ors questioned the mother of the disappeared Murad Gelayev - Amint Gelayeva [the second applicant], who stated that... she had tried to stop the abductors from taking away her son, but she could not stop them as she had been hit several times on the head by a rifle-butt and as a result she had lost consciousness. Subsequently she had been treated at the outpatient department of the Gikalo hospital...
...[it is necessary] to put the following questions to the experts:
- Are there any injuries on the head and the body of A. Gelayeva and if so, how they could have been received, and what is their location, mechanism and the time of their origin?
- What is the degree of the injuries suffered [by the applicant]?
- How could these injuries have been caused?
- Was it possible for the injuries to be received under the above circumstances?"
85. On 10 October 2006 the investigators refused to initiate a criminal investigation into the applicants' complaints of ill-treatment by the abductors. The text of the decision included the following:
"...the investigators questioned Aminat Gelayeva [the second applicant], who stated that... when she had attempted to prevent the abductors from taking away her son, the abductors had beaten her and her daughter Zarema [the third applicant], and had hit them several times with rifle butts, as a result of which she had lost consciousness. Subsequently she had been treated at the Gikalo hospital.
The investigators questioned Zarema Gelayeva [the third applicant], who stated that... she and her mother [the second applicant] had attempted to stop the abductors, but they had been subjected to beatings as a result of which her mother [the second applicant] had lost consciousness.
...According to the medical statement provided by the Gikalo hospital, on 27 February 2000 medical assistance had been provided to A. Gelayeva [the second applicant] as no [other] treatment had been possible at the time owing to the military actions...
...According to the forensic medical examination report No. 1086 of 4 October 2006... no bodily injuries or spots on the head or neck of A. Gelayeva [the second applicant] were found...
Thus, the investigation did not establish that A. Gelayeva had received bodily injuries..."
II. Relevant domestic law
86. For a summary of the relevant domestic law see Akhmadova and Sadulayeva v. Russia (No. 40464/02, §§ 67 - 69, 10 May 2007).
THE LAW
I. The Government's objection as to non-exhaustion
of domestic remedies
A. The parties' submissions
87. The Government contended that the application should be declared inadmissible for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies. They submitted that the investigation into the disappearance of Murad Gelayev had not yet been completed. They further argued that it had been open to the applicants to lodge complaints with the courts about any acts or omissions of the investigating authorities, but that the applicants had not availed themselves of that remedy. They also argued that it had been open to the applicants to pursue civil claims but that they had failed to do so.
88. The applicants contested that objection. They stated that the criminal investigation had proved to be ineffective. With reference to the Court's case-law, they argued that they were not obliged to claim civil damages in order to exhaust domestic remedies.
B. The Court's assessment
89. The Court will examine the arguments of the parties in the light of the provisions of the Convention and its relevant practice (for a relevant summary, see Estamirov and Others v. Russia, No. 60272/00, §§ 73 - 74, 12 October 2006).
90. The Court notes that the Russian legal system provi
> 1 2 3 ... 11 12 13 ... 24 25 26
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
