Waynakh Online

Top Menu

  • Archive Documents
  • Bookshelf
  • Chechen Culture
  • ECHR Cases
  • Gallery
  • Lyrics
  • Mp3
  • Poems
  • Videos

Main Menu

  • Home
  • Chechens
    • Who are the Chechens?
    • Tribal Unions and Clans
    • Religion
    • Famous Chechens
      • Chechen Academicians
      • Chechen Commanders
      • Chechen Litterateures
      • Chechen Musicians
      • Chechen Painters
      • Chechen Politicians
      • Chechen Presidents
      • Chechen Sports Men/Women
      • Names from Chechen History
  • Chechnya
    • Administrative Divisions
    • Maps
    • Geography
    • Constitution
    • Flag, Emblem and Anthem
    • Parliament
    • Presidents
    • Demographics
    • Economy
    • Human Rights Violations
    • Refugees
    • History
  • Chechen Language
    • Chechen Alphabet
    • Fairy Tales in Chechen Language (Mp3)
  • News
  • Articles
  • Interviews
  • Contact
  • Archive Documents
  • Bookshelf
  • Chechen Culture
  • ECHR Cases
  • Gallery
  • Lyrics
  • Mp3
  • Poems
  • Videos

logo

Waynakh Online

  • Home
  • Chechens
    • Who are the Chechens?
    • Tribal Unions and Clans
    • Religion
    • Famous Chechens
      • Chechen Academicians
      • Chechen Commanders
      • Chechen Litterateures
      • Chechen Musicians
      • Chechen Painters
      • Chechen Politicians
      • Chechen Presidents
      • Chechen Sports Men/Women
      • Names from Chechen History
  • Chechnya
    • Administrative Divisions
    • Maps
    • Geography
    • Constitution
    • Flag, Emblem and Anthem
    • Parliament
    • Presidents
    • Demographics
    • Economy
    • Human Rights Violations
    • Refugees
    • History
  • Chechen Language
    • Chechen Alphabet
    • Fairy Tales in Chechen Language (Mp3)
  • News
  • Articles
  • Interviews
  • Contact
ECHR Cases
Home›ECHR Cases›Ismailov and Others – Ustarkhanova v. Russia

Ismailov and Others – Ustarkhanova v. Russia

By admin
November 26, 2009
1132
0
Share:

The ECHR cases of Ismailov and Others – Ustarkhanov v. Russia (application no. 33947/05 and 35744/05).

..


…

.

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

887

26.11.2009

Press release issued by the Registrar

Two Chamber judgments in respect of Russia

Ismailov and Others v. Russia (no. 33947/05)

Ustarkhanova v. Russia (no. 35744/05)

DISAPPEARANCES IN CHECHNYA

In both cases:

Violations of Article 2 (right to life of Aslambek Ismailov, Aslan Ismailov, Khizir Ismailov, Yusi Daydayev, Yaragi Ismailov and Balavdi Ustarkhanov, and lack of an effective investigation into their disappearances),

Violation of Article 3 (inhuman treatment on account of the applicants’ psychological suffering),

Violation of Article 5 (unacknowledged detention) and

Violation of Article 13 (right to an effective remedy)

of the European Convention on Human Rights

Principal facts

The applicants in the first case are four families of Russian nationals who live in Achkhoy-Martan, Chechnya. All four applicant families are related to each other. They are also the relatives of: Aslambek Ismailov, born in 1979; Aslan Ismailov, born in 1981; Khizir Ismailov, born in 1962; Yusi Daydayev, born in 1953; Yaragi Ismailov, born in 1956. The five men have not been seen since the early morning of 13-14 January 2003, when armed men in camouflage uniforms broke into the applicants’ houses and took them away. At the material time the town of Achkhoy-Martan was under the full control of the Russian federal forces. Checkpoints manned by Russian servicemen were located on the roads leading to and from the settlement. The applicants alleged that their relatives were abducted by Russian servicemen and were taken away to an area where Russian troops had been stationed at the time. Immediately after the abduction the applicants called the district department of the interior where they were told that there was nothing that could be done about it. Since the morning of 14 January 2003, the applicants repeatedly complained to a number of State authorities, including the prosecution service, the Federal Security Service and the military commander’s office. Mostly their complaints have remained unanswered or purely formal replies have been given to them. An investigation was opened on 17 January 2003 into the abduction of the five men, yet it was forwarded numerous times to different prosecutors’ offices and suspended repeatedly for failure to establish the identity of the perpetrators.

The applicant in the second case was born in 1955 and lives in Achkhoy-Martan, Chechnya. She is the mother of Balavdi Ustarkhanov, who was born in 1982. Balavdi has not been seen since the night of 6 to 7 January 2003 when he was taken away by a large group of armed men in camouflage uniforms from the house of a friend with whom he was staying for a few nights. The applicant submitted that some of those men were wearing masks and those who were not were of Slavic appearance; they spoke unaccented Russian, were equipped with portable radio sets, and the residents of the household thought that they were Russian military servicemen. Balavdi Ustarkhanov was put in one of the military vehicles parked next to the house and then apparently driven away in the direction of the local checkpoint, manned by the Russian military forces. In support of her statement, the applicant submitted witness accounts. A number of other witnesses to the abduction, the applicant advanced, refused to provide statements to the Court out of fear for their safety and that of their relatives. The applicant complained about her son’s abduction to the police and prosecution services as soon as she was informed about it on the morning of 7 January 2003. On 21 January an investigation was opened into Balavdi Ustarkhanov’s abduction and two days later the applicant was granted victim status. The investigation was suspended many times for failure to establish the identities of the perpertrators.

The Government did not challenge most of the facts as presented by the applicants in both cases. As regards the first case, they further submitted that although the investigation has failed to establish the whereabouts of the missing men, it was still in progress and all operational and search measures were being taken to solve the crime.

Despite specific requests by the Court in both cases, the Government submitted only 22 documents from the investigation file in the first case, and did not disclose any documents from the file in the second case. They stated that as the investigations were in progress, disclosure of the documents in the files would be incompatible with domestic legislation.

Complaints and procedure

The two cases concerned the applicants’ allegations that their close relatives had been deprived of their lives in Chechnya after having been detained by Russian servicemen. All the applicants further complained that the domestic authorities had failed to carry out an effective investigation into their allegations. They all relied on Articles 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, and the applicants in the first case, on Article 14.

Decision of the Court

In both cases, the Court considered that the applicants had presented a coherent and convincing picture of their relatives’ abductions, corroborated by witness statements collected by the applicants and the investigations. In particular, the Court noted the fact that large groups of men had moved freely around, crossed check points and military roadblocks during curfew hours. Having examined the documents submitted to it, and having drawn inferences from the Government’s failure to submit the documents which had been in their exclusive possession or to provide any plausible explanation about the events in question, the Court concluded in both cases that the six men had been abducted by State servicemen and that they had to be presumed dead following their unacknowledged detention during unacknowledged security operations.

Noting in both cases that the authorities had not provided any justification or otherwise accounted for the deaths of the six men, the Court concluded unanimously that there had been violations of Article 2 in respect of all of the applicants’ relatives.

In both cases, the Court further held unanimously that there had been violations of Article 2 relating to the authorities’ failure to carry out effective investigations into the circumstances in which the applicants’ relatives had disappeared.

The Court also found unanimously that all the applicants, save for the youngest applicant in the first case who was born more than four months after her father had disappeared, had suffered and continued to suffer distress and anguish as a result of the disappearance of their relatives and their inability to find out what had happened to them. The manner in which their complaints had been dealt with by the authorities had to be considered to constitute inhuman treatment, in violation of Article 3.

In addition, the Court held unanimously in both cases that the applicants’ relatives had been held in unacknowledged detention without any of the safeguards contained in Article 5, which constituted a particularly grave violation of the right to liberty and security enshrined in that article.

Furthermore, the Court concluded unanimously that no separate issues arose under Article 8, and that there had been a violation of Article 13 in conjunction with Article 2 in both cases given that the criminal investigations had been ineffective and the effectiveness of any other remedy that may have existed had consequently been undermined.

The Court found unanimously that the applicants’ complaint under Article 14 had not been substantiated as no evidence had been submitted to it suggesting that the applicants had been treated differently from persons in an analogous situation without objective and reasonable justification, or that they had ever raised this complaint before the domestic authorities.

Under Article 41 (just satisfaction) of the Convention, the Court awarded the applicants sums ranging between of 1,500 euros (EUR) and EUR 13,000 in respect of pecuniary damage, between EUR 35,000 and EUR 70,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, and EUR 5,500 for costs and expenses.

TagsAslambek IsmailovAslan IsmailovBalavdi UstarkhanovKhizir IsmailovYaragi IsmailovYusi Daydayev
Previous Article

IFEX Members Call for Protection to Women ...

Next Article

Järzhaçu Büysanna – Hasan Musaev

Share:

Related articles More from author

  • ECHR Cases

    Akhmatkhanovy – Benuyeva and Others v. Russia

    July 22, 2010
    By admin
  • ECHR Cases

    Yusupova and Zaurbekov – Zulpa Akhmatova and Others v. Russia

    May 10, 2009
    By admin
  • ECHR Cases

    Zhebrailova and Others v. Russia

    March 26, 2015
    By admin
  • ECHR Cases

    Khalitova v. Russia

    May 11, 2009
    By admin
  • ECHR Cases

    Dzhabrailov v. Russia

    May 20, 2010
    By admin
  • ECHR Cases

    Mikiyeva and Others v. Russia

    January 31, 2014
    By admin

Leave a reply

  • News

    Sanctions against Kadirov’s Russia!

  • News

    Chechen Judoist Wins the Silver Medal at European Finals

  • News

    Chechen Asylum Seeker Arrested in Belarus

Our Website in Other Languages

                        

Latest Comments

  • Melissa weekley
    on
    March 2, 2023
    There is so much to learn about Chechen culture. It is probably one of the least ...

    The Etiquette of Chechen Marriage Customs

  • Khava
    on
    January 4, 2023
    That's not even true!! Our religion is the islam and it always been the islam! We ...

    Religion

  • Amina
    on
    November 15, 2022
    Your name, Tumisha, comes from Tum, meaning core, inner, or bonemarrow. The "sha" part is an ...

    Chechen Women Names

  • Withheld
    on
    August 17, 2022
    May I ask why your website makes no mention of the second most famous Chechen in ...

    Chechen Presidents

  • Eslem
    on
    August 11, 2022
    How can i learn нохчи мот

    Chechen Language

Find us on Facebook

Categories

Archives

Search

https://youtu.be/LRtf8UENmp8
https://youtu.be/0yiOJCJWZjU
https://youtu.be/o5oU3dXxgSU
https://youtu.be/iDCpqn62bVQ
https://youtu.be/eBaatZVQpQw
https://youtu.be/Ukk7OkjTlOk
https://youtu.be/rBzKuDNnidM
https://youtu.be/4OON0mwLMfM
https://youtu.be/A7YLIm2YC-Y
https://youtu.be/oiymVOUdIxk

Our Partners

Chechenpress
Khaaman
Ichkeria Culture Center in Austria
Qaanuoyn Dosh
World Chechnya Day
Justice for Medet Önlü

Honorary Consulate of the ChRI in Turkey

We are at Instagram

Waynakh Online

Independent Chechen website that publishes news, articles, interviews, historical documents, literary works, photographs, music and videos.


                        

Last Publications

  • March 16, 2020

    Prime Minister Zakayev’s Book Presented in London

  • February 3, 2020

    European Parliament Hosts a Conference Dedicated to Chechnya

  • October 19, 2019

    Akhmed Zakayev’s Book Presented in the House of Commons

  • August 11, 2019

    Subjugate or Exterminate!

  • August 11, 2019

    Chechnya: The Inside Story

Most commented

  • Gallery

    Gallery of Abed Arslan

    By admin
    September 14, 2009
    10
  • Articles

    Gakayev, The Enemy Kadyrov Needs

    By admin
    August 31, 2012
    10
  • Articles

    Sex Slavery and Death Await Women Seized by Kadyrov’s Bandits

    By admin
    August 16, 2011
    8
  • Famous Chechens

    Shamil Salmanovich Basayev

    By admin
    May 18, 2008
    6
  • Home
  • Contact
2000-2022 © Waynakh Online | Powered by Chechen Media