Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 08.04.2010 «Дело Садулаева (Sadulayeva) против России» [англ.]

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST SECTION

CASE OF SADULAYEVA v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 38570/05)

JUDGMENT <*>

(Strasbourg, 8.IV.2010)

--------------------------------
<*> 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 Sadulayeva 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,
Dean Spielmann,
Sverre Erik Jebens, judges,
and {Soren} Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 18 March 2010,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in an application (No. 38570/05) 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, Ms Chovka (also known as Aymani) Sadulayeva, on 16 September 2005.
2. The applicant was represented by lawyers of the NGO EHRAC/Memorial Human Rights Centre. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by their Agent, Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. On 22 April 2008 the Court decided to apply Rule 41 of the Rules of Court and to grant priority treatment to the application and to give notice of the application to the Government. Under the provisions of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention, it decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility. The President of the Chamber acceded to the Government's request not to make publicly accessible the documents from the criminal investigation file deposited with the Registry in connection with the application (Rule 33 of the Rules of Court).
4. The Government objected to the joint examination of the admissibility and merits of the application. Having considered the Government's objection, the Court dismissed it.

THE FACTS

I. The circumstances of the case

5. The applicant was born in 1947. She lives in the village of Martan-Chu, in the Urus-Martan district of Chechnya.

A. Disappearance of Aslan Sadulayev and subsequent events

1. The applicant's account

a. The abduction of the applicant's son
6. At the material time the applicant's son Aslan Sadulayev lived in a village in the Naurskiy district of Chechnya while the applicant and his other relatives lived in the Urus-Martan district of Chechnya.
7. On 9 December 2002 Aslan Sadulayev went to Urus-Martan to celebrate a holiday with his relatives. There he met an acquaintance, Mr M.M., who gave him a lift in his purple VAZ-2109 car to the nearby village of Alkhazurovo. In the early afternoon of 9 December 2002, on their way back from the village to Urus-Martan, Mr M.M. also agreed to give a lift to his acquaintance Ms T.S. and a young man.
8. The car with Mr M.M., Aslan Sadulayev, Ms. T.S. and the young man was stopped by Russian military servicemen at the intersection of the roads to Komsomolskoye village, Alkhazurovo and Urus-Martan. That day a mobile checkpoint of Russian military forces on two APCs (armoured personnel carriers) was conducting identity checks a



> 1 2 3 ... 14 15 16

	Поделиться:	Tweet