s post-mortem examination due to the Government's failure to submit a copy of it. In such circumstances the Court is ready to draw inferences from the Government's unwillingness to produce this document.
99. It is not entirely clear whether Idris Gakiyev spent the time between his abduction and death in the hands of his kidnappers or under the control of other persons or at liberty. The only information available in this respect is contained in the letter by the Chechen FSB stating that the State Duma election register of 7 December 2003 was signed with Idris Gakiyev's name (see paragraph 35 above). Given that Idris Gakiyev's immediate family had no news of him between 30 November 2003 and 29 March 2004, the Court considers it highly doubtful that, should he have been released by the kidnappers at some point during this period, the young man would perform his civic duty instead of trying to contact his parents. Therefore, the Court is not persuaded that on 7 December 2003 Idris Gakiyev was at liberty.
100. Lacking any other plausible explanation, the Court considers that Idris Gakiyev remained under the control of State servicemen from the moment of his abduction until his killing. It does not deem it necessary to establish whether he was guarded throughout the whole period of unregistered detention and then killed by the same persons who had kidnapped him since in any event the responsibility for his fate lies with the State.
101. Having regard to the above, the Court finds it established that Idris Gakiyev was killed by State servicemen following his abduction and that the State authorities are to be held responsible for his death.
III. Alleged violation of Article 2 of the Convention
102. The applicants complained that Idris Gakiyev had been detained and then killed by Russian servicemen and that the domestic authorities had failed to carry out an effective investigation of the matter. They relied on Article 2 of the Convention, which reads:
"1. Everyone's right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law.
2. Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this article when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary:
(a) in defence of any person from unlawful violence;
(b) in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained;
(c) in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection."
A. The parties' submissions
103. The Government contended that the domestic investigation had obtained no evidence to the effect that any servicemen of law-enforcement agencies had been involved in Idris Gakiyev's kidnapping or killing. The Government claimed that the investigation met the Convention requirement of effectiveness, as all measures envisaged in national law were being taken to identify the perpetrators. The applicants could have studied non-confidential case materials. The investigation had been suspended and resumed on numerous occasions, which proved that measures had been taken to solve the crime.
104. The applicants maintained their complaints. They stressed that the first applicant had identified dead body No. 2 found in the pit in Grozny as Idris Gakiyev. The applicants invited the Court to draw conclusions from the Government's unjustified failure to submit the documents from the case file to them or to the Court.
B. The Court's assessment
1. Admissibility
105. The Court considers, in the light of the parties' submissions, that the complaint raises serious issu
> 1 2 3 ... 10 11 12 ... 21 22 23
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
