Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 09.04.2009 «Дело Докаев и другие (Dokayev and others) против России» [англ.]

e No. 52161 had not established the involvement of Russian military servicemen in the abduction of Isa Dubayev.
28. On 21 October 2003 the Chechnya department of the Federal Security Service (the Chechnya FSB) informed the seventh applicant that they were taking measures to identify the perpetrators of Ruslan Askhabov's abduction. The letter further stated that Ruslan Askhabov was not suspected of committing a crime and that there were "no lawful grounds for his detention".
29. On 21 November 2003 the ROVD informed the applicants' relative that in connection with the abduction of Ruslan Askhabov, the Oktyabrskiy district prosecutor's office (the district prosecutor's office) had opened criminal case No. 40084.
30. On 25 February 2004 the seventh applicant once again wrote to the military prosecutor of the UGA with a request for assistance in the search for Ruslan Askhabov. In her letter she stated that her son's abduction had been carried out by five military servicemen in white camouflage uniforms who spoke unaccented Russian.
31. On 11 March 2004 the military prosecutor's office of the UGA informed the seventh applicant that the enquiry conducted by the military prosecutor's office of military unit No. 20102 had not established the involvement of Russian federal forces in the abduction of Ruslan Askhabov. The letter further stated that on 9 April 2001, in connection with the abduction of Ruslan Askhabov, the Urus-Martan district prosecutor's office had opened criminal case No. 19045 under Article 127 § 2 of the Criminal Code (unlawful deprivation of liberty).
32. On 12 March 2004 the interim Chechnya military commander forwarded the seventh applicant's request for assistance to the district military commander's office and the Chechnya Ministry of the Interior.
33. On 28 April 2004 the district prosecutor's office informed the eighth applicant that on 28 November 2003 the investigation in criminal case No. 52158 had been suspended owing to the failure to identify the perpetrators.
34. On 5 August 2004 the military prosecutor's office of the UGA forwarded the seventh applicant's request for assistance in the search for Ruslan Askhabov to the military prosecutor's office of military unit No. 20102.
35. On 20 September 2004 the military prosecutor's office of military unit No. 20102 informed the seventh applicant that neither the investigation nor additional enquiry had confirmed the involvement of Russian federal forces in the abduction of Ruslan Askhabov.
36. On 23 December 2004 the seventh applicant wrote to the district prosecutor's office requesting to be provided with information concerning the status of the investigation in criminal case No. 52158.
37. On 28 December 2004 the district prosecutor's office informed the seventh applicant that the investigation in criminal case No. 52158 had been resumed.
38. On 21 February 2005 the third applicant wrote to the town prosecutor's office and requested to be informed which prosecutor's office had been investigating her husband's abduction. She requested to be granted victim status in the proceedings and that the investigation be conducted in a thorough and effective manner.
39. On 22 February 2005 the seventh applicant wrote to the district prosecutor's office. She stated that the abduction of her husband had been carried out by a group of armed masked military servicemen in white camouflage uniforms. The applicant requested to be provided with information concerning the results of the investigation. In particular, she requested that the representatives of the Russian federal forces who had participated in special operations in Grozny on the night of 10 December 2002 be questioned by the investigators. She also requested that those who had been in charge of



> 1 ... 2 3 4 5 ... 19 20 21

	Поделиться:	Tweet