Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 22.01.2009 «Дело Заурбекова и Заурбекова (Zaurbekova and Zaurbekova) против России» [англ.]

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST SECTION

CASE OF ZAURBEKOVA AND ZAURBEKOVA v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 27183/03)

JUDGMENT <*>

(Strasbourg, 22.I.2009)

--------------------------------
<*> This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Zaurbekova and Zaurbekova v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Christos Rozakis, President,
Nina {Vajic} <*>,
--------------------------------
<*> Здесь и далее по тексту слова на национальном языке набраны латинским шрифтом и выделены фигурными скобками.

Anatoly Kovler,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Dean Spielmann,
Sverre Erik Jebens,
Giorgio Malinverni, judges,
and {Andre} Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 16 December 2008,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in an application (No. 27183/03) against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") by two Russian nationals, Ms Tumisha Magomedovna Zaurbekova and Ms Maryam Dushayevna Zaurbekova ("the applicants"), on 18 July 2003.
2. The applicants, who had been granted legal aid, were represented by lawyers of the Stichting Russian Justice Initiative ("the SRJI"), an NGO based in the Netherlands with a representative office in Russia. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented first by Mr P. Laptev and then by Ms V. Milinchuk, both former Representatives of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. The applicants alleged, in particular, that their close relative had disappeared following his unacknowledged detention and that there had been no adequate investigation into the matter. They further complained of their mental suffering on account of these events. The second applicant also complained of a violation of the right to respect for home and property rights in respect of herself and her missing relative. Lastly, the applicants complained of the lack of effective remedies in respect of those violations. They relied on Articles 2, 3, 5, 8 and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.
4. On 29 August 2004 the President of the First Section decided to grant priority to the application under Rule 41 of the Rules of Court.
5. By a decision of 11 October 2007 the Court declared the application partly admissible.
6. The applicants and the Government each filed further written observations (Rule 59 § 1).

THE FACTS

I. The circumstances of the case

7. The applicants were born in 1943 and 1975 respectively and live in Urus-Martan.

A. The facts

8. The first applicant has two children: Isa Zaurbekov, born in 1967, and the second applicant. At the material time her two children were living temporarily in a block of flats at 1 Kirov Avenue in Grozny, Chechnya. Isa Zaurbekov worked as a car mechanic in a local repair shop.

1. Detention of Isa Zaurbekov

(a) The applicants' account
9. On 11 February 2003, at around 3 a.m., a group of armed men forcibly entered the block of flats at 1 Kirov Avenue and attempted to break down the door of a flat in which the second applicant and Isa Zaurbekov lived. The men managed to make a hole in the door. One of them then pointed his sniper rifle (vintorez) through th



> 1 2 3 ... 23 24 25

	Поделиться:	Tweet