Главная страницаZaki.ru законы и право Поиск законов поиск по сайту Каталог документов каталог документов Добавить в избранное добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное

Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 13.07.2010 <Дело Лопата (Lopata) против России» [англ.]



(Application No. 72250/01)


(Strasbourg, 13.VII.2010)

<*> This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Lopata v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Josep Casadevall, President,
Corneliu {Birsan} <*>,
<*> Здесь и далее по тексту слова на национальном языке набраны латинским шрифтом и выделены фигурными скобками.

{Bostjan M. Zupancic},
Anatoly Kovler,
Alvina Gyulumyan,
Egbert Myjer,
Luis {Lopez} Guerra, judges,
and Santiago Quesada, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 22 June 2010,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:


1. The case originated in an application (No. 72250/01) against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") by a Russian national, Mr Aleksandr Konstantinovich Lopata ("the applicant"), on 26 March 2001.
2. The applicant was represented by Ms D. Vedernikova and Mr P. Leach, lawyers with the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC). The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by Mr P. Laptev, former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. The applicant alleged, in particular, that he had been subjected to torture and convicted on the basis of a forced confession, that the investigation of the torture had not been effective and that the authorities had interfered with his right of individual petition.
4. By a decision of 3 May 2005, the Court declared the application partly admissible.
5. The applicant and the Government each filed further written observations (Rule 59 § 1). The Chamber having decided, after consulting the parties, that no hearing on the merits was required (Rule 59 § 3 in fine), the parties replied in writing to each other's observations.


I. The circumstances of the case

6. The applicant was born in 1963 and resided before his arrest in the village of Akhunovo, in the Bashkortostan Republic.

A. The applicant's arrest and placement in custody

1. The applicant's alleged 14-day detention in August 2000

7. On 3 August 2000 the applicant was arrested along with several other village residents and placed in the temporary detention centre of the Uchaly police station (ИВС Учалинского ГРОВД, "the police station"). He was allegedly beaten and pressurised to confess to the murder of a certain Mr D. in the village of Akhunovo. The applicant remained in detention for fourteen days; the legal basis for his detention remains unclear. After fourteen days of detention he was released.

2. The applicant's arrest in September 2000

8. On 5 September 2000 the applicant was again arrested and taken to the police station. On the same day he was questioned by Kh.A., an investigator at the Uchaly district prosecutor's office ("the district prosecutor's office"), V.G., a senior operational officer of the Ministry of the Interior of the Bashkortostan Republic, Ya.M., the deputy head of the police station, and I.M., head of the criminal police. According to the applicant, throughout the interview they

Страницы: 1 2 3 ... 26 27 28


Опубликовать в своем блоге livejournal.com
0.2177 с