for his expulsion, having been upheld by the Supreme Administrative Court, is final and enforceable (see, mutatis mutandis, Shamayev and Others v. Georgia and Russia, no. 36378/02, § 358, ECHR 2005-III; Abdulazhon Isakov v. Russia, no. 14049/08, § 100, 8 July 2010; Karimov v. Russia, no. 54219/08, § 90, 29 July 2010; and Kolesnik v. Russia, no. 26876/08, § 63, 17 June 2010, and contrast Vijayanathan and Pusparajah v. France, 27 August 1992, § 46, Series A no. 241-B; Pellumbi v. France (dec.), no. 65730/01, 18 January 2005; Djemailji v. Switzerland (dec.), no. 13531/03, 18 January 2005; Etanji v. France (dec.), no. 60411/00, 1 March 2005; Shamayev and Others, cited above, §§ 354-55, ECHR 2005-III; and Nasrulloyev v. Russia, no. 656/06, § 60, 11 October 2007).
• EGMR, 03.07.2012 - 11209/10

  [ENG]

  Having regard to the above finding relating to Article 3, the Court considers that it is not necessary to examine the hypothetical question whether, in the event of extradition to Uzbekistan, there would be a violation of Article 8 (see Hilal, cited above, § 71; Saadi, cited above, § 170; and Kolesnik v. Russia, no. 26876/08, § 96, 17 June 2010).

• EGMR, 14.02.2017 - 46721/15

  ALLANAZAROVA c. RUSSIE

  Un certain nombre de rapports adoptés avant 2010 et relatifs à la situation au Turkménistan sont résumés dans l'arrêt Kolesnik c. Russie (no 26876/08, §§ 54-58, 17 juin 2010).
• EGMR, 15.05.2012 - 33809/08

  LABSI v. SLOVAKIA

  The relevant principles are summed up, for example, in Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy [GC], no. 27765/09, §§ 113-121, 23 February 2012; Saadi v. Italy [GC], no. 37201/06, §§ 124-148, ECHR 2008; Boutagni v. France, no. 42360/08, §§ 44-45, 18 November 2010; Ismoilov and Others v. Russia, no. 2947/06, §§ 115, 126 and 127, 24 April 2008; Khaydarov v. Russia, no. 21055/09, §§ 96-100 and 111, 20 May 2010; Shamayev and Others v. Georgia and Russia, no. 36378/02, §§ 334-339 and 344, ECHR 2005-III; Garayev v. Azerbaijan, no. 53688/08, §§ 67-75, 10 June 2010; Kolesnik v. Russia, no. 26876/08, § 73, 17 June 2010; Ben Khemais v. Italy, no. 246/07, §§ 53-64, 24 February 2009; or Koktysh v. Ukraine, no. 43707/07, §§ 57-59 and 63-64, 10 December 2009.
• EGMR, 06.07.2021 - 34804/17

  A.B. v. RUSSIA

  The Court reiterates that previously it had concluded that individuals whose criminal prosecution is pursued by the Turkmen authorities face a real risk of ill-treatment in detention in Turkmenistan (see Allanazarova, cited above, § 76, and Kolesnik v. Russia, no. 26876/08, § 74, 17 June 2010).22. The Court notes that neither the independent reports (see paragraph 9 above) nor the parties' submissions in the present case provide at this moment a sufficient basis for a conclusion that individuals in the applicant's situation would no longer run such a risk.
• EGMR, 04.11.2010 - 15303/09

  Auslieferungshaft, Auslieferung, Russische Föderation, Usbekistan, erniedrigende …

  In such circumstances the Court does not consider that the statements by the Russian prosecutor's office and the District Court amounted to a declaration of the applicant's guilt, but rather described the "state of suspicion" which had served as the basis for the extradition request and the subsequent decision to extradite him (in contrast to Ismoilov, cited above, § 168; see also Kolesnik v. Russia, no. 26876/08, § 92, 17 June 2010 (not yet final)).