The ECHR cases of Dokayev and Others v. Russia (application no. 16629\/05), Dzhabrailova v. Russia (application no. 1586\/05), Gaziyeva and Others v. Russia (application no. 15439\/05), Malsagova and Others v. Russia (application no. 27244\/03).<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
..<\/span><\/p>\n \n \u2026<\/span><\/p>\n .<\/span><\/p>\n EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n 302<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n 09.04.09<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Press release issued by the Registrar<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Four Chamber judgments against Russia The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing four Chamber judgments concerning Russia, none of which are final. The applicants in all four cases alleged that their relatives disappeared after being abducted by Russian servicemen and that the domestic authorities failed to carry out an effective investigation into their allegations. They relied in particular on Articles 2 (right to life), 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), 5 (right to liberty and security) and 13 (right to an effective remedy) of the European Convention on Human Rights.<\/span><\/p>\n 1.\u00a0Dokayev and Others v. Russia <\/span>(no. 16629\/05)<\/span><\/p>\n The applicants in the first case are 11 Russian nationals from three families who live in Grozny (<\/a>Chechen Republic). They are the close relatives of Isa Dokayev, Ruslan Askhabov and Isa Dubayev, born in 1969, 1962 and 1981, respectively. The three men have not been seen since they were abducted from the Dokayev family home in the early hours of 10\u00a0December 2002 by a group of masked men in white camouflage uniforms, armed with machine guns and pistols. Since the very day of the abduction the applicants have repeatedly applied in person and in writing to various authorities searching for their relatives. An investigation was opened into the disappearances, but was discontinued on several occasions for failure to establish the whereabouts of the three men or who abducted them. The investigation is still apparently on-going. No documents related to it have been disclosed to the Court despite its specific requests.<\/span><\/p>\n Violations of Article 2 (right to life in respect of Isa Dokayev, Ruslan Askhabov and Isa Dubayev and lack of effective investigation into their disappearance)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Violation of Article 3 (inhuman treatment as a result of mental suffering of all applicants except Isa Dokayev\u2019<\/span>s daughter, born after his abduction)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Violation of Article 5 (unacknowledged detention in respect of Isa Dokayev, Ruslan Askhabov and Isa Dubayev)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Violation of Article 13 (lack of an effective remedy) in connection with Article 2 <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n The Court awarded the applicants sums ranging between EUR\u00a014,000 to EUR\u00a035,000 in respect of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage, and EUR\u00a05,500\u00a0in respect of costs and expenses.<\/span><\/p>\n 2.\u00a0Dzhabrailova v. Russia <\/span>(no. 1586\/05)<\/span><\/p>\n The applicant in the second case is a Russian national who lives in Goyty (<\/a>Chechen Republic). She is the mother of Khanpasha Dzhabrailov, born in 1976, who has not been seen since the early hours of 10\u00a0April 2003 when he was abducted from his family home by a group of masked men in camouflage uniforms, armed with machine guns. The applicant complained in writing of the incident on the day following her son\u2019s abduction. An investigation was opened into the facts but was suspended on several occasions for failure to establish the whereabouts of Mr Dzhabrailov or the persons who abducted him. The applicant complained before the domestic courts that the investigation was ineffective and that she had not been allowed access to the files. It is unclear whether the courts examined her complaint regarding the lack of progress with the investigation.<\/span><\/p>\n Violations of Article 2 (right to life in respect of Khanpasha Dzhabrailov and lack of effective investigation into his disappearance)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Violation of Article 3 (inhuman treatment in respect of Khanpasha\u2019s mother on account of her mental suffering)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Violation of Article 5 (unacknowledged detention in respect of Khanpasha Dzhabrailov)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n The Court awarded the applicant EUR\u00a035,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, and EUR\u00a03,233 in respect of costs and expenses.<\/span><\/p>\n 3.\u00a0Gaziyeva and Others v. Russia <\/span>(no. 15439\/05)<\/span><\/p>\n The applicants in the third case are three Russian nationals who live in Chechen-Aul (<\/a>Chechen Republic). They are the wife and children of Abdul-Malik Shakhmurzayev, born in 1968, who has not been seen since the afternoon of 8\u00a0February 2001, when he was abducted by men in masks and uniforms who had stopped his lorry at a military roadblock. On 9\u00a0February, the wife of Mr Shakhmurzayev spoke to two officers at the military commanders\u2019 offices in the village of Gikalo and Urus-Martan district respectively, who confirmed that her husband had been arrested by military servicemen and was being held in the village of Violations of Article 2 (right to life in respect of Abdul-Malik Shakhmurzayev and lack of effective investigation into his disappearance)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Violation of Article 3 (inhuman treatment in respect of Abdul-Malik\u2019s wife and children on account of their mental suffering)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Violation of Article 5 (unacknowledged detention in respect of Abdul-Malik Shakhmurzayev)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Violation of Article 13 (lack of an effective remedy) in connection with Article 2<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n The Court awarded jointly to all applicants EUR\u00a010,000 in respect of pecuniary damage, EUR\u00a035,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, and EUR\u00a05,500 for costs and expenses.<\/span><\/p>\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n
\nconcerning disappearances in Chechnya<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n
\nTangi-Chu. An investigation into the facts was opened: the applicant submitted that it had been temporarily suspended, while the Government claimed that, although the whereabouts of Mr\u00a0Shakhmurzayev or the persons who had abducted him had still not yet been established, the investigation was on-going. Despite a specific request by the Court, the Government did not disclose any documents from the investigation file referring to the incompatibility of such an action with domestic legislation.<\/span><\/p>\n