Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VESELOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 35, Art. 41 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 - Fair hearing) Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - award ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Veselov and Others v. Russia

Wird zitiert von ... (54)Zitiert selbst (8)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 04.11.2010 - 18757/06

  Recht auf ein faires Verfahren (Abgrenzung der unzulässigen Tatprovokation von …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 23200/10

  General principles relating to the guarantees of a fair trial in the context of undercover investigative techniques used to combat drug trafficking and corruption are set out in the Court's extensive case-law summarised in the case of Bannikova v. Russia (no. 18757/06, §§ 33-65, 4 November 2010).
• EGMR, 26.10.2006 - 59696/00

  KHUDOBIN v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 23200/10

  However, the subsequent use of such sources by the trial court to found a conviction is a different matter and is acceptable only if adequate and sufficient safeguards against abuse are in place, in particular a clear and foreseeable procedure for authorising, implementing and supervising the investigative measures in question (see Khudobin v. Russia, no. 59696/00, § 135, 26 October 2006, and Ramanauskas, cited above, § 53).
• EGMR, 29.04.1999 - 25642/94

  Anforderungen an die unverzügliche Vorführung der festgenommenen Person i.S.d. …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 23200/10

  It reiterates that an applicant who has exhausted a remedy that is apparently effective and sufficient cannot be required also to have tried others that were available but probably no more likely to be successful (see Aquilina v. Malta [GC], no. 25642/94, § 39, ECHR 1999-III).

• EGMR, 06.05.2003 - 73557/01

  SEQUEIRA contre le PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 23200/10

  In particular, they should be in possession of concrete and objective evidence showing that initial steps have been taken to commit the acts constituting the offence for which the applicant is subsequently prosecuted (see Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI; Eurofinacom v. France (dec.), no. 58753/00, ECHR 2004-VII; Shannon v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 67537/01, ECHR 2004-IV; Ramanauskas, cited above, §§ 63 and 64, and Malininas, cited above, § 36).
• EGMR, 06.04.2004 - 67537/01

  SHANNON c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 23200/10

  In particular, they should be in possession of concrete and objective evidence showing that initial steps have been taken to commit the acts constituting the offence for which the applicant is subsequently prosecuted (see Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI; Eurofinacom v. France (dec.), no. 58753/00, ECHR 2004-VII; Shannon v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 67537/01, ECHR 2004-IV; Ramanauskas, cited above, §§ 63 and 64, and Malininas, cited above, § 36).
• EGMR, 13.07.2006 - 26853/04

  POPOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 23200/10

  Furthermore, the Court refers to its settled case-law to the effect that when an applicant has suffered an infringement of his rights guaranteed by Article 6 of the Convention, he should, as far as possible, be put in the position in which he would have been had the requirements of that provision not been disregarded, and that the most appropriate form of redress would, in principle, be the reopening of the proceedings, if requested (see, mutatis mutandis, Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], no. 46221/99, § 210 in fine, ECHR 2005-IV; Malininas cited above, § 43; and Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 264, 13 July 2006).
• EGMR, 01.07.2008 - 10071/04

  MALININAS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 23200/10

  On 2 December 2011 the Committee of Ministers concluded the execution of the judgments in the cases of in Ramanauskas, cited above, and Malininas v. Lithuania (no. 10071/04, 1 July 2008), having adopted Resolution CM/ResDH(2011)231, which described the measures taken by the Government of Lithuania to prevent future violations of Article 6 § 1 on account of the use by the police of undercover agents:.
• EGMR, 21.02.2008 - 15100/06

  Recht auf ein faires Strafverfahren (unzulässige Tatprovokation; mittelbare …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 23200/10

  On 10 March 2011 the Committee of Ministers concluded the execution of the judgment in the case of Pyrgiotakis v. Greece (no. 15100/06, 21 February 2008), having adopted Resolution ResDH(2011)11 which read in so far as relevant:.

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 23.10.2014 - 54648/09

  Unzulässige Tatprovokation (Anstiftung; verbleibende Opferstellung im Sinne der …

  In Rauschgiftfällen hat er festgestellt, dass die Ermittler sich unter anderem dann nicht mehr passiv verhalten, wenn sie von sich aus Kontakt zu dem Beschwerdeführer aufnehmen, wenn sie ihr Angebot trotz einer anfänglichen Ablehnung seitens des Beschwerdeführers erneuern oder darauf beharren, wenn sie ihn mit Preisen, die den Marktwert übersteigen, ködern oder wenn sie durch Vorspiegelung von Entzugserscheinungen das Mitleid des Beschwerdeführers erregen (…siehe u. a. Bannikova, a. a. O., Rdnr. 47; und Veselov u. a../. Russland, Individualbeschwerden Nrn. 23200/10, 24009/07 und 556/10, § 92, 2. Oktober 2012).
• EGMR, 15.10.2020 - 40495/15

  Polizeiliche Tatprovokation (Begriff: mittelbare Tatprovokation - Bestimmtsein …

  In Rauschgiftfällen hat er festgestellt, dass die Ermittlungsbehörden sich unter anderem dann nicht mehr passiv verhalten, wenn sie von sich aus Kontakt zu dem Beschwerdeführer aufnehmen, wenn sie ihr Angebot trotz einer anfänglichen Ablehnung seitens des Beschwerdeführers erneuern oder darauf beharren, wenn sie ihn mit Preisen, die den Marktwert übersteigen, ködern oder wenn sie durch Vorspiegelung von Entzugserscheinungen das Mitleid des Beschwerdeführers erregen (…siehe u. a. Bannikova, a.a.O., Rdnr. 47; und Veselov u. a../. Russland, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 23200/10 und zwei weitere, Rdnr. 92, 2. Oktober 2012).
• EGMR, 18.12.2014 - 14212/10

  SCHOLER v. GERMANY

  In Betäubungsmittelfällen hat er festgestellt, dass sich die Ermittler unter anderem dann nicht mehr passiv verhalten, wenn sie von sich aus Kontakt zu dem Beschwerdeführer aufnehmen, wenn sie ihr Angebot trotz einer anfänglichen Ablehnung seitens des Beschwerdeführers erneuern oder darauf beharren, wenn sie den Durchschnittspreis überbieten oder wenn sie durch Vorspiegelung von Entzugserscheinungen das Mitleid des Beschwerdeführers erregen (…siehe u. a. Bannikova, a. a. O., Rdnr. 47; und Veselov u. a../. Russland, Individualbeschwerden Nrn. 23200/10, 24009/07 und 556/10, § 92, 2. Oktober 2012).

• EGMR, 20.04.2021 - 66152/14

  KUZMINA v. RUSSIA and 8 other applications

  It addresses the question whether the structural problem identified in Veselov and Others v. Russia (nos. 23200/10, 24009/07 and 556/10, §§ 88-94 and 126-27, 2 October 2012) and reiterated in Lagutin and Others v. Russia (nos. 6228/09, 19123/09, 19678/07, 52340/08 and 7451/09, § 134, 24 April 2014) persists.

  A comparative analysis of the national systems of authorising undercover operations in the Council of Europe member States is summarised in Veselov and Others v. Russia (nos. 23200/10, 24009/07 and 556/10, §§ 50-63, 2 October 2012).

  The applicants contended that their cases revealed the presence of the same underlying defect as that identified by the Court in the cases of Veselov and Others (nos. 23200/10 and 2 others, §§ 126-27, 2 October 2012), and Lagutin and Others v. Russia (nos. 6228/09 and 4 others, §§ 93, 115 and 134, 24 April 2014), in particular the absence of a clear and foreseeable procedure for authorising test purchases and operational experiments.

• EGMR, 24.04.2014 - 6228/09

  LAGUTIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  A comparative analysis of the national systems of authorisation of undercover operations in the Council of Europe member States is summarised in Veselov and Others v. Russia (nos. 23200/10, 24009/07 and 556/10, §§ 50-63, 2 October 2012).

  [2] See paragraphs 93 and 115 of the judgment and the previous cases of Vanyan v. Russia, no. 53203/99, §§ 46-47, 15 December 2005; Khudobin v. Russia, no. 59696/00, § 135, ECHR 2006-XII; Bannikova v. Russia, no. 18757/06, §§ 49-50, 4 November 2010; and Veselov and Others v. Russia, nos. 23200/10, 24009/07 and 556/10, §§ 106 and 126-127, 2 October 2012.

• OLG Braunschweig, 05.07.2022 - 4 EK 1/21

  Entschädigungsansprüche wegen überlanger Verfahrensdauer; Verfahrensaussetzung …

  Rn. 2 Mit Beschluss vom 14. Dezember 2020 hat der Senat zu dem Aktenzeichen 4 EK 18/20 das Verfahren betreffend die im Wege der Klagehäufung (§ 260 ZPO) geltend gemachten Ansprüche hinsichtlich zehn Ausgangsverfahren des Landgerichts Göttingen zu den Aktenzeichen 2 O 780/10, 2 O 430/10, 2 O 482/10, 2 O 556/10, 2 O 650/10, 2 O 686/10, 2 O 764/10, 2 O 586/10, 14 (2) O 787/10 und 14 (2) O 873/10 abgetrennt.

  Betreffend die hier gegenständlichen Ausgangsverfahren zu den Aktenzeichen 2 O 430/10, 2 O 482/10, 2 O 556/10, 2 O 586/10, 2 O 650/10, 2 O 686/10, 2 O 764/10 und 2 O 780/10 bestimmten die 2. Zivilkammer des Landgerichts das noch laufende Verfahren 2 O 1802/07 und betreffend die Ausgangsverfahren zu den Aktenzeichen 14 (2) O 787/10 und 14 (2) O 873/10 die 14. Zivilkammer das noch laufende Verfahren zu dem Aktenzeichen 14 (2) O 2179/07 jeweils zu Pilotverfahren der Hauptserie.

• EGMR, 14.02.2017 - 7600/09

  PATRASCU v. ROMANIA

  A comparative law study conducted by the Court on the legislation of twenty-two member States of the Council of Europe (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Croatia, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia", Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey and the United Kingdom) concerning the use of undercover agents in test purchases and similar covert operations is summarised in Veselov and Others v. Russia (nos. 23200/10, 24009/07 and 556/10, §§ 50-63, 2 October 2012).

  It is therefore crucial in each case to establish if the criminal act was already under way at the time when the source began collaborating with the police (see Veselov and Others v. Russia, nos. 23200/10, 24009/07 and 556/10, § 91, 2 October 2012).

• EGMR, 30.11.2017 - 22625/07

  KLIMOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  The Court reiterates that absence in the national legal system of a clear and foreseeable procedure for authorising test purchases of drugs remains a structural problem which exposes applicants to an arbitrary action by the State agents and prevents the domestic courts from conducting an effective judicial review of their entrapment pleas (see Veselov and Others v. Russia, nos. 23200/10 and 2 others, § 126, 2 October 2012).

  Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case-law (see, in particular, Veselov and Others v. Russia, nos. 23200/10 and 2 others, 2 October 2012; Mamontov and Others v. Russia, nos. 46796/06 and 2 others, 21 June 2016; and Akulin and Others v. Russia, nos. 14313/07 and 8 others, 22 March 2016), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.

• EGMR, 22.02.2018 - 74986/10

  PARAMONOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  The Court reiterates that absence in the national legal system of a clear and foreseeable procedure for authorising test purchases of drugs remains a structural problem which exposes applicants to an arbitrary action by the State agents and prevents the domestic courts from conducting an effective judicial review of their entrapment pleas (see Veselov and Others v. Russia, nos. 23200/10 and 2 others, § 126, 2 October 2012).

  Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case-law (see, in particular, Veselov and Others v. Russia, nos. 23200/10 and 2 others, 2 October 2012; Mamontov and Others v. Russia, nos. 46796/06 and 2 others, 21 June 2016; and Akulin and Others v. Russia, nos. 14313/07 and 8 others, 22 March 2016), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.

• EGMR, 23.11.2017 - 47074/12

  GRBA v. CROATIA

  23200/10, 24009/07 and 556/10, §§ 50-63, 2 October 2012).
• EGMR, 17.02.2026 - 6580/22

  GREEN ALLIANCE v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 28.06.2018 - 31536/07

  TCHOKHONELIDZE v. GEORGIA
• EGMR, 05.02.2019 - 13573/14

  TEPRA v. AUSTRIA
• EGMR, 16.07.2015 - 43490/07

  CIPRIAN VLADUÈš POP AND IOAN FLORIN POP v. ROMANIA
• EGMR, 26.03.2015 - 7614/09

  VOLKOV AND ADAMSKIY v. RUSSIA
• EGMR - 60854/14 (anhängig)

  BIBIKOV v. RUSSIA and 3 other applications
• EGMR, 19.11.2013 - 19267/05

  [FRE]
• EGMR, 09.02.2016 - 22486/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 10.07.2018 - 66215/12

  KUMITSKIY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 30.04.2015 - 2500/07

  LEBEDEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 27.11.2014 - 20696/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 30.10.2014 - 5753/09

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 18.01.2024 - 40018/16

  UGURYAN v. RUSSIA and 10 other applications
• EGMR, 26.03.2020 - 12233/10

  LIVADNIY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 15.05.2018 - 35517/11

  VIRGIL DAN VASILE c. ROUMANIE
• EGMR, 22.03.2016 - 14313/07

  AKULIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 25.08.2015 - 70841/10

  LELYUYKIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 12.11.2013 - 17711/07

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 26.03.2026 - 20488/21

  GAREYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 06.02.2025 - 24305/17

  LASHKIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 27.10.2022 - 26314/20

  KARALOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 15.09.2022 - 26190/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 09.03.2021 - 54339/09

  ZININ v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 13.12.2016 - 19185/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 46796/06

  MAMONTOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR - 66407/17 (anhängig)

  SHABAN v. UKRAINE
• EGMR, 18.07.2024 - 57301/18

  ZEMTSOV v. and 1 other application
• EGMR, 27.10.2022 - 31751/14

  SIROTA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 26.11.2020 - 46440/16

  MEDVEDEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 08.03.2016 - 65311/09

  MORARI v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 06.05.2014 - 25730/06

  VALKADOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR - 20977/18 (anhängig)

  MIROSHNIK v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 15.09.2022 - 33724/14

  DICHKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 19.07.2022 - 62082/10

  IVANOV v. RUSSIA and 9 other applications
• EGMR, 19.07.2022 - 60757/12

  ANZINA v. RUSSIA and 3 other applications
• EGMR, 07.12.2021 - 39703/07

  DANILIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 26.03.2020 - 7779/17

  BOKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 08.10.2019 - 40442/07

  MANELYUK AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 27.06.2019 - 28634/11

  KHASANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 15.03.2016 - 51643/08

  YEGOROV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 15.04.2014 - 27797/10

  ROTARU c. ROUMANIE
• EGMR, 12.11.2013 - 3343/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 10.10.2017 - 50468/16

  MILLS v. IRELAND
• EGMR, 13.12.2016 - 18471/03

  RYMANOV v. RUSSIA