Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VARYAN v. ARMENIA

  Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-1) Exhaustion of domestic remedies;Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2 - Positive obligations;Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  VARYAN v. ARMENIA

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 3 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (14)Zitiert selbst (25)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 08.11.2022 - 2169/12

  HOVHANNISYAN v. ARMENIA and 1 other application

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2024 - 48998/14

  Rn. 60 The Law establishing the Internal Service Regulations of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Armenia ("the Internal Service Regulations"), which was enacted on 3 December 1996, is the principal legal instrument regulating military service in the Armenian armed forces (see also Hovhannisyan and Nazaryan v. Armenia, nos. 2169/12 and 29887/14, § 86, 8 November 2022).

  The Court notes that the Government have previously raised similar objections in other cases concerning fatalities in the army (see, for example, Nana Muradyan, cited above, § 101; Hovhannisyan and Nazaryan v. Armenia, nos. 2169/12 and 29887/14, § 92, 8 November 2022; and Hovhannisyan and Karapetyan, cited above § 64).

• EGMR, 01.07.2020 - 57129/10

  MIRZOYAN CONTRE L'ARMÉNIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2024 - 48998/14

  The relevant provisions of domestic law concerning compensation for damage, as in force at the material time, are set out in Mirzoyan v. Armenia (no. 57129/10, §§ 46-50, 23 May 2019).

  The Court notes that it has previously examined the issue of Armenia's jurisdiction in other cases concerning fatalities during military service in Nagorno-Karabakh and found that there was a jurisdictional link for the purposes of Article 1 of the Convention between Armenia and individuals who had died while performing military service in the territory in question (see Muradyan v. Armenia, no. 11275/07, §§ 123-27, 24 November 2016; Nana Muradyan v. Armenia, no. 69517/11, §§ 86-92, 5 April 2022; Dimaksyan v. Armenia, no. 29906/14, §§ 43 and 44, 17 October 2023; and Hovhannisyan and Karapetyan v. Armenia, no. 67351/13, §§ 59-63, 17 October 2023, concerning the deaths of conscripts during compulsory military service in Nagorno-Karabakh; and compare Mirzoyan v. Armenia no. 57129/10, §§ 55-56, 23 May 2019, concerning the murder of a conscript during compulsory military service in Nagorno-Karabakh).

• EGMR, 27.08.2019 - 32631/09

  Fall Magnitski: Russland verletzte mehrfach Menschenrechte

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2024 - 48998/14

  Rn. 131 This finding makes it unnecessary to examine the remaining aspects of the investigation (see, mutatis mutandis, Magnitskiy and Others v. Russia, nos. 32631/09 and 53799/12, § 272, 27 August 2019, and Anahit Mkrtchyan v. Armenia, no. 3673/11, § 101, 7 May 2020), including its independence and the level of public scrutiny.

• EGMR, 13.06.2002 - 38361/97

  ANGUELOVA v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2024 - 48998/14

  Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (see, among many other authorities, Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, §§ 109-11, ECHR 2002-IV, and Nana Muradyan, cited above, § 123).
• EGMR, 17.06.2008 - 21899/02

  ABDULLAH YILMAZ c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2024 - 48998/14

  Furthermore, States are required to ensure high professional standards among regular soldiers, whose acts and omissions - particularly vis-à-vis conscripts - could, in certain circumstances, engage the State's responsibility, inter alia under the substantive limb of Article 2 (see, in particular, Abdullah Yılmaz v. Turkey, no. 21899/02, §§ 56-57, 17 June 2008, and Nana Muradyan, cited above, § 122; see also, mutatis mutandis, Stoyanovi v. Bulgaria, no. 42980/04, § 61, 9 November 2010).
• EGMR, 20.05.2021 - 13527/18

  LAPSHIN v. AZERBAIJAN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2024 - 48998/14

  Rn. 104 Nevertheless, the material before the Court does not allow it to support "beyond reasonable doubt" (see the case-law quoted in paragraph 95 above) the hypothesis that T. Varyan's life was taken intentionally (contrast Beker, cited above, §§ 45-54, and Lapshin v. Azerbaijan, no. 13527/18, §§ 110-20, 20 May 2021; see also, mutatis mutandis, Mižigárová v. Slovakia, no. 74832/01, § 89, 14 December 2010).
• EGMR, 11.07.2006 - 18059/06

  WALTER v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2024 - 48998/14

  To rely on Article 13, an applicant must also have an arguable claim under another Convention provision (see, for instance, Walter v. Italy (dec.), no. 18059/06, 11 July 2006).
• EGMR, 07.06.2005 - 40145/98

  KILINÇ ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2024 - 48998/14

  Such rules must require the adoption of practical measures aimed at the effective protection of conscripts against the dangers inherent in military life and appropriate procedures for identifying shortcomings and errors liable to be committed in that regard by those in charge at different levels (see Kılınç and Others v. Turkey, no. 40145/98, § 41, 7 June 2005, and Mosendz, cited above, § 91).
• EGMR, 07.05.2020 - 3673/11

  MKRTCHYAN v. ARMENIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2024 - 48998/14

  Rn. 131 This finding makes it unnecessary to examine the remaining aspects of the investigation (see, mutatis mutandis, Magnitskiy and Others v. Russia, nos. 32631/09 and 53799/12, § 272, 27 August 2019, and Anahit Mkrtchyan v. Armenia, no. 3673/11, § 101, 7 May 2020), including its independence and the level of public scrutiny.
• EGMR, 12.10.2021 - 8663/08

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2024 - 48998/14

  The principles established in the above-cited Fernandes de Oliveira case, which concerned the suicide of a mentally ill man undergoing inpatient treatment in a State psychiatric hospital, apply equally to people in custody and, similarly, to conscripts (see Boychenko v. Russia, no. 8663/08, § 80, 12 October 2021, with further references, and Hovhannisyan and Nazaryan, cited above, § 121).
• EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 30677/10

  DURDU v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 09.11.2010 - 42980/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 38287/06

  SAHINKUSU c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 03.05.2022 - 39087/15

  AVETISYAN v. ARMENIA
• EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91
• EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 36760/06

  STANEV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 01.06.2017 - 30500/11

  MALIK BABAYEV v. AZERBAIJAN
• EGMR, 24.03.2009 - 27866/03

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 17.01.2013 - 52013/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 24.11.2016 - 11275/07

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 05.04.2022 - 69517/11

  MURADYAN v. ARMENIA
• EGMR, 17.10.2023 - 67351/13

  HOVHANNISYAN AND KARAPETYAN v. ARMENIA
• EGMR, 17.10.2023 - 29906/14

  DIMAKSYAN v. ARMENIA
• EGMR, 21.10.2014 - 61183/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 11.10.2022 - 35814/14

  MALKHASYAN v. ARMENIA

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 17.09.2026 - 54266/17

  MARGARYAN v. ARMENIA

  It further notes that it has previously addressed the issue of Armenia's jurisdiction in several other cases concerning fatalities during military service in Nagorno-Karabakh prior to September 2023, finding a jurisdictional link for the purposes of Article 1 of the Convention between Armenia and conscripts of the Armenian army who had died while performing military service in the territory in question (see, among the most recent authorities, Varyan v. Armenia, no. 48998/14, §§ 69-70, 4 June 2024, with further references, and Petrosyan v. Armenia, no. 51448/15, §§ 98-102, 9 January 2025, concerning the death of a conscript in a detention facility in the "NKR").
• EGMR, 25.03.2025 - 40410/07

  KOSTIC v. SERBIA

  In the context of fatalities in military barracks and/or during compulsory military service, the comprehensive general principles under Article 2 of the Convention as regards the content of the State's positive substantive obligation to care for those at risk of suicide, including to take preventive operational measures to protect them from self-harm or harm by other individuals, and the scope of the positive procedural obligation to carry out an effective investigation and account for any deaths, are summarised in Malik Babayev, cited above, §§ 64-68 (substantive limb) and 79-81 (procedural limb); Boychenko v. Russia, no. 8663/08, §§ 76-80 (substantive limb) and 81-84 (procedural limb), 12 October 2021, and most recently Varyan v. Armenia, no. 48998/14, §§ 87-95 (substantive limb) and 96-100 (procedural limb), 4 June 2024).
• EGMR, 13.03.2025 - 39553/16

  VYACHESLAVOVA v. UKRAINE and 7 other applications

  Furthermore, the effectiveness of an investigation cannot be gauged simply on the basis of the number of reports made, witnesses questioned or other investigative measures taken (see Varyan v. Armenia, no. 48998/14, § 127, 4 June 2024).

• EGMR, 15.05.2025 - 30085/13

  SEKSIMP GROUP SRL v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

  31620/15 and 2 others, § 62, 12 December 2023; Varyan v. Armenia, no. 48998/14, § 72, 4 June 2024).
• EGMR, 09.01.2025 - 51448/15

  PETROSYAN v. ARMENIA

  Those cases concerned, among other things, the detention and conviction of a Jehovah's Witness for conscientious objection in the "NKR" (see Avanesyan v. Armenia, no. 12999/15, §§ 31-38, 20 July 2021, with further references) and fatalities involving individuals who had died while performing military service in the territory in question (see Muradyan, cited above, §§ 123-27; Nana Muradyan, cited above, §§ 86-92; Dimaksyan, cited above, §§ 43 and 44; Hovhannisyan and Karapetyan v. Armenia, no. 67351/13, §§ 59-63, 17 October 2023; and Varyan v. Armenia, no. 48998/14, §§ 69 and 70, 4 June 2024, concerning the deaths of conscripts during compulsory military service in Nagorno-Karabakh; also compare Mirzoyan v. Armenia, no. 57129/10, §§ 55-56, 23 May 2019, concerning the murder of a conscript while he had been performing his compulsory military service in Nagorno-Karabakh).
• EGMR, 30.04.2026 - 9970/19

  MANUCHARYAN v. ARMENIA

  Rn. 21 Starting with the substantive limb of the complaint, the general principles concerning the States' positive obligation to protect conscripts during compulsory military service have been summarised in Mosendz v. Ukraine (no. 52013/08, §§ 90-95, 17 January 2013); Malik Babayev v. Azerbaijan (no. 30500/11, §§ 64-68, 1 June 2017); and Varyan v. Armenia (no. 48998/14, §§ 87-95, 4 June 2024).
• EGMR, 26.03.2026 - 19234/18

  SHABRATSKYY AND SHABRATSKA v. UKRAINE

  The investigation's conclusions must be based on a thorough, objective and impartial analysis of all the relevant elements (see Varyan v. Armenia, no. 48998/14, § 127, 4 June 2024).
• EGMR, 04.12.2025 - 5497/17

  KHAGHAGHUTYAN YERKKHOSUTYUN v. ARMENIA

  2169/12 and 29887/14, 8 November 2022; Dimaksyan v. Armenia, no. 29906/14, 17 October 2023; and Varyan v. Armenia, no. 48998/14, 4 June 2024), has no reason to question that at least a significant part of the information sought by the applicant NGO concerned a matter of public interest.
• EGMR, 26.03.2026 - 10761/16

  YENOKYAN v. ARMENIA

  The Court further notes that the Government are estopped from raising an objection that the applicant failed to exhaust domestic remedies since they raised it for the first time in their further observations of 18 March 2022 (see Varyan v. Armenia, no. 48998/14, § 75, 4 June 2024, with further references).
• EGMR, 09.10.2025 - 74995/17

  PLATON v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

  31620/15 and 2 others, § 62, 12 December 2023; and Varyan v. Armenia, no. 48998/14, § 72, 4 June 2024).
• EGMR, 06.03.2025 - 35950/20

  HASANI v. SWEDEN
• EGMR, 30.04.2025 - 4059/24

  LAVOCAT c. FRANCE
• EGMR - 26854/24 (anhängig)

  MKRTCHYAN v. ARMENIA
• EGMR - 46398/20 (anhängig)

  SARGSYAN v. ARMENIA