Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 17.12.2009 "Дело "Джураев (Dzhurayev) против Российской Федерации" [рус., англ.]

а Суда.

Председатель Палаты Суда
Христос РОЗАКИС

Секретарь Секции Суда
Серен НИЛЬСЕН





EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST SECTION

CASE OF DZHURAYEV v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 38124/07)

JUDGMENT <*>

(Strasbourg, 17.XII.2009)

--------------------------------
<*> 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 Dzhurayev v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Christos Rozakis, President,
Nina {Vajic},
Anatoly Kovler,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Dean Spielmann,
Giorgio Malinverni,
George Nicolaou, judges,
and {Soren} Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 26 November 2009,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in an application (No. 38124/07) 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 national of Uzbekistan, Mr Yashin Yakubovich Dzhurayev ("the applicant"), on 3 September 2007.
2. The applicant was represented by Ms M. Morozova, a lawyer practising in Moscow. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. On 4 September 2007 the President of the Chamber decided to apply Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, indicating to the Government that the applicant should not be expelled to Uzbekistan until further notice.
4. On 24 April 2008 the Court decided to apply Rule 41 of the Rules of Court and to grant priority treatment to the application, as well as 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.
5. 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

6. The applicant was born in 1966 and lives in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. He is currently residing in Moscow.

A. Proceedings in Uzbekistan

7. In January 2005, when the applicant was living in Uzbekistan, a district court in Tashkent convicted him of being a member of the Islamic religious organisation Tablighi Dzhamaat, prohibited in Uzbekistan. The court ordered him to pay a fine in an amount equal to sixty times the minimum monthly wage.
8. The applicant paid the fine and continued to reside in Uzbekistan. However, according to him, he felt constant pressure from the law-enforcement agencies, which required him to report on all his actions and movements and, in case of delay or failure on his part, threatened to arrest his elder son. So as not to put his family in danger, on 6 December 2005 the applicant left Uzbekistan for Moscow.
9. In the meantime the Supreme Court of Uzbekistan quashed the decision of January 2005 on the ground that the sentence was too mild and remitted the case for fresh examination.
10. On 9 January 2006 the Sobir Rakhimovskiy District Court of Tashkent ordered the applicant to be remanded in custody. On that basis a cross-border search warrant for the applicant was issued.

B



> 1 2 3 ... 10 11 12 ... 18 19 20

	Поделиться:	Tweet