Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 23.04.2009 «Дело Исраилова и другие (Israilova and others) против России» [англ.]

e in the present case and that it was so serious that it fell within the ambit of Article 3 of the Convention.
148. At the same time the Court considers that Adlan Dovtayev's wife was to a certain extent involved in the search for her husband, even if there is no evidence that she applied to the authorities in writing. It also considers that the tenth, eleventh and twelfth applicants were adversely affected by the fact of their father's disappearance although they could not have been expected to communicate with the authorities owing to their young age.
149. The Court observes that for six years the first, second, eighth, ninth, tenth, eleventh and twelfth applicants have had no news of Adlan Dovtayev and Sharpuddin Israilov. Throughout this period the first, second and eighth applicants persistently applied to various official bodies with enquiries about their sons. Despite those attempts, they have never received any plausible explanation or information as to what became of Adlan Dovtayev and Sharpuddin Israilov following their kidnapping. The Court's findings under the procedural aspect of Article 2 are also of direct relevance here.
150. In view of the above, the Court finds that the first, second, eighth, ninth, tenth, eleventh and twelfth applicants suffered distress and anguish as a result of the disappearance of their close relatives and their inability to find out what had happened to them. The manner in which their complaints have been dealt with by the authorities must be considered to constitute inhuman treatment contrary to Article 3 of the Convention.
151. The Court therefore concludes that there has been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention in respect of the first, second, eighth, ninth, tenth, eleventh and twelfth applicants.

VI. Alleged violation of Article 5 of the Convention

152. The applicants further stated that Adlan Dovtayev and Sharpuddin Israilov had been detained in violation of the guarantees of Article 5 of the Convention, which reads, in so far as relevant:
"1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law:
...
(c) the lawful arrest or detention of a person effected for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence or when it is reasonably considered necessary to prevent his committing an offence or fleeing after having done so;
...
2. Everyone who is arrested shall be informed promptly, in a language which he understands, of the reasons for his arrest and of any charge against him.
3. Everyone arrested or detained in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 (c) of this Article shall be brought promptly before a judge or other officer authorised by law to exercise judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial. Release may be conditioned by guarantees to appear for trial.
4. Everyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take proceedings by which the lawfulness of his detention shall be decided speedily by a court and his release ordered if the detention is not lawful.
5. Everyone who has been the victim of arrest or detention in contravention of the provisions of this Article shall have an enforceable right to compensation."

A. The parties' submissions

153. In the Government's opinion, no evidence was obtained by the investigators to confirm that Adlan Dovtayev and Sharpuddin Israilov had been deprived of their liberty in breach of the guarantees set out in Article 5 of the Convention.
154. The applicants reiterated the complaint.

B. The Cou



> 1 2 3 ... 17 18 19 ... 22 23 24

	Поделиться:	Tweet