y prosecutor's office of a military unit forwarded the request for the search for Abdul-Malik Shakhmurzayev to a number of law enforcement agencies.
36. On 18 April 2003, 4 December 2003, 2 June 2004, 6 October 2004 and 21 March 2005 the applicants' representatives repeatedly and unsuccessfully requested information from the district prosecutor's office. They asked to be informed when the criminal investigation into the abduction had been opened; what number the case file had been given; who had been in charge of the investigation; and whether there had been any progress. In addition, they requested to be informed whether the applicants or their relatives had been granted victim status in the proceedings, whether the authorities had forwarded information requests concerning the whereabouts of Abdul-Malik Shakhmurzayev to various detention facilities and whether the investigation had questioned the eyewitnesses to Abdul-Malik Shakhmurzayev's abduction.
37. On 6 May 2003 and 8 January 2004 the district prosecutor's office informed the applicants that the investigation in the criminal case had been suspended owing to the failure to establish the identity of the perpetrators.
38. On 23 May 2003 the military prosecutor's office of military unit No. 20102 informed the applicants' relative that military unit No. 3660 had not conducted any operations in Chechen-Aul in February 2001.
39. In August 2004 (the date is illegible) the district prosecutor's office informed the applicants that the investigation in the criminal case had been resumed on 29 July 2004.
40. On 19 April 2005 the Chechnya prosecutor's office informed the applicants that they had been duly informed about the progress of the investigation.
2. Information submitted by the Government
41. In their submission to the Court the Government pointed out that the applicants had complained to the district prosecutor's office about the abduction of Abdul-Malik Shakhmurzayev only on 7 August 2001.
42. The Government further stated that on an unspecified date a relative of another person abducted together with Abdul-Malik Shakhmurzayev, Mr Kh.Z., had complained about the abduction to the Special Envoy of the Russian President on Human Rights and Freedoms in Chechnya (the Envoy). On 9 June 2001 the Envoy forwarded this complaint to the district prosecutor's office. Therefore, on 9 June 2001 the district prosecutor's office opened criminal case No. 19074.
43. On 17 June 2001 the investigators requested the ROVD to establish whether any special operations had been conducted by the military or law-enforcement agencies in the vicinity of Chechen-Aul on 8 February 2001.
44. On 20 or 28 June 2001 the investigators requested the ROVD to question relatives of the abducted men and those residents of Chechen-Aul who might have witnessed the abduction.
45. On an unspecified date the investigators requested the Grozny department of the FSB and the ROVD to establish whether any law enforcement agencies or military units had been involved in the abduction of the applicants' relative. They were also requested to establish which units of federal forces had been stationed on the premises of the former canning factory in Gikalo in 2001 and whether Abdul-Malik Shakhmurzayev, Malik Z. and Gilani M. had been taken there.
46. On an unspecified date the investigators conducted a crime scene examination at the site of the abduction. It does not appear that any evidence was collected from the scene.
47. According to the responses received from the ROVD, Abdul-Malik Shakhmurzayev, Malik Z. and Gilani M. had not been listed by the authorities as members of illegal armed groups. They had never been prosecuted or detained on criminal or administrative charges; they had not applied for medical assis
> 1 2 3 ... 5 6 7 ... 17 18 19
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
