been stationed on the roof of the house; that the abductors had freely driven away in spite of the curfew and the presence of the soldiers on the roof. The applicant stated that her numerous complaints to various state authorities, including the ROVD, the military commander's office and the prosecutor's office, had failed to produce any results. She also complained that the investigating authorities had failed to inform her about the reasons for the suspension of the investigation in criminal case No. 12368. Lastly, the first applicant requested assistance in the search for her son.
38. On 28 January 2002 the town prosecutor's office informed the applicants that on 18 September 2001 they had suspended the investigation in criminal case No. 12368 owing to the failure to establish the perpetrators and that there were no reasons for that decision to be set aside.
39. On an unspecified date in 2002 the first applicant wrote to the military prosecutor's office of the United Group Alignment (the UGA military prosecutor's office). She described the circumstances of her son's abduction and stated that her numerous complaints to various law enforcement bodies had failed to produce any results. She also complained about the lack of information concerning the investigation in criminal case No. 12368.
40. On 16 May 2002 Human Rights Watch wrote on behalf of the applicants to the Prosecutor General. The letter provided, among other things, a detailed description of the circumstances of Mayrudin Khantiyev's abduction and requested the authorities to resume the criminal investigation into his kidnapping.
41. On 23 July 2002 the first applicant wrote to the prosecutor of the Chechen Republic. She complained about her son's abduction by armed men in camouflage uniforms and stated that her numerous requests for assistance in the search for Mayrudin Khantiyev had failed to produce any results.
42. On 3 October 2002 the prosecutor of the Chechen Republic replied to Human Rights Watch. The letter stated that the authorities had been undertaking unspecified measures to establish the whereabouts of the applicants' relative.
43. It appears that at some point in 2003 the investigation in criminal case No. 12368 was transferred from the town prosecutor's office to the Staropromyslovskiy district prosecutor's office ("the district prosecutor's office"). There is no indication that applicants were informed about it.
44. On 17 May 2003 the UGA military prosecutor's office forwarded the first applicant's request for assistance in the search for her son to the military prosecutor's office of military unit No. 20102 for examination.
45. On 21 May 2003 the district prosecutor's office informed the first applicant that they had examined her complaint. The letter stated that on 12 September 2001 the town prosecutor's office had suspended the investigation in criminal case No. 12368 owing to the failure to identify the perpetrators and that the search for Mayrudin Khantiyev had been entrusted to the ROVD.
46. On 16 June 2003 the republican prosecutor's office informed the first applicant that it had examined case file No. 12368 opened into the abduction of Mayrudin Khantiyev on 4 December 2000 at about 6.10 a.m. by unidentified persons. The first applicant was informed that on 16 June 2003 the republican prosecutor's office had set aside the decision of 12 September 2001 to suspend the investigation in criminal case No. 12368. The district prosecutor's office had been given unspecified instructions and would inform the applicants about the progress in the criminal investigation.
47. On 26 June 2003 the ROVD informed the first applicant that they had been conducting operational and search measures aimed at establishing Mayrudin Khantiyev's whereabouts and identi
> 1 2 ... 3 4 5 6 ... 22 23 24
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
