Weitere Entscheidung unten: EGMR, 05.07.2022

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 57269/14, 29330/15   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2018,38008
EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 57269/14, 29330/15 (https://dejure.org/2018,38008)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 20.11.2018 - 57269/14, 29330/15 (https://dejure.org/2018,38008)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 20. November 2018 - 57269/14, 29330/15 (https://dejure.org/2018,38008)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2018,38008) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    SAMESOV v. RUSSIA

    Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment;Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) ...

Sonstiges

 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (27)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

  • EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

    Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 57269/14
    Where an individual is taken into police custody in good health and is found to be injured on release, it is incumbent on the State to provide a plausible explanation of how those injuries were caused, failing which a clear issue arises under Article 3 (see Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 34, Series A no. 336, and Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 87, ECHR 1999-V).
  • EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

    LABITA c. ITALIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 57269/14
    That investigation should be capable of leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 131, ECHR 2000-IV).
  • EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

    RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 57269/14
    Where an individual is taken into police custody in good health and is found to be injured on release, it is incumbent on the State to provide a plausible explanation of how those injuries were caused, failing which a clear issue arises under Article 3 (see Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 34, Series A no. 336, and Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 87, ECHR 1999-V).
  • EGMR, 20.06.2013 - 63638/09

    TURLUYEVA v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 57269/14
    Thus, the mere fact that appropriate steps were not taken to reduce the risk of collusion between alleged perpetrators amounts to a significant shortcoming in the adequacy of the investigation (see, mutatis mutandis, Ramsahai and Others v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 52391/99, § 330, ECHR 2007-II, and Turluyeva v. Russia, no. 63638/09, § 107, 20 June 2013).
  • EGMR, 05.11.2013 - 36716/07

    MESUT DENIZ v. TURKEY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 57269/14
    Furthermore, the investigation must be independent, impartial and subject to public scrutiny (see Mesut Deniz v. Turkey, no. 36716/07, § 52, 5 November 2013).
  • EGMR - 26955/20 (anhängig)

    ZARIPOV v. RUSSIA and 6 other applications

    The applications concern complaints raised under Article 3 of the Convention relating to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see Lyapin v. Russia, no. 46956/09, §§ 128-40, 24 July 2014, and Samesov v. Russia, no. 57269/14, §§ 54-63, 20 November 2018).

    In Lyapin v. Russia, no. 46956/09, §§ 128-40, 24 July 2014 and Samesov v. Russia, no. 57269/14, §§ 54-63, 20 November 2018, as well as in Kuchta and Metel v. Poland, no. 76813/16, § 88, 2 September 2021, the Court has already found that the authorities' refusal to institute a fully-fledged criminal investigation into the credible allegations of ill-treatment, as well as the lack of assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the use of lawful force by the police violated procedural obligation under Article 3 of the Convention.

    According to findings in Lyapin v. Russia, no. 46956/09, §§ 128-40, 24 July 2014 and Samesov v. Russia, no. 57269/14, §§ 54-63, 20 November 2018, the refusal of the authorities to conduct a full criminal investigation into the credible allegations of ill-treatment is a violation of procedural obligation under Article 3 of the Convention.

  • EGMR, 11.01.2024 - 62807/09

    MASLOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    Furthermore, in the cases of Lyapin v. Russia, no. 46956/09, §§ 128-40, 24 July 2014, and Samesov v. Russia, no. 57269/14, §§ 54-63, 20 November 2018, as well as in Kuchta and Metel v. Poland, no. 76813/16, § 88, 2 September 2021, the Court has already found, in particular, that the authorities' refusal to open a fully-fledged criminal investigation into the credible allegations of ill-treatment, as well as the lack of assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the use of lawful force by the police were indicative of the State's failure to fulfil its procedural obligation under Article 3 of the Convention.
  • EGMR, 14.09.2023 - 27284/17

    KOZAYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    Furthermore, in the cases of Lyapin v. Russia, no. 46956/09, §§ 128-40, 24 July 2014, and Samesov v. Russia, no. 57269/14, §§ 54-63, 20 November 2018, as well as in Kuchta and Metel v. Poland, no. 76813/16, § 88, 2 September 2021, the Court has already found, in particular, that the authorities' refusal to open a fully-fledged criminal investigation into the credible allegations of ill-treatment, as well as the lack of assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the use of lawful force by the police were indicative of the State's failure to fulfil its procedural obligation under Article 3 of the Convention.
     
  • EGMR, 30.11.2023 - 41071/18

    TINGAYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    Furthermore, in the cases of Lyapin v. Russia, no. 46956/09, §§ 128-40, 24 July 2014, and Samesov v. Russia, no. 57269/14, §§ 54-63, 20 November 2018, as well as in Kuchta and Metel v. Poland, no. 76813/16, § 88, 2 September 2021, the Court has already found, in particular, that the authorities' refusal to open a fully-fledged criminal investigation into the credible allegations of ill-treatment, as well as the lack of assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the use of lawful force by the police were indicative of the State's failure to fulfil its procedural obligation under Article 3 of the Convention.
  • EGMR, 23.11.2023 - 40311/19

    MUZHETSKIY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    Furthermore, in the cases of Lyapin v. Russia, no. 46956/09, §§ 128-40, 24 July 2014, and Samesov v. Russia, no. 57269/14, §§ 54-63, 20 November 2018, as well as in Kuchta and Metel v. Poland, no. 76813/16, § 88, 2 September 2021, the Court has already found, in particular, that the authorities' refusal to open a fully-fledged criminal investigation into the credible allegations of ill-treatment, as well as the lack of assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the use of lawful force by the police were indicative of the State's failure to fulfil its procedural obligation under Article 3 of the Convention.
  • EGMR, 07.09.2023 - 58533/18

    SHAROV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    Furthermore, in the cases of Lyapin v. Russia, no. 46956/09, §§ 128-40, 24 July 2014, and Samesov v. Russia, no. 57269/14, §§ 54-63, 20 November 2018, as well as in Kuchta and Metel v. Poland, no. 76813/16, § 88, 2 September 2021, the Court has already found, in particular, that the authorities' refusal to open a fully-fledged criminal investigation into the credible allegations of ill-treatment, as well as the lack of assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the use of lawful force by the police were indicative of the State's failure to fulfil its procedural obligation under Article 3 of the Convention.
  • EGMR, 29.08.2023 - 25276/15

    VERZILOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    The authorities had to initiate an investigation proper, in which the whole range of investigative measures could be carried out, including the questioning of witnesses, confrontations and identification parades (see Lyapin v. Russia, no. 46956/09, §§ 129 and 132-36, 24 July 2014, and Samesov v. Russia, no. 57269/14, §§ 51-52 and 54, 20 November 2018).
  • EGMR, 05.10.2023 - 60851/12

    VARZHABETYAN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    Furthermore, in the cases of Lyapin v. Russia, no. 46956/09, §§ 128-40, 24 July 2014, and Samesov v. Russia, no. 57269/14, §§ 54-63, 20 November 2018, as well as in Kuchta and Metel v. Poland, no. 76813/16, § 88, 2 September 2021, the Court has already found, in particular, that the authorities' refusal to open a fully-fledged criminal investigation into the credible allegations of ill-treatment, as well as the lack of assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the use of lawful force by the police were indicative of the State's failure to fulfil its procedural obligation under Article 3 of the Convention.
  • EGMR, 28.09.2023 - 75045/11

    PUGACHEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    Furthermore, in the cases of Lyapin v. Russia, no. 46956/09, §§ 128-40, 24 July 2014, and Samesov v. Russia no. 57269/14, §§ 54-63, 20 November 2018, as well as in Kuchta and Metel v. Poland, no. 76813/16, § 88, 2 September 2021, the Court has already found, in particular, that the authorities' refusal to open a fully-fledged criminal investigation into the credible allegations of ill-treatment, as well as the lack of assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the use of lawful force by the police were indicative of the State's failure to fulfil its procedural obligation under Article 3 of the Convention.
  • EGMR, 14.09.2023 - 4792/22

    ABAKUMETS AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    Furthermore, in the cases of Lyapin v. Russia, no. 46956/09, §§ 128-40, 24 July 2014, and Samesov v. Russia, no. 57269/14, §§ 54-63, 20 November 2018, as well as in Kuchta and Metel v. Poland, no. 76813/16, § 88, 2 September 2021, the Court has already found, in particular, that the authorities' refusal to institute a fully-fledged criminal investigation into the credible allegations of ill-treatment, as well as the lack of assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the use of lawful force by the police were indicative of the State's failure to comply with its procedural obligation under Article 3 of the Convention.
  • EGMR, 28.09.2023 - 18032/19

    BARONIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 28.09.2023 - 58772/18

    IVANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 28.09.2023 - 54250/18

    KOLESNIKOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 07.09.2023 - 15380/19

    TARASOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 23.11.2023 - 31186/22

    KOMPANEYETS AND PETROSYAN v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 14.09.2023 - 41761/20

    KUSHNIKOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 14.09.2023 - 30389/19

    GOLOVACHEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 12.09.2023 - 28834/19

    LAPUNOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 52734/16 (anhängig)

    LEBEDEV AND BODNAR v. RUSSIA and 9 other applications

  • EGMR - 2504/19 (anhängig)

    FRENKEL v. RUSSIA and 9 other applications

  • EGMR - 16678/17 (anhängig)

    CHEMURZIYEVA v. RUSSIA an d4 other applications

  • EGMR - 67357/17 (anhängig)

    TORCHINSKIY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA and 3 other applications

  • EGMR - 12881/21 (anhängig)

    LYANOV v. RUSSIA and 4 other applications

  • EGMR, 24.05.2022 - 1223/12

    DOKUKINY v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 15.10.2019 - 13768/06

    BOZHKOV c. RUSSIE

  • EGMR - 77068/14 (anhängig)

    KARPYUK v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 18.07.2019 - 8971/10

    GOGALADZE v. GEORGIA

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 05.07.2022 - 50942/08, 24592/10, 75186/11, 62510/12, 29330/15, 13123/16   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2022,16442
EGMR, 05.07.2022 - 50942/08, 24592/10, 75186/11, 62510/12, 29330/15, 13123/16 (https://dejure.org/2022,16442)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 05.07.2022 - 50942/08, 24592/10, 75186/11, 62510/12, 29330/15, 13123/16 (https://dejure.org/2022,16442)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 05. Juli 2022 - 50942/08, 24592/10, 75186/11, 62510/12, 29330/15, 13123/16 (https://dejure.org/2022,16442)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2022,16442) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    IVANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    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 5 - Right to ...

Sonstiges

 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (21)

  • EGMR - 24592/10 (anhängig)

    KNYAZKINY v. RUSSIA and 4 other applications

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2022 - 50942/08
    Preliminary objections 3. In their additional observations and submissions on just satisfaction in the cases of Mr Aleksandr Knyazkin and Mr Andrey Knyazkin (no. 24592/10) and Mr I.Z. (no. 62510/12) the Government submitted for the first time that the applicants had failed to exhaust domestic remedies.

    Effectiveness of the investigation into the alleged ill-treatment 10. Firstly, the investigative authorities dismissed the credible allegations of ill-treatment by State officers in the cases of Mr Ivanov (no. 50942/08), Mr Aleksandr Knyazkin and Mr Andrey Knyazkin (no. 24592/10), Mr Krysyuk (no.75186/11) and Mr Demerchyan (no. 29330/15) after summary pre-investigative inquiries.

    OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE CONVENTION UNDER THE WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 20. Mr Ivanov (no. 50942/08), Mr Andrey Knyazkin (no.24592/10), Mr Krysyuk (no. 75186/11), Mr Vyacheslav Piskunov and Mr Gennadiy Piskunov (no.13123/16) submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, given the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see Appendix II).

    OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE CONVENTION 21. Lastly, the Court has examined the remaining complaint under Article 6 of the Convention submitted by Mr Aleksandr Knyazkin (the first applicant in the case no. 24592/10) regarding the fairness of the criminal proceedings against him.

    Mr Aleksandr Knyazkin and Mr Andrey Knyazkin (no. 24592/10), made no claims regarding just satisfaction.

    Decides to join the applications; Declares Mr Aleksandr Knyazkin's (the first applicant in the case no. 24592/10) complaint under Article 6 of the Convention inadmissible and the remainder of the applications admissible; Holds that there has been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention under its substantive and procedural limbs in respect of all of the applicants; Holds that there has been a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention in respect of Mr Vyacheslav Piskunov and Mr Gennadiy Piskunov (no. 13123/16); Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in respect of Mr Ivanov (no. 50942/08) and Mr Andrey Knyazkin (the second applicant in the case no. 24592/10); Holds that there has been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention in respect of Mr Krysyuk (no. 75186/11); Holds that the respondent State has failed to comply with its obligations under Article 34 of the Convention in the case of Mr Krysyuk (no. 75186/11); Holds that there is no need to examine the complaints under Article 13 of the Convention; Holds (a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in Appendix II, plus any tax that may be chargeable to them.

    24592/10.

    24592/10.

  • EGMR - 13123/16 (anhängig)

    PISKUNOVY v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2022 - 50942/08
    29330/15 and 13123/16 by a Committee;.

    Lastly, in the case of Mr Vyacheslav Piskunov and Mr Gennadiy Piskunov (no. 13123/16) the investigative authorities opened criminal cases into the applicants' allegations in more than six months and one year respectively after the receipt of the applicants' first complaints.

    Having regard to the applicants' injuries confirmed by medical evidence, the Court concludes that the ill-treatment of Mr I.Z. (no. 62510/12), Mr Demerchyan (29330/15) and Mr Vyacheslav Piskunov (the first applicant in the case no. 13123/16) amounted to torture within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention.

    OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE CONVENTION UNDER THE WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 20. Mr Ivanov (no. 50942/08), Mr Andrey Knyazkin (no.24592/10), Mr Krysyuk (no. 75186/11), Mr Vyacheslav Piskunov and Mr Gennadiy Piskunov (no.13123/16) submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, given the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see Appendix II).

    Mr Ivanov (no. 50942/08), Mr Demerchyan (no. 29330/15), Mr Vyacheslav Piskunov and Mr Gennadiy Piskunov (no. 13123/16), also claimed costs and expenses.

    Decides to join the applications; Declares Mr Aleksandr Knyazkin's (the first applicant in the case no. 24592/10) complaint under Article 6 of the Convention inadmissible and the remainder of the applications admissible; Holds that there has been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention under its substantive and procedural limbs in respect of all of the applicants; Holds that there has been a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention in respect of Mr Vyacheslav Piskunov and Mr Gennadiy Piskunov (no. 13123/16); Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in respect of Mr Ivanov (no. 50942/08) and Mr Andrey Knyazkin (the second applicant in the case no. 24592/10); Holds that there has been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention in respect of Mr Krysyuk (no. 75186/11); Holds that the respondent State has failed to comply with its obligations under Article 34 of the Convention in the case of Mr Krysyuk (no. 75186/11); Holds that there is no need to examine the complaints under Article 13 of the Convention; Holds (a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in Appendix II, plus any tax that may be chargeable to them.

    13123/16.

    13123/16.

  • EGMR, 26.11.2019 - 2991/06

    BELUGIN v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2022 - 50942/08
    7077/06 and 12 others, §§ 78-79, 26 June 2018; and Belugin v. Russia, no. 2991/06, §§ 69-71, 26 November 2019).

    Domestic courts failed to conduct a comprehensive review of his credible allegations in that regard (see Belugin v. Russia, no. 2991/06, § 71, 26 November 2019).

    Domestic courts failed to conduct a comprehensive review of his credible allegations in that regard (see Belugin v. Russia, no. 2991/06, § 71, 26 November 2019).

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht