The ECHR case of Khalitova v. Russia (application no. 39166\/04)<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
..<\/span><\/p>\n \n \u2026<\/span><\/p>\n .<\/span><\/p>\n EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n 178<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n 5.3.2009<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Press release issued by the Registrar<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n CHAMBER JUDGMENT<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n KHALITOVA v. RUSSIA<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Khalitova v. Russia <\/span>(no. 39166\/04)<\/span><\/p>\n The applicant, Luiza Khalitova, is a Russian national who was born in 1966 and lives in Urus-Martan (<\/a>Chechen Republic). On 11 September 2000 her husband, Lecha Khazhmuradov, while working in the woods near his home village, was shot dead by a group of armed men equipped with armoured personnel carriers in broad daylight. Relying on Articles\u00a02 (right to life) and\u00a013 (right to an effective remedy), the applicant complained that her husband had been killed by Russian servicemen, that the authorities had failed to carry out an effective investigation into the matter, and that there had been no effective remedies available to her in respect of those violations. <\/span><\/p>\n The Court found it established that Lecha Khazhmuradov had been killed on 11 September 2000 by State agents. Noting that the Russian Government had not provided any <\/a> plausible <\/a>explanation at all, the Court concluded that there had been a violation of Article 2 in respect of the applicant\u2019s husband. It further held that there had been a violation of Article\u00a02 relating to the authorities\u2019 failure to carry out a thorough and effective investigation into the circumstances in which the applicant\u2019s husband had been killed. Lastly, it held that there had been a violation of Article\u00a013 in conjunction with Article\u00a02. The Court awarded Mrs\u00a0Khalitova 35,000\u00a0euros (EUR) in respect of non-pecuniary damage and EUR\u00a02,400 for costs and expenses. (The judgment is available only in English.)<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The ECHR case of Khalitova v. Russia (application no. 39166\/04)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-480","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-echr-cases"],"views":1075,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.waynakh.com\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/480","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.waynakh.com\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.waynakh.com\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.waynakh.com\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.waynakh.com\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=480"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.waynakh.com\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/480\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":481,"href":"https:\/\/www.waynakh.com\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/480\/revisions\/481"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.waynakh.com\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=480"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.waynakh.com\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=480"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.waynakh.com\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=480"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\n<\/span><\/p>\n