The ECHR case of Saydaliyeva and Others v. Russia (application no. 41498\/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 CASE OF SAYDALIYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n (Application no. 41498\/04)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n JUDGMENT<\/span><\/p>\n This version was rectified on 4 May 2009 <\/span><\/p>\n under Rule 81 of the Rules of the Court<\/span><\/p>\n STRASBOURG<\/span><\/p>\n 2 April 2009<\/span><\/p>\n This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article\u00a044 \u00a7\u00a02 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n In the case of Saydaliyeva and Others v. Russia,<\/span><\/p>\n The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:<\/span><\/p>\n Christos Rozakis, President, Having deliberated in private on 12 March 2009,<\/span><\/p>\n Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:<\/span><\/p>\n PROCEDURE<\/span><\/p>\n 1.\u00a0\u00a0The case originated in an application (no. 41498\/04) against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (\u201cthe Convention\u201d) by three Russian nationals, namely Ms Erist Adamovna Saydaliyeva, Ms Nakhapu Yakubovna Dautkhadzhiyeva and Ms Khavra Khasaynovna1<\/sup><\/span><\/a> Saydaliyeva, (\u201cthe applicants\u201d), on 2 November 2004.<\/span><\/p>\n 2.\u00a0\u00a0The applicants were represented by lawyers of the Stichting Russian Justice Initiative (\u201cSRJI\u201d), an NGO based in the Netherlands with a representative office in Russia. The Russian Government (\u201cthe Government\u201d) were represented by Ms V. Milinchuk, former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.<\/span><\/p>\n 3.\u00a0\u00a0On 13 June 2007 the Court decided to apply Rule\u00a041 of the Rules of Court and to grant priority treatment to the application, as well as to give notice of the application to the Government. Under the provisions of Article\u00a029 \u00a7 3 of the Convention, it decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility.<\/span><\/p>\n 4.\u00a0\u00a0The Government objected to the joint examination of the admissibility and merits of the application. Having considered the Government’s objection, the Court dismissed it.<\/span><\/p>\n THE FACTS<\/span><\/p>\n I.\u00a0\u00a0THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE<\/span><\/p>\n 5.\u00a0\u00a0The applicants were born in 1954, 1974 and 1979 respectively. They live in the village of Serzhen-Yurt, the Shali District, in the Chechen Republic.<\/span><\/p>\n 6.\u00a0\u00a0The first applicant is the mother of the third applicant, Ms Luisa Saydaliyeva and of Mr Vakha Khasanovich Saydaliyev, born in 1976. At the material time Vakha Saydaliyev lived with the second applicant and had three children with her. Vakha Saydaliyev was disabled: he had had a leg amputated as a result of a trauma.<\/span><\/p>\n A.\u00a0\u00a0Disappearance of Vakha Saydaliyev<\/span><\/p>\n 1.\u00a0\u00a0The applicants’ account<\/span><\/p>\n (a)\u00a0\u00a0Abduction of Vakha Saydaliyev<\/span><\/p>\n 7.\u00a0\u00a0On 16 April 2002 the Saydaliyevs gathered their relatives and acquaintances in their house at 50 Sheripov Street, the village of Serzhen-Yurt, for the funeral of a family member. At some point Vakha Saydaliyev absented himself from home for a while and went to visit his neighbours.<\/span><\/p>\n 8.\u00a0\u00a0At about 1 p.m. two armoured personnel carriers (\u201cAPCs\u201d) and three Ural vehicles arrived at the Sandaliyevs’ house; around fifty or sixty armed men who wore camouflage uniforms and spoke Russian without an accent got out of them. The applicants believed the men to be Russian military servicemen.<\/span><\/p>\n 9.\u00a0\u00a0The servicemen proceeded to the courtyard and blocked the gates to it. Some of them entered the house and searched it without producing any warrant. They examined the dead body prepared for the funeral and explained that they had been instructed to check everything.<\/span><\/p>\n 10.\u00a0\u00a0The servicemen shouted at the applicants and asked them where \u201ctheir one-legged man\u201d was. Then they lined all the men present against a wall and checked their identity papers.<\/span><\/p>\n 11.\u00a0\u00a0In the meantime Vakha Saydaliyev returned home and entered the courtyard. The servicemen told him that they would take him to the military commander’s office for questioning but did not produce any documents. Vakha Saydaliyev did not offer any resistance and got into the Ural vehicle.<\/span><\/p>\n 12.\u00a0\u00a0The applicants and Luisa Saydaliyeva begged the servicemen not to take Vakha Saydaliyev away. In reply, the servicemen shouted at the women; one of them hit Luisa Saydaliyeva with a machine gun butt. Then the vehicles drove away.<\/span><\/p>\n (b)\u00a0\u00a0Information obtained by the applicants from third persons<\/span><\/p>\n 13.\u00a0\u00a0On 16 April 2002 armed men, allegedly Russian servicemen, detained the Saydaliyevs’ neighbour, Mr Kh. On 17 or 18 A<\/span>pril 2002 he was released and returned home. Mr Kh. told the applicants that he had seen Vakha Saydaliyev in the premises of the military commander’s office in the village of Avtury, the Shali District, in the Chechen Republic. However, he refused to provide more information on his arrest and detention or to make an official statement. Later he left the village of <\/span>Serzhen-Yurt.<\/span><\/p>\n 14.\u00a0\u00a0In spring 2004 two unknown men visited Vakha Saydaliyev’s relatives and told them that for a year they had been kept in a detention facility in Stavropol and had shared a cell with Vakha Saydaliyev. They had no further information on his fate.<\/span><\/p>\n 2.\u00a0\u00a0Information submitted by the Government<\/span><\/p>\n 15.\u00a0\u00a0At about 2 p.m. on 16 April 2002 unidentified persons in camouflage uniforms armed with machine guns kidnapped Vakha Saydaliyev from the house at 50 Sharipov Street, the village of Serzhen-Yurt.<\/span><\/p>\n B.\u00a0\u00a0The search for Vakha Saydaliyev and the investigation<\/span><\/p>\n 1.\u00a0\u00a0The applicants’ account<\/span><\/p>\n 16.\u00a0\u00a0Immediately after Vakha Saydaliyev’s abduction the first and second applicants asked the head of the local administration to help find their relative, but in vain.<\/span><\/p>\n 17.\u00a0\u00a0Starting from 16 April 2002 the first and second applicants tried to establish Vakha Saydaliyev’s whereabouts. They applied to various official bodies, such as prosecutors’ offices at different levels, the Russian President, the Speaker of the Russian State Duma, the Administration of the Chechen Republic, the head of the Federal Security Service (\u201cthe FSB\u201d) and the military commander’s office of the Shali District of the Chechen Republic requesting to help them to find their relative. The applicants were assisted in their efforts by the SRJI.<\/span><\/p>\n 18.\u00a0\u00a0On 18 May 2002 the military prosecutor’s office of military unit no.\u00a020116 (\u201cthe unit prosecutor’s office\u201d) forwarded the first applicant’s complaint about her son’s abduction to the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic and noted that there was no \u201cobjective proof of guilt of the United Group Alignment military servicemen\u201d in the crime.<\/span><\/p>\n 19.\u00a0\u00a0On 14 June 2002 the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic forwarded the first applicant’s complaint about her son’s arrest by \u201cunidentified persons\u201d to the prosecutor’s office of the Shali District (\u201cthe district prosecutor’s office\u201d).<\/span><\/p>\n 20.\u00a0\u00a0On 6 August 2002 the district prosecutor’s office instituted an investigation into the disappearance of Vakha Saydaliyev under Article\u00a0126\u00a0\u00a7 2 of the Russian Criminal Code (aggravated kidnapping). The case file was given the number\u00a059186.<\/span><\/p>\n 21.\u00a0\u00a0On 23 September 2002 the district prosecutor’s office granted the first applicant victim status and notified her accordingly.<\/span><\/p>\n 22.\u00a0\u00a0On 8 October 2002 the district prosecutor’s office suspended the investigation in case no. 59186 for failure to identify the perpetrators and informed the first applicant accordingly.<\/span><\/p>\n 23.\u00a0\u00a0On 26 December 2002 the district prosecutor’s office informed the Administration of the Chechen Republic and the first applicant that the investigation into Vakha Saydaliyev’s kidnapping was pending and investigative measures were being taken to solve the crime.<\/span><\/p>\n 24.\u00a0\u00a0On 13 February 2003 the South Federal Circuit Department of the Prosecutor General’s Office forwarded the first applicant’s complaint to the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic.<\/span><\/p>\n 25.\u00a0\u00a0On 11 April 2003 the district prosecutor’s office issued a certificate confirming that the investigation in case no. 59186 instituted in relation to Vakha Saydaliyev’s kidnapping was pending before them and that investigative measures were being taken to establish his whereabouts.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/a>26.\u00a0\u00a0On 16 April 2003 the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic forwarded the first applicant’s complaint that her son had been apprehended by \u201cpeople in military uniforms who had introduced themselves as servicemen of the FSB\u201d to the district prosecutor’s office and to the Department of the FSB for the Chechen Republic (\u201cthe FSB Department\u201d). They requested that they be informed whether Vakha Saydaliyev had been apprehended by any law-enforcement agency and, if so, whether criminal proceedings against him had been initiated.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/a>27.\u00a0\u00a0On 24 April 2003 the Department of the Interior of Shali District (\u201cthe ROVD\u201d) issued the first applicant with a certificate confirming that her son had \u201cactually been taken away to an unknown destination on 16\u00a0April 2002 by military servicemen during the special operation [carried out] in the village of Serzhen-Yurt\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n 28.\u00a0\u00a0On 6 June 2003 the district prosecutor’s office informed the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic and the first applicant that, despite the suspension of the investigation in case no. 59186, investigative measures were being taken to find Vakha Saydaliyev and the perpetrators.<\/span><\/p>\n 29.\u00a0\u00a0On 19 June 2003 the Shali District Court of the Chechen Republic declared Vakha Saydaliyev missing at the second applicant’s request.<\/span><\/p>\n 30.\u00a0\u00a0On 28 October 2003 the first applicant requested the district prosecutor’s office to inform her of progress in the investigation and to grant her victim status.<\/span><\/p>\n 31.\u00a0\u00a0On 5 December 2003 the district prosecutor’s office informed the first applicant that the investigation in case no. 59186 had been suspended, that she had been admitted to the proceedings as a victim and that investigative measures were being taken to establish Vakha Saydaliyev’s whereabouts and to find the perpetrators.<\/span><\/p>\n 32.\u00a0\u00a0On 29 January 2004 the ROVD informed the first applicant that the investigation into her son’s kidnapping had been initiated on 6 August 2002 and that the search for him was under way.<\/span><\/p>\n 33.\u00a0\u00a0On 6 April 2004 the military prosecutor’s office of the United Group Alignment (\u201cthe UGA prosecutor’s office\u201d) informed the first applicant that the unit prosecutor’s office had carried out an inquiry into her son’s kidnapping, which had established no evidence of the implication of military personnel in the crime, and advised her to send further queries to the district prosecutor’s office.<\/span><\/p>\n 34.\u00a0\u00a0On 6 May 2004 the first applicant complained about her son’s disappearance to the UGA prosecutor’s office. On 8 June 2004 the UGA prosecutor’s office replied that the investigation in case no. 59186 was pending before the district prosecutor’s office.<\/span><\/p>\n 35.\u00a0\u00a0On 1 July 2004 the district prosecutor’s office informed the first applicant that the investigation into Vakha Saydaliyev’s kidnapping had been resumed.<\/span><\/p>\n 36.\u00a0\u00a0On 1 August 2004 the district prosecutor’s office informed the first applicant that the investigation had again been suspended but noted that investigative measures were being taken to find Vakha Saydaliyev.<\/span><\/p>\n 37.\u00a0\u00a0On 2 August 2004 the district prosecutor’s office issued the first applicant with a certificate confirming that the investigation into Vakha Saydaliyev’s kidnapping was pending and that his whereabouts were unknown.<\/span><\/p>\n 38.\u00a0\u00a0On 21 August 2004 the UGA prosecutor’s office forwarded the first applicant’s letter to the unit prosecutor’s office and ordered an inquiry into the matters complained of.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/a>39.\u00a0\u00a0On 25 December 2004 the UGA prosecutor’s office informed the first applicant that an inquiry into her son’s disappearance had established that servicemen of the law-enforcement agencies under their jurisdiction had not been implicated in the crime.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/a>40.\u00a0\u00a0On 17 February 2005 the first applicant complained about her son’s disappearance to the military commander’s office of the Shali District (\u201cthe military commander’s office\u201d). On the same date the military commander’s office replied that they had requested information on Vakha Saydaliyev’s whereabouts from various official bodies.<\/span><\/p>\n 41.\u00a0\u00a0On 10 March 2005 the unit prosecutor’s office informed the first applicant that on 16 April 2002 the military personnel had not carried any special operations in the village of Serzhen-Yurt and had not apprehended any of its inhabitants.<\/span><\/p>\n 42.\u00a0\u00a0On 12 March 2005 the military commander’s office informed the first applicant that an operational and search case under the number 71026 had been initiated in respect of Vakha Saydaliyev’s disappearance and was pending before the ROVD.<\/span><\/p>\n 43.\u00a0\u00a0On 19 May 2005 the SRJI requested from the district prosecutor’s office information on progress in the investigation in case no. 59186. On 6\u00a0June 2005 the district prosecutor’s office replied that the case was pending before them and advised the SRJI to send further queries to the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic.<\/span><\/p>\n 44.\u00a0\u00a0On 7 June 2005 the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic forwarded the first applicant’s complaint to the district prosecutor’s office and ordered that the investigation in case no. 59186 be pursued actively.<\/span><\/p>\n 45.\u00a0\u00a0On 23 September 2005 the SRJI complained to the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic that they had been denied access to the investigation file in case no. 59186. They also requested to resume the investigation if it had been suspended.<\/span><\/p>\n 46.\u00a0\u00a0On 11 October 2005 the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic informed the SRJI that, although Vakha Saydaliyev’s kidnappers had not yet been identified, investigative measures were being taken to solve the crime. They also noted that the first applicant could receive copies of decisions on institution and suspension of the proceedings from the district prosecutor’s office.<\/span><\/p>\n 47.\u00a0\u00a0On 19 September 2007 the Shali Inter-District Department of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Prosecutor’s Office informed the second applicant that the investigation in case no. 59186 had been resumed on 20 August 2007 and that investigative measures were being taken to solve the crime.<\/span><\/p>\n 48.\u00a0\u00a0On 1 October 2007 the Ministry of the Interior of the Chechen Republic informed the first applicant that the investigation into her son’s kidnapping was pending before the district prosecutor’s office and that the ROVD were taking all requisite measures to find Vakha Saydaliyev and the perpetrators.<\/span><\/p>\n 2.\u00a0\u00a0Information submitted by the Government<\/span><\/p>\n 49.\u00a0\u00a0On 6 August 2002 the district prosecutor’s office at the first applicant’s request instituted an investigation of Vakha Saydaliyev’s abduction under Article 126 \u00a7 2 of the Russian Criminal Code (aggravated kidnapping). The case file was assigned the number 59186.<\/span><\/p>\n 50.\u00a0\u00a0On an unspecified date the applicants’ house was inspected. The inspection of the crime scene gave no results. No items were found or seized.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/a>51.\u00a0\u00a0On 23 September 2002 the first applicant was granted victim status and questioned. She stated that at about 12 noon on 16 April 2004 Vakha Saydaliyev had been in the courtyard of his home. An Ural vehicle carrying around twenty men wearing camouflage uniforms and masks and armed with machine guns had driven inside the courtyard. The armed men had said that Vakha Saydaliyev had been filmed on video at the moment of kidnapping by a military commander of the Vedeno District. Then they had taken her son away. The first applicant alleged that Vakha Saydaliyev could have been kept at the Khankala military base. Her son had not been involved in illegal armed groups.<\/span><\/p>\n 52.\u00a0\u00a0On 6 October 2002 the investigation in case no. 59186 was suspended for failure to identify those responsible and the first applicant was informed accordingly.<\/span><\/p>\n 53.\u00a0\u00a0On 3 April 2003 Mr Ch., a head of the local administration of the village of Serzhen-Yurt, issued the applicants with a certificate confirming that Vakha Saydaliyev \u201chad been detained and taken away by men wearing camouflage uniforms and masks\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n 54.\u00a0\u00a0On 25 June 2004 the investigation was resumed.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/a>55.\u00a0\u00a0On 16 July 2004 three persons, apparently villagers of Serzhen-Yurt, were questioned as witnesses. They made statements identical to the first applicant’s deposition of 23 September 2002.<\/span><\/p>\n 56.\u00a0\u00a0On 1 August 2004 the investigation was again suspended.<\/span><\/p>\n 57.\u00a0\u00a0On 1 August 2007 the investigation was resumed owing to the need to take additional investigative steps.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/a>58.\u00a0\u00a0The investigators requested information concerning special operations carried out on the date of the kidnapping from the military commander’s office of the Shali District, the ROVD and the FSB Department. According to the replies received, no special operations had been carried out in the village of Serzhen-Yurt on that day and Vakha Saydaliyev had not been arrested or placed in a temporary detention facility.<\/span><\/p>\n 59.\u00a0\u00a0The investigators also sent requests to all prosecutors’ offices and departments of the interior in the Chechen Republic, which brought no results. Vakha Saydaliyev’s body was not found among unidentified corpses.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/a>60.\u00a0\u00a0On unspecified dates after the resumption of the investigation on 1\u00a0August 2007 Mr Kh., the applicants’ neighbour, Mr S., the ROVD officer, and Mr Ch., the former head of the local administration, were questioned.<\/span><\/p>\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n
<\/span><\/p>\n
\n<\/span> Nina Vaji\u0107,
\n<\/span> Anatoly Kovler,
\n<\/span> Khanlar Hajiyev,
\n<\/span> Dean Spielmann,
\n<\/span> Giorgio Malinverni,
\n<\/span> George Nicolaou, judges,<\/span><\/span>
\nand S\u00f8ren Nielsen, Section Registrar<\/span><\/span>,<\/span><\/p>\n