Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 08.04.2010 «Дело Мудаевы (Mudayevy) против России» [англ.]

at no reliable news of them has been received since. It has also found that, in view of all the known circumstances, they can be presumed dead and that the responsibility for their death lies with the State authorities (see paragraph 99 above). However, the questions of the exact way in which they died and whether they were subjected to ill-treatment while in detention have not been elucidated. The Court considers that the applicants' reference to the statement of Mr Aslan A. (see paragraph 21 above) does not enable it to find beyond all reasonable doubt that Aslan and Mokhmad Mudayev were ill-treated in detention. It thus finds that this part of the complaint has not been substantiated.
113. It follows that this part of the application is manifestly ill-founded and should be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

2. Merits

Alleged ineffectiveness of the investigation of the ill-treatment
114. The Court reiterates that "where an individual makes a credible assertion that he has suffered treatment infringing Article 3 at the hands of the police or other similar agents of the State, that provision, read in conjunction with the State's general duty under Article 1 of the Convention to secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in... [the] Convention, requires by implication that there should be an effective official investigation" (see Labita v. Italy [GC], No. 26772/95, § 131, ECHR 2000-IV).
115. The Court notes that the applicants raised in detail their complaints about the ill-treatment of Aslan and Mokhmad Mudayev with the investigating authorities (see paragraph 31 above). However, it does not appear that their complaints were properly examined by the prosecutor's office.
116. For the reasons stated above in paragraphs 103 - 107 in relation to the procedural obligation under Article 2 of the Convention, the Court concludes that the Government has failed to conduct an effective investigation into the ill-treatment of Aslan and Mokhmad Mudayev.
117. Accordingly, there has been a violation of Article 3 in this respect.

V. Alleged violation of Article 5 of the Convention

118. The applicants stated that Aslan and Mokhmad Mudayev had been detained in violation of the guarantees contained in Article 5 of the Convention. Article 5 reads, in so far as relevant:
"1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law:...
(c) the lawful arrest or detention of a person effected for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence or when it is reasonably considered necessary to prevent his committing an offence or fleeing after having done so;
...
2. Everyone who is arrested shall be informed promptly, in a language which he understands, of the reasons for his arrest and of any charge against him.
3. Everyone arrested or detained in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 (c) of this Article shall be brought promptly before a judge or other officer authorised by law to exercise judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial. Release may be conditioned by guarantees to appear for trial.
4. Everyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take proceedings by which the lawfulness of his detention shall be decided speedily by a court and his release ordered if the detention is not lawful.
5. Everyone who has been the victim of arrest or detention in contravention of the provisions of this Article shall have an enforceable right to compensation."

A. The part

> 1 2 3 ... 15 16 17 18 ... 19 20