Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 28.05.2009 «Дело Ненкаев и другие (Nenkayev and others) против России» [англ.]

6 § 3 of the Russian Criminal Code ("theft of weapons") on account of the theft of the third applicant's gun.
83. On 16 January 2006 the district prosecutor's office questioned as witnesses the second, third and fourth applicants. They also questioned several relatives and acquaintances of the Nenkayev brothers, who said that they had no precise information concerning the perpetrators' identities; nor could they confirm that any belongings had been stolen from the Nenkayevs.
84. On 16 January 2006 the district prosecutor's office questioned the head of the local administrative authority, Mr K., and his deputy. They did not confirm that they had been aware of the Nenkayev brothers' kidnapping; nor did they confirm the fact that the applicants had complained to them about it. Further, Mr L.-A.G. who, according to the first applicant had been an FSB officer, denied that he had known anything about the kidnapping and submitted that he had never been an officer of any law enforcement agency.
85. On 20 February 2006 the seventh applicant was questioned.
86. On 16 February 2006 the district prosecutor's office suspended the investigation in case No. 61116. On the same date the decision on suspension was quashed and the investigation resumed. The first applicant was notified of both decisions.
87. On 3 March 2006 the district prosecutor's office received a request from the second and tenth applicant to investigate the robbery that had occurred on 8 June 2002, to grant them victim status and to join the proceedings to case No. 61116.
88. On 5 March 2006 the district prosecutor's office granted the second and tenth applicants' request in part and admitted the tenth applicant to the proceedings as a victim.
89. On an unspecified date the Central Archives of the Russian Ministry of the Defence informed the investigators that there was no documented information on special operations in Urus-Martan on 8 June 2002 or on Muslim Nenkayev's arrest.
90. On 14 November 2007 the investigators requested all units of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Prosecutor's Office for the Chechen Republic to inform them whether they had any information on criminal proceedings instituted against Muslim Nenkayev, any complaints lodged by him or discovery of his dead body. The replies received were negative.
91. On 14 November 2007 the third applicant was questioned again. He stated that he had been abducted by ten to fifteen masked men in camouflage uniforms armed with machine guns and pistols. He had not examined their faces carefully as he had been blindfolded. He could not identify any of those persons by voice.
92. On 20 November 2007 the first applicant was again questioned and reaffirmed his previous statement.
93. On 26 November 2007 the investigation was suspended for failure to identify those responsible. The first applicant was notified accordingly and the ROVD were instructed to search for the perpetrators more vigorously.
94. On 14 December 2007 the ROVD informed the district prosecutor's office that they were taking measures to solve the crime.
95. On 4 December 2007 the Achkhoy-Martan inter-district prosecutor's office ("the inter-district prosecutor's office") quashed the decision of 26 November 2007, resumed the investigation and notified the first applicant accordingly.
96. On 7 December 2007 the first applicant was again questioned and stated that his two sons had been kidnapped by men armed with sawn-off machine guns with silencers that differed from those used by the military. It was rumoured that Muslim Nenkayev had been kept in the premises of the Urus-Martan Department of the FSB ("the Urus-Martan FSB"), however, there was no evidence of that.
97. On 8 December 2007 the sixth applicant was again questioned and stat

> 1 2 3 ... 7 8 9 ... 23 24 25

0.12 с