Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 17.06.2010 «Дело Колесник (Kolesnik) против России» [англ.]

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST SECTION

CASE OF KOLESNIK v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 26876/08)

JUDGMENT <*>

(Strasbourg, 17.VI.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 Kolesnik v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Christos Rozakis, President,
Nina {Vajic} <*>,
--------------------------------
<*> Здесь и далее по тексту слова на национальном языке набраны латинским шрифтом и выделены фигурными скобками.

Anatoly Kovler,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Dean Spielmann,
Giorgio Malinverni,
George Nicolaou, judges,
and {Soren} Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 27 May 2010,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in an application (No. 26876/08) 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 Ms Irina Batdanovna Kolesnik, a national of Turkmenistan, and Mr Viktor Pavlovich Kolesnik, a national of Russia, ("the applicants"), on 9 June 2008.
2. The applicants were represented by Mrs Ryabinina, a lawyer practising in Moscow, and by Mrs Tseytlina, a lawyer practising in St. Petersburg. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by Mrs V. Milinchuk, the former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights, and subsequently by their new Representative, Mr G. Matyushkin.
3. The applicants alleged that the first applicant's extradition to Turkmenistan would subject her to a risk of ill-treatment and violate their right to respect for their family life, that her detention was not lawful and not subject to judicial review, and that the presumption of innocence had been breached. They referred to Articles 3, 5, 6 and 8 of the Convention.
4. On 27 June 2008 the President of the Chamber decided to apply Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, indicating to the Government that it was desirable in the interests of the parties and the proper conduct of the proceedings not to extradite the first applicant to Turkmenistan pending the Court's decision.
5. On 2 March 2009 the President of the First Section decided to give notice of the application to the Government. Under the provisions of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention, it was decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility.

THE FACTS

I. The circumstances of the case

6. The applicants were born in 1961 and 1946 respectively and live in the Tula Region.

A. Background events

7. The applicants are a married couple and have a daughter born in 1992. The first applicant also has a daughter from her previous marriage, born in 1985. Both daughters are Russian nationals.
8. Prior to their arrival in Russia, the applicants and their daughter were living in Turkmenistan. There the second applicant and their daughter acquired Russian citizenship in 2002. On 15 November 2005 criminal proceedings were brought against the first applicant's employer on economic charges. The first applicant was questioned as a witness on several occasions and allegedly threatened by the investigator.
9. On 10 December 2005 the applicants and their daughter moved to Russia. The first applicant's elder daughter was already livi

> 1 2 3 ... 12 13 14