Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 18.02.2010 «Дело Алиева (Aliyeva) против России» [англ.]

was compatible with domestic law and thus there were no reasons to quash it.
26. On 13 October 2003 Ms G., who apparently also lived in Bogdana Khmelnitskogo Street, was questioned. According to the Government, she stated that she had no close relationship with the Aliyevs. She had learned about the abduction a few days later from her neighbours. Mr G., questioned on the same date, made a similar statement.
27. On 16 October 2003 Ms S., the applicant's neighbour, was questioned. According to the Government, she submitted that on the night of 29 October 2002 she had been woken up by the noise. She had opened the door to the balcony and had called out to the applicant since she had thought that the noise had been coming out from their apartment. She had heard no reply and had gone down to the applicant's apartment. There she had seen the applicant who had just been untied by her daughter. Later Ms S. had learned that armed men had taken away Mr Abu Aliyev.
28. On 17 October 2003 Ms A., the applicant's daughter, was questioned. According to the Government, she stated that on the night of 29 October 2002 she had been woken up by a horrible noise. Her three-year-old brother had also woken up and they had got frightened and started to cry. The armed people burst into their apartment. One of them ordered her to stop crying and to calm down her brother. They had left in approximately ten to fifteen minutes. Then she had heard her mother calling her. Ms A. had gone to the kitchen and found her mother there, tied up with adhesive tape. Ms A. had untied her, and her mother had run outside. Ms A. had not seen her father being taken away.
29. On the same date the applicant requested the Prosecutor's Office of the Chechen Republic that she be permitted to copy the investigation file, at her own expense.
30. On 27 October 2003 the applicant requested the Prosecutor's Office of the Chechen Republic to help her find her husband, who had been kidnapped by armed men in camouflage uniforms.
31. On 5 November 2003 the Prosecutor's Office of the Chechen Republic denied the applicant access to the case file, giving the reason that the investigation had not been completed.
32. On 9 February 2004 the Leninskiy District Prosecutor's Office informed the applicant that the investigation into her husband's kidnapping had been resumed and invited her to visit their premises on 14 February 2004 for additional questioning as a victim.
33. On 14 February 2004 Mr A., Mr Abu Aliyev's brother, was questioned. According to the Government, he submitted that he had learned of his brother's abduction from his cousin. He had been surprised because the day before his brother had visited him and they had been planting apple trees together.
34. On 9 March 2004 the investigation in case No. 48193 was again suspended; the applicant was not promptly informed of the decision.
35. On 16 June 2004 the applicant requested the Leninskiy District Prosecutor's Office to inform her of recent developments in the investigation and to allow her access to the case file.
36. On 26 June 2004 she repeated the request.
37. According to the Government, in the course of the investigation measures were taken to establish the whereabouts of Mr Abu Aliyev and to identify the perpetrators. In particular, requests for information were sent to Departments of the Interior and prosecutors of different levels in Chechnya and Dagestan, the FSB Department in Chechnya, the Chechen penitentiary and passport-visa authorities, the Ministry of the Interior and other bodies. As a result of those measures it was established that Mr Abu Aliyev had not been detained by State authorities and had not been placed in either remand or administrative detention facilities. He was not found in hospitals, nor was his body to be found in any morgu

> 1 ... 2 3 4 5 ... 15 16 17