Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  LORSE AND OTHERS v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Art. 3, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 13, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 3 with regard to the first applicant No violation of Art. 3 with regard to the other applicants No violation of Art. 8 No violation of Art. 13 Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 18.01.2000 - 52750/99
• EGMR, 28.08.2001 - 52750/99
• EGMR, 04.02.2003 - 52750/99

Wird zitiert von ... (43)Neu Zitiert selbst (12)

• EGMR, 15.07.2002 - 47095/99

  Russland, Haftbedingungen, EMRK, Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.02.2003 - 52750/99

  The question whether the purpose of the treatment was to humiliate or debase the victim is a factor further to be taken into account, but the absence of any such purpose cannot conclusively rule out a violation of Article 3 (see, for example, Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, § 74, ECHR 2001-III; Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, § 101, ECHR 2002-VI).

  Whilst it is an essential part of a prisoner's right to respect for family life that the prison authorities should assist him in maintaining contact with his family (see Messina v. Italy, no. 25498/94, § 61, ECHR 2000-X), the Court recognises at the same time that some measure of control over prisoners" contacts with the outside world is called for and is not of itself incompatible with the Convention (see Kalashnikov v. Russia (dec.), no. 47095/99, ECHR 2001-XI).

• EGMR, 18.01.2017 - 41576/98

  GANCI ET 12 AUTRES AFFAIRES CONTRE L'ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.02.2003 - 52750/99

  On the other hand, the removal from association with other prisoners for security, disciplinary or protective reasons does not in itself amount to inhuman treatment or degrading punishment (see Messina v. Italy (dec.), no. 25498/94, ECHR 1999-V).

  Whilst it is an essential part of a prisoner's right to respect for family life that the prison authorities should assist him in maintaining contact with his family (see Messina v. Italy, no. 25498/94, § 61, ECHR 2000-X), the Court recognises at the same time that some measure of control over prisoners" contacts with the outside world is called for and is not of itself incompatible with the Convention (see Kalashnikov v. Russia (dec.), no. 47095/99, ECHR 2001-XI).

• EGMR, 11.07.2002 - 28957/95

  Christine Goodwin ./. Vereinigtes Königreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.02.2003 - 52750/99

  The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points (see Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 28957/95, § 124, ECHR 2002-VI).

 
• EGMR, 26.03.1987 - 9248/81

  LEANDER c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.02.2003 - 52750/99

  Given that the word "remedy" within the meaning of Article 13 does not mean a remedy bound to succeed, but simply an accessible remedy before an authority competent to examine the merits of a complaint (see Lacko and Others v. Slovakia (dec.), no. 47237/99, 2 July 2002; K. v. the United Kingdom, application no. 11468/85, Commission decision of 15 October 1986, DR 50, p. 199), the Court considers that the proceedings before the Appeals Board and the possibility of interim injunction proceedings taken together provided the applicants with an effective remedy (see Leander v. Sweden, judgment of 26 March 1987, Series A no. 116, pp. 29-30, § 77).
• EGMR, 16.12.1999 - 24888/94

  Mord an James Bulger

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.02.2003 - 52750/99

  In order for a punishment or treatment associated with it to be "inhuman" or "degrading", the suffering or humiliation involved must in any event go beyond that inevitable element of suffering or humiliation connected with a given form of legitimate treatment or punishment (see V. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 24888/94, § 71, ECHR 1999-IX).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.02.2003 - 52750/99

  It prohibits in absolute terms torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the circumstances and the victim's behaviour (see, for example, Labita v. Italy [GC], no 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.02.2003 - 52750/99

  Treatment has been held by the Court to be "inhuman" because, inter alia, it was premeditated, was applied for hours at a stretch and caused either actual bodily injury or intense physical and mental suffering, and also "degrading" because it was such as to arouse in the victims feeling of fear, anguish and inferiority capable of humiliating and debasing them (see, for example, Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 92, ECHR 2000-XI).
• EGMR, 19.04.2001 - 28524/95

  PEERS v. GREECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.02.2003 - 52750/99

  The question whether the purpose of the treatment was to humiliate or debase the victim is a factor further to be taken into account, but the absence of any such purpose cannot conclusively rule out a violation of Article 3 (see, for example, Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, § 74, ECHR 2001-III; Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, § 101, ECHR 2002-VI).
• EGMR, 24.07.2001 - 44558/98

  VALASINAS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.02.2003 - 52750/99

  The Court has previously found that strip-searches may be necessary on occasions to ensure prison security or to prevent disorder or crime (see Valasinas v. Lithuania, no. 44558/98, § 117, ECHR 2001-VIII; Iwanczuk v. Poland, no. 25196/94, § 59, 15 November 2001, unreported; McFeeley et al. v. the United Kingdom, cited above, §§ 60-61).
• EKMR, 15.05.1980 - 8317/78

  McFEELEY et al. v. the UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.02.2003 - 52750/99

  v. the United Kingdom, application no. 8317/78, Commission decision of 15 May 1980, DR 20, p. 44).
• EKMR, 12.07.1984 - 10448/83

  D. contre la BELGIQUE
• EGMR, 20.01.2016 - 25196/94

  IWÁNCZUK CONTRE LA POLOGNE

• EGMR, 28.09.2015 - 23380/09

  BOUYID v. BELGIUM

  It is not for the Court to impose general rules of conduct on law-enforcement officers; instead, its task is limited to examining the applicants" individual situation to the extent that they allege that they were personally affected by the treatment complained of (see, mutatis mutandis, Lorsé and Others v. the Netherlands, no. 52750/99, § 62, 4 February 2003; Van der Ven v. the Netherlands, no. 50901/99, § 50, ECHR 2003-II; and Lindström and Mässeli v. Finland, no. 24630/10, § 41, 14 January 2014).
• BVerfG, 05.11.2016 - 2 BvR 6/16

  Bei der Anordnung der stichprobenartigen Durchsuchung von Strafgefangenen muss …

  Mit Entkleidungen und der Inspektion von Körperöffnungen verbundene Durchsuchungen können danach durch die Erfordernisse der Sicherheit und Ordnung der Haftanstalt gerechtfertigt sein; sie müssen aber in schonender Weise - unter anderem außerhalb möglichen Sichtkontakts anderer Gefangener oder unnötigerweise anwesenden Personals - und dürfen nicht routinemäßig, unabhängig von fallbezogenen Verdachtsgründen, durchgeführt werden (siehe im Einzelnen EGMR, Urteil vom 4. Februar 2003, Van der Ven ./. Niederlande, Beschwerde Nr. 50901/99, Rn. 62; Urteil vom 4. Februar 2003, Lorsé u.a. ./. Niederlande, Beschwerde Nr. 52750/99, Rn. 74;… Urteil vom 12. Juni 2007, Frérot ./. Frankreich, Beschwerde Nr. 70204/01, Rn. 41, 47;… Urteil vom 27. November 2012, Savics ./. Lettland, Beschwerde Nr. 17892/03, Rn. 133, 142 ff.; Urteil vom 10. Oktober 2013, Voloshyn ./. Ukraine, Beschwerde Nr. 15853/08, Rn. 53 f.; Urteil vom 14. Januar 2014, Lindström u.a. ./. Finnland, Beschwerde Nr. 24630/10, Rn. 43; Urteil vom 31. Juli 2014, Jaeger ./. Estland, Beschwerde Nr. 1574/13, Rn. 40 ff.; Urteil vom 14. Juni 2016, Pugzlys ./. Polen, Beschwerde Nr. 446/10, Rn. 58 ff.).
• BVerfG, 10.07.2013 - 2 BvR 2815/11

  Körperliche Durchsuchung im Strafvollzug (allgemeines Persönlichkeitsrecht; …

  Mit Entkleidungen und der Inspektion von Körperöffnungen verbundene Durchsuchungen können danach durch die Erfordernisse der Sicherheit und Ordnung der Haftanstalt gerechtfertigt sein; sie müssen aber in schonender Weise - unter anderem außerhalb möglichen Sichtkontakts anderer Gefangener oder unnötigerweise anwesenden Personals - und dürfen nicht routinemäßig, unabhängig von fallbezogenen Verdachtsgründen, durchgeführt werden (s. im Einzelnen EGMR…, Urteil vom 4. Februar 2003, Van der Ven ./. Niederlande, Beschwerde Nr. 50901/99, Rn. 62; Urteil vom 4. Februar 2003, Lorsé u.a. ./. Niederlande, Beschwerde Nr. 52750/99, Rn. 74;… Urteil vom 12. Juni 2007, Frérot ./. Frankreich, Beschwerde Nr. 70204/01, Rn. 41, 47;… Urteil vom 27. November 2012, Savics ./. Lettland, Beschwerde Nr. 17892/03, Rn. 133, 142 ff.).

 
• EGMR, 06.10.2005 - 13600/02

  BAYBASIN v. THE NETHERLANDS

  The ruling of the European Court of Human Rights [of 4 February 2003 in the case of Van der Ven v. the Netherlands, no. 52750/99] and the ruling of the interim-measures judge (voorzieningenrechter) of the Regional Court of The Hague of 7 July 2003, as cited by the [applicant], were given after (the major part of) the strip-searches and frisking of which complaint is made.

  For the determination of the appeal are also of relevance the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights of 4 February 2003 [Lorsé and Others v. the Netherlands and Van der Ven v. the Netherlands] (nos. 52750/99 and 50901/99).

  As regards the weekly strip-searches after the cell inspection it was held [in the case of Lorsé and Others] (no. 52750/99):.

  On 1 March 2003, in view of the Court's findings in its judgments of 4 February 2003 in the cases of Van der Ven v. the Netherlands (cited above) and Lorsé and Others v. the Netherlands (no. 52750/99), the EBI house rules (huisregels) were amended in that the practice of weekly routine strip-searches accompanying the weekly cell inspections was abandoned.

  (Van der Ven v. the Netherlands, Application no. 50901/99, ECtHR 4 February 2002, § 63; see also Lorsé et al v. the Netherlands, Application no. 52750/99, ECtHR 4 February 2002, § 74).

  The Court reiterates the general considerations as set out in its judgments in the similar cases of Van der Ven v. the Netherlands (no. 50901/99, §§ 46-53, ECHR 2003-II) and Lorsé and Others v. the Netherlands (no. 52750/99, §§ 58-65, 4 February 2003) and its findings in these cases.

• EGMR, 06.10.2005 - 14683/03

  SYLLA v. THE NETHERLANDS

  For the determination of the appeal are also of relevance the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights of 4 February 2003 [Lorsé and Others v. the Netherlands and Van der Ven v. the Netherlands] (nos. 52750/99 and 50901/99).

  As regards the weekly strip-searches after the cell inspection it was held [in the case of Lorsé and Others] (no. 52750/99):.

  On 1 March 2003, in view of the Court's findings in its judgments of 4 February 2003 in the cases of Van der Ven v. the Netherlands (cited above) and Lorsé and Others v. the Netherlands (no. 52750/99), the EBI house rules (huisregels) were amended in that the practice of weekly routine strip-searches accompanying the weekly cell inspections was abandoned.

  (Van der Ven v. the Netherlands, Application no. 50901/99, ECtHR 4 February 2002, § 63; see also Lorsé et al v. the Netherlands, Application no. 52750/99, ECtHR 4 February 2002, § 74).

  The Court reiterates the general considerations as set out in its judgments in the similar cases of Van der Ven v. the Netherlands (no. 50901/99, §§ 46-53, ECHR 2003-II) and Lorsé and Others v. the Netherlands (no. 52750/99, §§ 58-65, 4 February 2003) and its findings in these cases.

• EGMR, 04.07.2006 - 59450/00

  Ramírez Sánchez ./. Frankreich

  In order for a punishment or treatment associated with it to be "inhuman" or "degrading", the suffering or humiliation involved must in any event go beyond that inevitable element of suffering or humiliation connected with a given form of legitimate treatment or punishment (see, among other authorities, V. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 24888/94, § 71, ECHR 1999-IX; Indelicato, cited above, § 32; Ilascu and Others v. Moldova and Russia [GC], no. 48787/99, § 428, ECHR 2004-VII; and Lorsé and Others v. the Netherlands, no. 52750/99, § 62, 4 February 2003).
• EGMR, 12.06.2007 - 70204/01

  Erniedrigende Leibesvisitation eines Gefangenen

  Selon le Gouvernement, les circonstances de la présente cause ne sont pas comparables à celles des arrêts Van der Ven c. Pays-Bas (no 50901/99, CEDH 2003-II) et Lorsé c. Pays-Bas (no 52750/99), dans lesquels la Cour a conclu à la violation de l'article 3 dans le contexte de fouilles corporelles pratiquées sur des détenus.
• EGMR, 06.10.2005 - 8196/02

  SALAH v. THE NETHERLANDS

  On 1 March 2003, in view of the Court's findings in its judgments of 4 February 2003 in the cases of Van der Ven v. the Netherlands (cited above) and Lorsé and Others v. the Netherlands (no. 52750/99), the EBI house rules (huisregels) were amended in that the practice of weekly routine strip-searches accompanying the weekly cell inspections was abandoned.

  (Van der Ven v. the Netherlands, Application no. 50901/99, ECtHR 4 February 2002, § 63; see also Lorsé et al v. the Netherlands, Application no. 52750/99, ECtHR 4 February 2002, § 74).

  Reiterating the general considerations as set out in its judgments in the similar cases of Van der Ven v. the Netherlands (no. 50901/99, §§ 46-53, ECHR 2003-II) and Lorsé and Others v. the Netherlands (no. 52750/99, §§ 58-65, 4 February 2003) and its findings in these cases, the Court considers that, to the extent that this complaint concerns the weekly routine strip-searches to which the applicant was subjected during his stay in the EBI, it cannot determine on the basis of the case file the admissibility of this part of the application and that it is therefore necessary, in accordance with Rule 54 § 3 (b) of the Rules of Court, to give notice of this complaint to the respondent Government.

• EGMR, 18.03.2014 - 24069/03

  ÖCALAN c. TURQUIE (N° 2)

  In order for a punishment or the treatment associated with it to be "inhuman" or "degrading", the suffering or humiliation involved must in any event go beyond that inevitable element of suffering or humiliation connected with a given form of legitimate treatment or punishment (see, for example, V. v. the United Kingdom, cited above, § 71; Indelicato, cited above, § 32; Ilascu and Others v. Moldova and Russia [GC], no. 48787/99, § 428, ECHR 2004-VII; and Lorsé and Others v. the Netherlands, no. 52750/99, § 62, 4 February 2003).
• EGMR, 30.06.2015 - 41418/04

  KHOROSHENKO c. RUSSIE

  De même, dans le contexte des prisons de haute sécurité, l'application de mesures telles qu'une séparation physique peut être motivée par les impératifs de sécurité en vigueur au sein de l'établissement concerné ou par le risque qu'un détenu communique avec des organisations criminelles par le truchement de membres de sa famille (Lorsé et autres c. Pays-Bas, no 52750/99, §§ 83-86, 4 février 2003, et Van der Ven c. Pays-Bas, no 50901/99, §§ 69-72, CEDH 2003-II).
• EGMR, 09.10.2008 - 62936/00

  MOISEYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 03.04.2012 - 37575/04

  BOULOIS c. LUXEMBOURG
• EGMR, 06.12.2011 - 8595/06

  DE DONDER ET DE CLIPPEL c. BELGIQUE
• EGMR, 16.11.2017 - 72126/14

  CEESAY v. AUSTRIA
• EGMR, 06.07.2010 - 24027/07

  BABAR AHMAD AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 13.04.2017 - 66357/14

  PODESCHI v. SAN MARINO
• EGMR, 07.10.2021 - 49529/12

  SYRIANOS c. GRÈCE
• EGMR, 24.07.2012 - 64930/09

  CIUPERCESCU c. ROUMANIE (N° 2)
• EGMR, 14.12.2010 - 37575/04

  BOULOIS v. LUXEMBOURG
• EGMR, 14.01.2014 - 24630/10

  LINDSTRÖM AND MÄSSELI v. FINLAND
• EGMR, 09.09.2010 - 1033/07

  XIROS c. GRECE
• EGMR, 12.10.2023 - 82939/17

  TAKÓ AND VISZTNÉ ZÁMBÓ v. HUNGARY
• EGMR, 20.01.2011 - 19606/08

  PAYET c. FRANCE
• EGMR, 15.06.2010 - 35555/03

  CIUPERCESCU c. ROUMANIE
• EGMR, 15.05.2018 - 48106/13

  GOIA c. GRÈCE
• EGMR, 04.07.2013 - 4242/07

  RZAKHANOV v. AZERBAIJAN
• EGMR, 13.11.2007 - 65039/01

  SCHIAVONE c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 05.06.2014 - 33761/05

  TERESHCHENKO v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 06.07.2006 - 14683/03

  SYLLA v. THE NETHERLANDS
• EGMR, 06.07.2006 - 8196/02

  SALAH v. THE NETHERLANDS
• EGMR, 26.04.2018 - 74884/13

  TSARPELAS v. GREECE
• EGMR, 17.10.2013 - 9967/06

  VLADIMIR BELYAYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 10.05.2012 - 16906/10

  LIARTIS c. GRÈCE
• EGMR, 23.02.2010 - 35086/02

  MARIANO c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 01.12.2009 - 16702/04

  DELL'ANNA c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 21.10.2008 - 15750/02

  UYAN c. TURQUIE (N° 2)
• EGMR, 06.07.2006 - 13600/02

  BAYBASIN v. THE NETHERLANDS
• EGMR, 28.03.2006 - 70204/01

  FREROT c. FRANCE
• EGMR, 01.09.2015 - 37648/02

  PAOLELLO c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 17.11.2009 - 37936/04

  CORDI c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 04.03.2008 - 63748/00

  TASTAN c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 27.03.2008 - 28320/02

  GUIDI c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 18.01.2007 - 40225/02

  SOTIROPOULOU c. GRECE