Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 06.05.2003 - 73557/01   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2003,35105
EGMR, 06.05.2003 - 73557/01 (https://dejure.org/2003,35105)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 06.05.2003 - 73557/01 (https://dejure.org/2003,35105)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 06. Mai 2003 - 73557/01 (https://dejure.org/2003,35105)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2003,35105) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

 
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 ... (31)

  • EGMR, 05.02.2008 - 74420/01

    Recht auf ein faires Strafverfahren (Tatprovokation; agent provocateur; V-Mann;

    The Court, for its part, must ascertain whether the proceedings as a whole, including the way in which evidence was taken, were fair (see, among other authorities, Van Mechelen and Others v. the Netherlands, judgment of 23 April 1997, Reports of Judments and Decisions 1997-III, p. 711, § 50; Teixeira de Castro, judgment of 9 June 1998, Reports 1998-IV, p. 1462, § 34; Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI; and Shannon v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 67537/01, ECHR 2004-IV).
  • EGMR, 04.11.2010 - 18757/06

    Recht auf ein faires Verfahren (Abgrenzung der unzulässigen Tatprovokation von

    In the case of Sequeira v. Portugal ((dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI) the Court found that there had been no police incitement, basing its finding on the following considerations:.
  • EGMR, 30.05.2013 - 8810/05

    DAVITIDZE v. RUSSIA

    In particular, they should be in possession of concrete and objective evidence showing that the applicant had taken initial steps to commit the acts constituting the offence for which he was 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 v. Lithuania [GC], no. 74420/01, §§ 63 and 64, ECHR 2008; and Malininas v. Lithuania, no. 10071/04, § 36, 1 July 2008).
  • EGMR, 18.10.2011 - 21218/09

    PRADO BUGALLO c. ESPAGNE

    Accordingly, their activity did not go beyond that of an undercover officer, as was the case in Sequeira (see Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI).
  • EGMR, 20.04.2021 - 66152/14

    KUZMINA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    The Government maintained that the present cases involved "sting operations", which were widely acceptable and free from incitement to commit an offence under the criteria set out in the Court's case-law (they referred to Calabro v. Italy and Germany (dec.), no. 59895/00, ECHR 2002-V; Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI; and Eurofinacom v. France (dec.), no. 58753/00, ECHR 2004-VII).
  • EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 23200/10

    VESELOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    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, 29.09.2009 - 23782/06

    CONSTANTIN AND STOIAN v. ROMANIA

    Regarding the facts of the present case, they denied that there had been police incitement, arguing that the information prior to the covert operation had revealed that the first applicant had been predisposed to commit a criminal offence (they referred to Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI).
  • EGMR, 27.05.2008 - 35686/02

    ÜNEL c. TURQUIE

    La Cour, quant à elle, doit rechercher si la procédure envisagée dans son ensemble, y compris le mode de présentation des moyens de preuve, a revêtu un caractère équitable (voir, entre autres, Van Mechelen et autres c. Pays-Bas, arrêt du 23 avril 1997, Recueil des arrêts et décisions 1997-III, § 50 ; Teixeira de Castro c. Portugal, arrêt du 9 juin 1998, Recueil 1998-IV, § 34 ; Sequeira c. Portugal, no 73557/01, CEDH 2003-VI ; Shannon c. Royaume-Uni, no 67537/01, CEDH 2004-IV).
  • EGMR - 13746/09 (anhängig)

    FEDOROV v. RUSSIA

    Were the undercover agents and other witnesses who could testify on the issue of incitement heard in court and cross-examined by the defence (see Lüdi v. Switzerland, 15 June 1992, § 49, Series A no. 238; Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI; Shannon v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 67537/01, ECHR 2004-IV, Bulfinsky, § 45, cited above; and Kuzmickaja v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 27968/03, 10 June 2008)?.
  • EGMR - 7716/09 (anhängig)

    DIMITRIYEV v. RUSSIA

    Were the undercover agents and other witnesses who could testify on the issue of incitement heard in court and cross-examined by the defence (see Lüdi v. Switzerland, 15 June 1992, § 49, Series A no. 238; Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI; Shannon v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 67537/01, ECHR 2004-IV, Bulfinsky, § 45, cited above; and Kuzmickaja v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 27968/03, 10 June 2008)?.
  • EGMR - 18561/09 (anhängig)

    MANYAKHIN v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 6226/07

    FRANTSUZOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 6193/07

    MORDVINOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 22504/06

    ANTONOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 39703/07

    DANILIN v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 10192/09 (anhängig)

    IVANTSOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 54706/07

    KRIVDA v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 52651/07

    BEREZIN v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 5608/09 (anhängig)

    SALIKHOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 55519/09 (anhängig)

    VALEYEV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 43089/07

    CHERKASOVA v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 48809/07

    MAKAROV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 42616/08 (anhängig)

    SAZONOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 54449/07

    ROGOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 48405/07

    CHALOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 46227/07

    SMIRNOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 09.10.2012 - 12025/02

    TRIFONTSOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 24.06.2008 - 74355/01

    MILINIENE v. LITHUANIA

  • EGMR - 52131/09 (anhängig)

    MUJAJ v. ALBANIA

  • EGMR, 14.04.2015 - 43873/10

    TORAN AND SCHYMIK v. ROMANIA

  • EGMR - 18589/07

    KUZNETSOV v. RUSSIA

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