Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 15.01.2009 «Дело Абдурзакова и Абдурзаков (Abdurzakova and Abdurzakov) против России» [англ.]

ander's office to help in the search for her son.
38. On 23 December 2005 the first applicant requested assistance from the prosecutor's office of the Chechen Republic in establishing her son's whereabouts.
39. On 13 January 2006 the prosecutor's office of the Chechen Republic forwarded the first applicant's complaint to the district prosecutor's office.
40. On 18 January 2006 the district prosecutor's office informed the first applicant that investigative measures were being taken to solve the crime.
41. On 10 July 2006 the first applicant requested an update on progress in the investigation from the district prosecutor's office.
42. On 10 September 2007 the first applicant was informed that the investigation in case No. 61146 had been resumed.

2. Information submitted by the Government

43. On 3 November 2002 the district prosecutor's office instituted an investigation of Vakha Abdurzakov's abduction under Article 126 § 2 of the Russian Criminal Code (aggravated kidnapping). The case file was assigned number 61146.
44. On 10 November 2002 the district prosecutor's office requested information on Vakha Abdurzakov's whereabouts to the FSB Department, the district military commander's office, the temporary unit of the Ministry of the Interior and military unit No. 6779. According to the replies received, Vakha Abdurzakov had not been detained by those agencies or kept in a temporary detention facility and no criminal proceedings had been instituted against him.
45. On 29 November 2002 the first applicant was granted victim status and questioned. She submitted that at about 3 a.m. on 25 October 2002 her son had heard dogs barking and had gone into the street. Someone had ordered him not to move and threatened to open fire. Vakha Abdurzakov had gone back inside the house and told the first applicant that there were soldiers in the courtyard. Then unknown armed men in masks had entered the house, asked her son's last name and demanded his identity papers. Having taken the identity papers and a gold ring, the men had led Vakha Abdurzakov out of the house.
46. On 4 December 2002 the district prosecutor's office questioned the second applicant. He submitted that at about 3 a.m. on 25 October 2002 six unknown armed men wearing camouflage uniforms and masks had entered his house, made his son get out of bed and taken his identity papers.
47. On 3 January 2003 the district prosecutor's office suspended the investigation for failure to identify those responsible and informed the first applicant accordingly.
48. On 23 September 2003 the first applicant informed the district prosecutor's office that two APCs and two UAZ vehicles had been used by her son's kidnappers.
49. On 17 August 2004 the district prosecutor's office quashed the decision of 3 January 2003 and resumed the investigation because of the necessity to verify newly discovered information.
50. On 17 September 2004 the district prosecutor's office suspended the investigation and notified the first applicant accordingly.
51. On 8 October 2004 the first applicant requested the district prosecutor's office to question Ms Yu. as a witness.
52. On 11 October 2004 the investigation was resumed to verify newly discovered information.
53. On 23 October 2004 Mr Yu., Ms Yu.'s son, was questioned. He submitted that in the winter of 2003 the second applicant had told him that Ms Yu. had taken USD 2,800 from him promising that his son would be released but had not kept her word. The second applicant had demanded that Mr Yu. pay him back. Mr Yu. had requested an explanation from his mother who had confirmed that she had taken the money from the second applicant and given it to a policeman of the

> 1 ... 2 3 4 5 ... 18 19 20