Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SHAROMOV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 3, Art. 34 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Art. 6-1 (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (6)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 8927/02

  Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII).
• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

  RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 8927/02

  Nevertheless, recourse to physical force which has not been made strictly necessary by the detainee's own conduct diminishes human dignity and is in principle an infringement of the right set forth in Article 3 of the Convention (see Sheydayev v. Russia, no. 65859/01, § 59, 7 December 2006, and Ribitsch v. Austria, judgment of 4 December 1995, Series A no. 336, § 38).
• EGMR, 07.12.2006 - 65859/01

  SHEYDAYEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 8927/02

  Nevertheless, recourse to physical force which has not been made strictly necessary by the detainee's own conduct diminishes human dignity and is in principle an infringement of the right set forth in Article 3 of the Convention (see Sheydayev v. Russia, no. 65859/01, § 59, 7 December 2006, and Ribitsch v. Austria, judgment of 4 December 1995, Series A no. 336, § 38).

 
• EGMR, 21.12.2006 - 35962/97

  GÖMI ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 8927/02

  The Court is mindful of the potential for violence that exists in penitentiary institutions and of the fact that disobedience by detainees may quickly degenerate into a riot which would require intervention by the security forces (see Gömi and Others v. Turkey, no. 35962/97, § 77, 21 December 2006).
• EGMR, 18.10.2007 - 12316/04

  ASNAR c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 8927/02

  The Court also reiterates that the principle of equality of arms does not depend on further, quantifiable unfairness flowing from a procedural inequality (see Bulut v. Austria, judgment of 22 February 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-II, § 49, and Asnar v. France (no. 2), no. 12316/04, §§ 24-28, 18 October 2007).
• EGMR, 14.09.2000 - 41954/98

  AYDIN v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 8927/02

  Although the scope of the above proceedings was limited to the questions of the applicant's sentence and the prison regime rather than amendment of the conviction due to a different legal categorisation of his actions, the Court considers that those proceedings nevertheless concerned a determination of the "criminal charge" against the applicant (see Findlay v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 25 February 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-I, p. 279, § 69; see, by contrast, Gutfreund v. France, no. 45681/99, § 32, ECHR 2003-VII, and Aydin v. Turkey (dec.), no. 41954/98, 14 September 2000).

• EGMR, 13.02.2014 - 66393/10

  TALI v. ESTONIA

  Recourse to physical force which has not been made strictly necessary by the detainee's own conduct diminishes human dignity and is in principle an infringement of the right set forth in Article 3 of the Convention (see, among others, Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 38, Series A no. 336; Vladimir Romanov v. Russia, no. 41461/02, § 63, 24 July 2008; and Sharomov v. Russia, no. 8927/02, § 27, 15 January 2009).
• EGMR, 01.02.2022 - 9204/08

  STRAISTEANU AND AGACHI v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

  The Court points out that, following annulment of a conviction or termination of the proceedings against an applicant, he or she can no longer be considered a victim, within the meaning of Article 34 of the Convention, of a breach of his or her right to a fair trial in connection with these proceedings (see Sharomov v. Russia, no. 8927/02, § 36, 15 January 2009, G. v. France, no. 27244/09, § 46, 23 February 2012, and Hacer Arican v. Turkey (dec.) no. 24461/09, § 20, 2 July 2019).
• EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 6250/10

  PAKSÜT c. TURQUIE

  Dans le contexte de la présente affaire en examen, la Cour rappelle aussi qu'il est de jurisprudence constante que, à la suite d'un acquittement ou de l'annulation d'une condamnation, l'intéressé ne peut pas être considéré comme « victime'd'une violation des droits garantis par l'article 6 de la Convention (voir, parmi beaucoup d'autres, Sharomov c. Russie, no 8927/02, § 36, 15 janvier 2009, Komyakov c. Russie (déc.), no 7100/02, 8 janvier 2009, et Oleksy c. Pologne (déc.), no 1379/06, 16 juin 2009).

 
• EGMR, 02.12.2014 - 42733/07

  GIUTTARI c. ITALIE

  La Cour rappelle qu'il est de jurisprudence constante qu'à la suite d'un acquittement ou de l'annulation d'une condamnation, le requérant ne peut pas être considéré comme « victime'des droits garantis par l'article 6 § 1 de la Convention (voir, parmi beaucoup d'autres, Ustün c. Turquie, no 37685/02, § 24, 10 mai 2007 ; Komyakov c. Russie (déc.), no 7100/02, 8 janvier 2009 ; Sharomov c. Russie, no 8927/02, § 36, 15 janvier 2009 ; et Oleksy c. Pologne (déc.), no 1379/06, 16 juin 2009).
• EGMR, 18.04.2013 - 37975/02

  BERESNEV v. RUSSIA

  In the present case there is no evidence that the applicant attacked prison staff or other prisoners verbally or physically, or that there were other compelling reasons for the use of force against him (see Sharomov v. Russia, no. 8927/02, § 29, 15 January 2009).
• EGMR, 03.12.2013 - 6840/11

  B.H. c. FRANCE

  La Cour rappelle qu'il est de jurisprudence constante qu'à la suite d'un acquittement ou de l'annulation d'une condamnation, le requérant ne peut pas être considéré comme « victime'des droits garantis par l'article 6 de la Convention (voir, parmi beaucoup d'autres, Üstün c. Turquie, no 37685/02, § 24, 10 mai 2007 ; Sharomov c. Russie, no 8927/02, § 36, 15 janvier 2009 ; Komyakov c. Russie (déc.), no 7100/02, 8 janvier 2009, et Oleksy c. Pologne (déc.), no 1379/06, 16 juin 2009).