n mind the principles referred to above, the Court finds that it can draw inferences from the Government's conduct in respect of the well-foundedness of the applicant's allegations. The Court will thus proceed to examine crucial elements in the present case that should be taken into account when deciding whether the death of the applicant's son can be attributed to the authorities.
112. The applicant maintained that it was beyond reasonable doubt that the men who had abducted and subsequently killed Murad Khachukayev were State agents. In support of that affirmation he referred to the following facts. At the material time the village of Goyty had been under the total control of federal troops. There had been military checkpoints on the roads leading to and from the settlement. The armed men who had abducted Murad Khachukayev spoke unaccented Russian, had been armed with sniper rifles, and were wearing camouflage uniform. The group had consisted of at least fourteen men. According to some witnesses, the men had arrived at the applicant's house in UAZ vehicles of a type normally used only by federal forces. Because of the curfew, such a large group of armed men could not have moved freely around the area between 8 p.m. and 6 a.m. unless they had obtained the permission of federal forces or were military servicemen. The men had stated that they had arrived to do a passport check and had acted in a manner similar to that of special forces carrying out identity checks. The abductors had not taken away another son of the applicant, Mr S.Kh., as the latter was an officer of a local enforcement agency and had a service gun; if the abductors had been members of illegal armed groups, they would have rather attacked Mr S.Kh. in retaliation for his work. The abductors had driven away in the direction of the Russian military checkpoint. Murad Khachukayev had not been seen alive since his abduction. His remains had been discovered in the orchard where blown-up corpses of other abducted men had previously been found. The body of Murad Khachukayev had been blown up only about 20 metres from the road, which demonstrated that only Russian federal servicemen could have openly acted in such close proximity to the road without fear of arrest. Murad Khachukayev's body had been blown up with a significant amount of explosives and only representatives of Russian federal forces could have had access to such an amount of explosives.
113. The Government stated that there was no evidence demonstrating the involvement of the Russian servicemen in the abduction and subsequent killing of Murad Khachukayev. They further argued that the four other corpses found in the same Michurina orchard were the subject of a separate investigation and had nothing to do with the criminal case concerning the applicant's son. They stated that Murad Khachukayev could have been killed by members of illegal armed groups or that he could have died as a result of an accident, having blown himself up with a home-made explosive device. However, these allegations were not specific and the Government did not submit any material to support them. Furthermore, from the information reviewed by the Court it does not appear that the domestic investigation has ever considered these possibilities.
114. The Court notes that the applicant's version of events is supported by the witness statements collected by him and by the investigation. The applicant, his relatives and the neighbours stated that the perpetrators had acted in a manner similar to that of a security operation - they had checked the residents' identity documents, and they had spoken Russian among themselves and to the residents. Some witnesses also referred to the use of military UAZ vehicles (see paragraph 18 above). In his applications to the authorities the applicant consistently maintained that his son had been detained by unknown servicemen and requested
> 1 2 3 ... 12 13 14 ... 18 19 20