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 12.05.2010 «Дело Сулейманова (Suleymanova) против России» [англ.]





t be effective in the sense that it is capable of leading to a determination of whether the force used in such cases was or was not justified in the circumstances (see Kaya v. Turkey, 19 February 1998, p. 324, § 87, Reports 1998-I,) and to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see {Ogur}, cited above, § 88).
91. In particular, the authorities must take the reasonable steps available to them to secure the evidence concerning the incident, including inter alia eye witness testimony, forensic evidence and, where appropriate, an autopsy which provides a complete and accurate record of injury and an objective analysis of clinical findings, including the cause of death (see concerning autopsies, for example, Salman v. Turkey [GC], No. 21986/93, § 106, ECHR 2000-VII; concerning witnesses, for example, {Tanrikulu} v. Turkey [GC], No. 23763/94, ECHR 1999-IV, § 109; and concerning forensic evidence, for example, {Gul} v. Turkey, No. 22676/93, § 89, 14 December 2000). Any deficiency in the investigation which undermines its ability to establish the cause of death or the person responsible may risk falling foul of this standard.
92. Also, there must be an implicit requirement of promptness and reasonable expedition (see {Yasa}, cited above, §§ 102 - 04, and Mahmut Kaya, cited above, §§ 106 - 07). It must be accepted that there may be obstacles or difficulties which prevent progress in an investigation in a particular situation. However, a prompt response by the authorities in investigating the use of lethal force may generally be regarded as essential in maintaining public confidence in the maintenance of the rule of law and in preventing any appearance of collusion in or tolerance of unlawful acts.
93. For the same reasons, there must be a sufficient element of public scrutiny of the investigation or its results to secure accountability in practice as well as in theory. The degree of public scrutiny required may well vary from case to case. In all cases, however, the next of kin of the victim must be involved in the procedure to the extent necessary to safeguard his or her legitimate interests (see Shanaghan v. the United Kingdom, No. 37715/97, §§ 91 - 92, 4 May 2001).
94. In the instant case, the Court observes that some degree of investigation was carried out into the killing of the applicants' relatives. It must assess whether that investigation met the requirements of Article 2 of the Convention. The Court notes in this connection that its knowledge of the criminal proceedings at issue is very limited in view of the respondent Government's refusal to submit the investigation file (see paragraph 63 above). Drawing inferences from the respondent Government's conduct when evidence was being obtained (see Ireland v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 18 January 1978, Series A No. 25, pp. 64 - 65, § 161), the Court will assess the merits of this complaint on the basis of the available information in the light of these inferences.
95. The Court notes that from the report on the investigative actions submitted by the Government it appears that the civilian authorities made attempts to investigate the events of 16 - 19 May 2000 and to secure evidence concerning the incident. In particular, the investigation was commenced on the date of the discovery of the remains of the applicant's relatives and a number of important investigative actions, such as the inspection of the scene of the incident, the seizure of fragments of cartridges and other evidence at the crime scene, and the questioning of the local residents, were taken within the first months of the investigation (see paragraphs 35, 37 - 40 above). However, it appears that after the civilian authorities had established that military servicemen had been implicated in the events and consequently transferred the investigation file to the military prosecutor's office (see paragraph 44 above) no investig



> 1 2 3 ... 11 12 13 14 ... 15 16

Поделиться:

Опубликовать в своем блоге livejournal.com
0.1245 с