Главная страницаZaki.ru законы и право Поиск законов поиск по сайту Каталог документов каталог документов Добавить в избранное добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное




Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 28.05.2009 "Дело "Карягин, Матвеев и Королев (Karyagin, Matveyev and Korolev) против Российской Федерации" [рус., англ.]





SIA
(Applications Nos. 72839/01, 74124/01 and 15625/02)

JUDGMENT <*>

(Strasbourg, 28.V.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 Karyagin, Matveyev and Korolev 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,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Dean Spielmann,
Sverre Erik Jebens,
Giorgio Malinverni, judges,
and {Soren} Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 7 May 2009,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in three applications (Nos. 72839/01, 74124/01 and 15625/02) 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 three Russian nationals, Mr Valeriy Ivanovich Karyagin, Mr Sergey Anatolyevich Matveyev and Mr Sergey Lvovich Korolev ("the applicants"), on 11 January 2001 (the two first applications) and 9 January 2001 respectively.
2. The applicant Mr S. Matveyev was represented before the Court by Mr I. Smorodin, a lawyer practising in Magnitogorsk. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by Mr P. Laptev and Mrs V. Milinchuk, former Representatives of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. The applicants alleged that they had not received a fair trial on account of discrepancies between the copy of the judgment served on them and the copy of the judgment examined by the appeal court.
4. By decisions of 23 October 2007, the Court declared the applications admissible.
5. The Chamber decided to join the applications (Rule 42 § 1).
6. The applicants and the Government each submitted further written observations (Rule 59 § 1).

THE FACTS

I. The circumstances of the case

7. The applicants Mr Karyagin and Mr Matveyev were born in 1955 and the applicant Mr Korolev was born in 1953. They live in Magnitogorsk, Chelyabinsk region.
8. On 5 February 1998 the Chelyabinsk Regional Court, composed of presiding judge Ms Ikryannikova and two lay assessors, convicted Mr Korolev, who had occupied the post of the head of the Magnitogorsk police department for the fight against economic crimes, and the applicant Mr Matveyev, who had been his deputy, of several episodes of bribe-taking, abuse of office and unlawful possession of firearms and sentenced them to nine and ten years' imprisonment respectively. The applicant Mr Karyagin was convicted of aiding and abetting bribe-taking and sentenced to nine years' imprisonment.
9. On 19 February 1998 the court sent the judgment to detention facility SIZO 70/2 of Magnitogorsk in which the applicants were detained. Each applicant received a typed copy of the judgment on twenty-seven pages. It had signatures against the words "judge" and "secretary" and the Chelyabinsk Regional Court's official stamp. The same copy of the judgment was included in the applicants' personal files at the detention facility.
10. The applicants appealed against the judgment, denying the offences and claiming that there was no proper evidence of their guilt.
11. The Regional Court forwarded the case file, which included a typed copy of the judgment on thi



> 1 2 3 ... 5 6 7 8 ... 9 10

Поделиться:

Опубликовать в своем блоге livejournal.com
0.1134 с