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 12.02.2009 «Дело Самохвалов (Samokhvalov) против России» [англ.]







EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST SECTION

CASE OF SAMOKHVALOV v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 3891/03)

JUDGMENT <*>

(Strasbourg, 12.II.2009)

--------------------------------
<*> 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 Samokhvalov 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,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Giorgio Malinverni,
George Nicolaou, judges,
and {Soren} Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 22 January 2009,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in an application (No. 3891/03) 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 Roman Aleksandrovich Samokhvalov ("the applicant"), on 16 December 2002.
2. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by Mr P. Laptev, the former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. The applicant alleged, in particular, that his right to a fair trial had been violated in that the appeal hearing of his criminal case had been held in his absence.
4. On 15 September 2005 the President of the First Section decided to give notice of the application to the Government. It was also decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility (Article 29 § 3).
5. The Government objected to the use of the joint procedure under Article 29 § 3. The Court examined their objection and dismissed it.

THE FACTS

I. The circumstances of the case

6. The applicant was born in 1976 and lives in Kurgan, the Kurgan region. He is currently serving a prison sentence in the Kurgan region.

A. First examination of the case

7. On 15 November 2001 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of murder of a certain S. and was placed in detention.
8. On 5 February 2002 the Kurgan Town Court, Kurgan Region ("the trial court") held a trial in the applicant's case. The applicant confessed to the murder in part. He submitted that during a quarrel with S. the latter had threatened him with an axe and he (the applicant) had stabbed him several times with a knife in order to defend himself. The Town Court found the applicant guilty of premeditated murder under Article 105 § 1 of the Criminal Code (see "Relevant domestic law and practice" below, paragraph 22) and sentenced him to eleven years and three months' imprisonment. On 5 March 2002 the Kurgan Regional Court ("the appeal court") quashed that judgment and remitted the case for fresh examination to the trial court having found, in particular, that the latter had not established whether the victim had had an axe in his hands during the quarrel. On the same date the Regional Court remanded the applicant in custody. The applicant was neither present nor represented by a lawyer at the appeal hearing.
9. On an unspecified date the applicant was additionally charged with several counts of theft. A certain Sch. was charged with concealment of the murder of S. Criminal proceedings against Sch. were jo



> 1 2 3 ... 9 10 11

Поделиться:

Опубликовать в своем блоге livejournal.com
0.1342 СЃ