Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 23.04.2009 «Дело Хачукаев (Khachukayev) против России» [англ.]

nt, the Chechnya Supreme Court quashed the decision of 14 May 2004 and remitted the case to the first-instance court for a fresh examination.
49. At the end of August 2004 the applicant wrote to the Town Court and the district prosecutor's office with requests to resume the investigation, take necessary investigative measures and verify the theory that the federal forces had been involved in the abduction and murder of his son. In respect of the latter the applicant referred to a number of measures that could have been taken by the investigators. He also requested to be provided with access to the criminal case file.
50. On 25 September 2004 the investigators resumed the investigation in the criminal case. On the same date a letter informing the applicant about this decision was forwarded to his address.
51. On 29 September 2004 the Town Court dismissed the applicant's complaint. It stated that despite all possible measures the authorities had been unable to establish the identity of the culprits, that the criminal investigation had been reopened on 25 September 2004, and that until it was complete the applicant could not be provided with access to the investigation file.
52. On 25 October 2004 the investigators suspended the investigation in the criminal case owing to the failure to establish the perpetrators. On the same date a letter informing the applicant about this decision was forwarded to his address. According to the applicant, he did not receive the letter and only at some point in June 2005 did the investigators inform him in reply to his oral request that the criminal proceedings in case No. 34023 had been suspended.
53. On 27 October 2004 the Chechnya Supreme Court quashed the Town Court's decision of 29 September 2004 and remitted the case for a fresh examination.
54. On 1 December 2004 the Town Court allowed the applicant's complaint in part and ordered the prosecutor's office to resume the criminal proceedings and to carry out a complete and effective investigation. The court rejected the applicant's request for access to the case file, stating that the investigation was still in progress.
55. On 25 January 2005 the Chechnya Supreme Court upheld the decision of 1 December 2004 on appeal, noting that the refusal to provide the applicant with access to the investigation file did not violate his constitutional or procedural rights, as "he had not been refused access to the criminal case file in general, but only until the completion of the preliminary investigation".
56. On 21 September 2005 the applicant wrote to the district prosecutor requesting information about the progress of the investigation in the criminal case and asking for it to be resumed.
57. On 2 June 2006 the applicant wrote again to the district prosecutor requesting information about the progress of the investigation in the criminal case.
58. On 5 June 2006 the district prosecutor's office resumed the investigation in case No. 34023. On the same date a letter informing the applicant about this decision was forwarded to his address.
59. On 5 June 2006 the district prosecutor's office instituted a criminal investigation under Article 105 § 2 of the Criminal Code (aggravated murder) in connection with the discovery of Murad Khachukayev's remains. The decision stated that "in the course of the investigation of criminal case No. 34023 opened on 12 February 2003 in connection with the abduction of Murad Khachukayev on 5 February 2003 from the village of Goyty in the Urus-Martan district of Chechnya, it was established that the corpse of the said person with signs of violent death had been discovered on 12 February 2003 in the orchards located near the village of Goyty in the Urus-Martan district". The criminal case was assigned number 57031.
60. On the same date the Urus-Martan prosecutor&#

> 1 2 3 ... 5 6 7 ... 18 19 20

0.1418 с