or the information submitted by the Government that only dead body No. 3 had received a blow to the head (see paragraph 58 above). Considering that the first applicant identified dead body No. 2 his son (see paragraph 38 above), the Court assumes that Idris Gakiyev's corpse bore no traces of ante-mortem injuries but a strangulation mark. In such circumstances the Court cannot find it established that Idris Gakiyev had been tortured or otherwise ill-treated prior to his death.
124. It follows that this part of the application is manifestly ill-founded and should be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.
125. As to the alleged violation of procedural guarantees of Article 3, the Court considers that in the absence of any reliable information about the ill-treatment of Idris Gakiyev this complaint raises no separate issue from that examined above under Article 2 and to be examined below under Article 13 of the Convention (see Luluyev and Others v. Russia, No. 69480/01, § 107, ECHR 2006-... (extracts)).
(b) The complaints in respect of the applicants
126. The Court notes that the part of the complaint under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the applicants' mental suffering is not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 of the Convention. It further notes that it is not inadmissible on any other grounds. It must therefore be declared admissible.
2. Merits
(a) The complaint concerning the first applicant's ill-treatment
i. Compliance with Article 3
127. The Court observes at the outset that the first applicant corroborated his allegations that State servicemen had beaten him by statements from his wife, who witnessed the beating, and a medical certificate of 30 November 2003 (see paragraph 10 above).
128. Moreover, in their observations the Government admitted that bodily injuries had been inflicted on the first applicant on 30 November 2003 and that the investigation into that incident had been pending in case Nos. 26075 and 32027.
129. The Court reiterates that ill-treatment must attain a minimum level of severity if it is to fall within the scope of Article 3. The assessment of this minimum is relative: it depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as the duration of the treatment, its physical and/or mental effects and, in some cases, the sex, age and state of health of the victim (see Tekin v. Turkey, 9 June 1998, § 52, Reports 1998-IV).
130. The Court has found it established that Idris Gakiyev was apprehended on 30 November May 2000 by State agents (see paragraph 96 above). The evidence submitted corroborates the allegation that during his son's abduction the first applicant was beaten and sustained the injuries recorded in the medical certificate issued on the same date (see paragraph 10 above). The Court considers that this treatment reached the threshold of "inhuman and degrading".
131. Therefore, there has been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention in respect of the applicant on account of the ill-treatment by the servicemen.
ii. Effective investigation
132. The Court notes that the first applicant raised the complaint concerning ill-treatment by State servicemen before the investigating authorities when describing the circumstances of his son's apprehension. According to the Government, the investigation into the incident was pending in case Nos. 26075 and 32027. However, after five years it produced no tangible results.
133. For the reasons stated above in paragraphs 108 - 117 in relation to the procedural obligation under Article 2 of the Convention, the Court concludes that the Government have failed to conduct an effective investigation into the ill-treatment of the first applicant.
134. Accordingly, there has been a violation of Article 3 also in
> 1 2 3 ... 14 15 16 ... 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
