n away Ruslan Magomadov.
64. On 4 October and 24 November 2007 the investigators informed the applicants that the investigation in the criminal case had been suspended for failure to establish the identity of the perpetrators.
65. On 4 February 2008 the investigators informed the applicants that the investigation in the criminal case had been resumed.
66. On 7 February 2008 the investigators questioned Ruslan Magomadov's former colleague, Mr U.A., who stated that between 1996 and 1999 Ruslan Magomadov had worked as the head of the operational division in the Staropromyslovskiy ROVD and after that he had worked as a senior investigator at the Shatoy ROVD. At the beginning of February 2003 the Staropromyslovskiy ROVD had received a complaint from Ruslan Magomadov's relatives that he had been abducted from his own house.
67. On 4 March 2008 the investigators informed the applicants that the investigation in the criminal case had been suspended for failure to establish the identity of the perpetrators.
68. On 9 April 2008 the investigators informed the applicants that the investigation in the criminal case had been resumed.
69. On an unspecified date the investigators conducted a crime scene examination at the applicants' house. No evidence was found or collected.
70. On an unspecified date the investigators requested No. 2 Operational Search Bureau of the Chechnya Ministry of the Interior to conduct operational search measures aimed, inter alia, at establishing the identity of eyewitnesses to the abduction who had seen the abductors' armoured vehicles.
71. According to the Government, the investigators also requested information from various State authorities about the disappearance. On various dates these authorities, including the district offices of the FSB and the military prosecutors' office, stated that they had not detained Ruslan Magomadov or carried out a criminal investigation into his activities. Also on unspecified dates a number of the district departments of the interior in Chechnya informed the investigation that they had never detained or delivered Ruslan Magomadov to a temporary detention facility. On unspecified dates the remand centres in Chechnya and the neighbouring regions informed the investigation that the missing man had never been detained on their premises. According to the responses from the Chechnya military commanders' office and a number of the district military commanders' offices located in the Republic, the previously acting military commanders' offices had been disbanded in July 2003 and no information was available about special operations conducted by these offices prior to July 2003.
72. The Government submitted that the investigation was checking several theories concerning the abduction of Ruslan Magomadov: firstly that his abduction had been committed by Russian military servicemen; secondly that it had been perpetrated by persons to whom Ruslan Magomadov owed money; thirdly that his abductors were members of illegal armed groups; and fourthly that his abduction had been carried out for a ransom.
73. The investigation failed to establish the whereabouts of Ruslan Magomadov. The investigating authorities sent requests for information to the competent State agencies and took other steps to have the crime resolved. The investigation found no evidence to support the involvement of federal forces in the crime. The law enforcement authorities of Chechnya had never arrested or detained Ruslan Magomadov on criminal or administrative charges and had not carried out a criminal investigation in his respect.
74. In response to the Court's request, the Government submitted several documents from the investigation file, running to fifty-seven pages. The Government requested the Court to apply Rule 33 § 3 of the Rules of Court concerning confidentialit
> 1 2 3 ... 6 7 8 ... 17 18 19