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

n the statements of the applicants, their relatives and neighbours and drew a map of the house. When the second applicant told the investigators about the spray used to disable her, one of them dismissed her statement as irrelevant. The investigators refused to go inside and examine the house for evidence.
32. On 2 July 2004 the district prosecutor's office instituted an investigation into the abduction of Sarali Seriyev under Article 126 § 2 of the Criminal Code (aggravated kidnapping). The case file was given the number 36076.
33. On 2 July 2004 the district prosecutor's office granted the first applicant victim status in the criminal case.
34. On 21 July 2004 the Chechnya prosecutor's office informed the first applicant that the investigation in the criminal case was taking operational search measures to establish the whereabouts of Sarali Seriyev and identify the perpetrators of his kidnapping.
35. On 21 July 2004 the Chechnya prosecutor's office forwarded the first applicant's request for assistance in the search for his son to the district prosecutor's office for examination.
36. On 17 September 2004 the head of the criminal search division of the Chechnya department of the interior (the Chechnya MVD) informed the first applicant that his son's abduction was being investigated by the district prosecutor's office.
37. On 20 September 2004 the first applicant requested the military prosecutor office's of the United Group Alignment (the military prosecutor's office of the UGA) to assist in the search for his son.
38. On 15 October 2004 the military prosecutor's office of the UGA informed the first applicant that information concerning the investigation into his son's abduction was available either at the district prosecutor office or the Chechnya prosecutor's office. The letter also stated "...it has been established that federal military servicemen were not involved in your son's abduction".
39. On 1 December 2004 the district prosecutor's office informed the first applicant that his complaint about the abduction had been included into the investigation file.
40. On 2 February 2005 the first applicant addressed the Shali district military commander's office (the district military commander's office) with a request for assistance in the search for his son.
41. On 3 February 2005 the district military commander's office informed the first applicant that they had forwarded information requests concerning Sarali Seriyev's whereabouts to a number of law enforcement agencies.
42. On 5 February 2005 the Chechnya prosecutor's office informed the first applicant that the investigation in the criminal case had been resumed on an unspecified date.
43. On 22 February 2005 the military prosecutor's office of military unit No. 20116 informed the first applicant that they had not received his request.
44. On 8 March 2005 the district military commander's office provided the first applicant with a copy of their information request concerning the search for Sarali Seriyev.
45. On 14 March 2005 the first applicant complained to the district military commander's office about the lack of information concerning the investigation into his son's abduction.
46. On 6 June 2005 the applicants' representatives wrote to the district prosecutor's office. They asked about the measures taken in the criminal case and the progress of the investigation and requested that the first applicant be provided with copies of documents from the investigation file.
47. On 29 June 2005 the Chechnya prosecutor's office informed the applicants' representatives that the investigation into the abduction of Sarali Seriyev had taken all measures to identify the perpetrators; tha

> 1 ... 2 3 4 5 ... 16 17 18