Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 29.07.2010 <Дело Каримов (Karimov) против России» [англ.]

ional Court decision No. 101-O of 4 April 2006
69. Verifying the compatibility of Article 466 § 1 of the CCP with the Russian Constitution, the Constitutional Court reiterated its established case-law to the effect that excessive or arbitrary detention, unlimited in time and without appropriate review, was incompatible with Article 22 of the Constitution and Article 14 § 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in all cases, including extradition proceedings.
70. In the Constitutional Court's view, the guarantees of the right to liberty and personal integrity set out in Article 22 and Chapter 2 of the Constitution, as well as the legal norms laid down in Chapter 13 of the CCP on preventive measures, were fully applicable to detention with a view to extradition. Accordingly, Article 466 of the CCP did not allow the authorities to apply a custodial measure without abiding by the procedure established in the CCP, or in excess of the time-limits fixed therein.
(c) Constitutional Court decision No. 158-O of 11 July 2006 on the Prosecutor General's request for clarification
71. The Prosecutor General asked the Constitutional Court for an official clarification of its decision No. 101-O of 4 April 2006 (see above), for the purpose, in particular, of elucidating the procedure for extending a person's detention with a view to extradition.
72. The Constitutional Court dismissed the request on the ground that it was not competent to indicate specific criminal-law provisions governing the procedure and time-limits for holding a person in custody with a view to extradition. That was a matter for the courts of general jurisdiction.
(d) Constitutional Court decision No. 333-O-P of 1 March 2007
73. In this decision the Constitutional Court reiterated that Article 466 of the CCP did not imply that detention of a person on the basis of an extradition request did not have to comply with the terms and time-limits provided for in the legislation on criminal procedure.

B. Status of refugees

1. The 1951 Geneva Convention Relating
to the Status of Refugees

74. Article 33 of the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, which was ratified by Russia on 2 February 1993, provides as follows:
"1. No Contracting State shall expel or return ("refouler") a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.
2. The benefit of the present provision may not, however, be claimed by a refugee whom there are reasonable grounds for regarding as a danger to the security of the country in which he is, or who, having been convicted by a final judgement of a particularly serious crime, constitutes a danger to the community of that country."

2. Refugees Act

75. The Refugees Act (Law No. 4258-I of 19 February 1993) incorporated the definition of the term "refugee" contained in Article 1 of the 1951 Geneva Convention, as amended by the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. The Act defines a refugee as a person who is not a Russian national and who, owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, ethnic origin, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country, or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, unwilling to return to it (section 1 § 1 (1)).
76. The Act does not apply to anyone believed on reasonable grounds to have commit



> 1 2 3 ... 7 8 9 ... 20 21 22

	Поделиться:	Tweet