Mutsolgov had been subjected to beatings and torture and pressurised to confess to an unspecified crime. Lastly, he stressed that both he and the first applicant had experienced enormous suffering because of the lack of news about their son and the investigating authorities' failure to take any measures to find him or to identify the perpetrators.
36. By a letter of 11 May 2004 the republican prosecutor's office informed the second applicant that his complaint about the abduction of Bashir Mutsolgov had been forwarded to the town prosecutor's office for examination.
37. By a letter of 20 May 2004 the town prosecutor's office informed the second applicant that they had opened a criminal investigation into his son's abduction; that they were verifying the information submitted by the second applicant during the preliminary investigation, and that he would be given any relevant information in due course.
38. On 26 May 2004 the republican prosecutor's office wrote to the second applicant that the town prosecutor's office had opened a criminal investigation into his son's abduction and that operational and search measures were under way. The letter stated the investigation of the criminal case was under the control of the republican prosecutor's office.
39. By a decision of 26 June 2004 the town prosecutor's office suspended the investigation in criminal case No. 23520016 for failure to identify the perpetrators and establish Bashir Mutsolgov's whereabouts; the operational and search measures aimed at identification of the culprits were to be continued.
40. In a letter of 1 August 2004 the third applicant requested the town prosecutor's office to provide him with information on the status and the progress in the investigation into his brother's abduction.
41. On 3 November 2004 the third applicant wrote to the town prosecutor's office seeking detailed information on the investigation in case No. 23520016 and access to the case file.
42. By a decision of 5 November 2004 the town prosecutor's office refused his request, stating that the third applicant would be allowed to have detailed information concerning the investigation and access to the case file materials only when the investigation was complete. In a letter of the same day the town prosecutor's office notified the third applicant accordingly and provided him with copies of three procedural decisions issued by it: the decision to open the criminal investigation; the decision to grant the third applicant victim status, and the decision to suspend the investigation.
43. On 11 November 2004 the third applicant requested the town prosecutor's office to reopen the investigation in case No. 23520016 and to carry out additional investigative measures. In particular, he asked the authorities to compile a photofit image of one of the abductors based on the statements by officer Ch. and to conduct an identification procedure.
44. By a decision of 12 November 2004 the town prosecutor's office granted the third applicant's request concerning the photofit image. The decision also stated that the third applicant was to be notified of it. It is unclear whether the requested investigative measures have been carried out by the authorities.
45. On 12 November 2004 the republican prosecutor's office informed the third applicant that the investigation in criminal case No. 23520016 had been resumed on an unspecified date.
46. On 18 December 2004 the third applicant wrote to the town prosecutor's office, submitting that on that day an unidentified man had told him on the phone that one of Bashir Mutsolgov's abductors was Mr L.T., an officer of the Kostroma Region department of the FSB. In connection with that information the third applicant requested the authorities to carry out t
> 1 2 3 ... 6 7 8 ... 27 28 29
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
