The ECHR cases of Alaudinova v. Russia (application no. 32297\/05),\u00a0 Bitiyeva and Others v. Russia (application no. 36156\/04), Gakiyev and Gakiyeva v. Russia (application no. 3179\/05), Israilova and Others v. Russia (application no. 4571\/04), Khachukayev v. Russia (application no. 28148\/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 338<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n 23.04.09<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Press release issued by the Registrar<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n FIVE CHAMBER JUDGMENTS AGAINST RUSSIA CONCERNING DISAPPEARANCES AND DEPRIVATION OF LIFE IN CHECHNYA<\/span> The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing five Chamber judgments<\/span><\/a> concerning Russia, none of which are final. The applicants in all five cases alleged that their relatives disappeared \u2013 and in three of the cases were then killed \u2013 after being unlawfully detained by State agents 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).<\/span><\/p>\n 1.\u00a0Alaudinova v. Russia <\/span>(no. 32297\/05)<\/span><\/p>\n The applicant in the first case is a Russian national who lives in Urus-Martan (<\/a>Chechen Republic). She is the mother of Bekkhan Alaudinov, born in 1976, who has not been seen since the early hours of 8\u00a0November 2001 when he was abducted from the family home by a group of men, armed with machine guns and wearing camouflage uniforms, and driven away in a military lorry. Since the day of the abduction, Ms Alaudinova has repeatedly applied in person and in writing to various public bodies searching for her son and asking for assistance with it. An investigation was opened into the abduction, and was suspended and resumed on several occasions for failure to identify the perpetrators. Although Ms Alaudinova was granted the status of a victim, she and the Government differed on the question of whether she was kept abreast of all decisions taken during the investigation: while Ms Alaudiniva alleged that she was refused access to the criminal case file and no information about the progress of the investigation was provided to her, the Government submitted that she was duly informed of the progress of the investigation. The investigation is still apparently 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 Violations of Article 2 (right to life in respect of Bekkhan Alaudinov and lack of effective investigation into his disappearance)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Violation of Article 3 (inhuman treatment as a result of mental suffering of the applicant, mother of Bekkhan Alaudinov)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Violation of Article 5 (unacknowledged detention of Bekkhan Alaudinov)<\/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 applicant EUR\u00a035,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, and EUR\u00a01,280\u00a0in respect of costs and expenses.<\/span><\/p>\n 2.\u00a0Bitiyeva and Others v. Russia <\/span>(no. 36156\/04)<\/span><\/p>\n The applicants in the second case are 38 Russian nationals who live in Duba-Yurt (Chechen<\/strong> Republic). They are the close relatives of Bayali and Sharip Elmurzayev, born in 1968 and 1971; Khusin and Isa Khadzhimuradov, born in 1975 and 1965; Lechi Shaipov, born in 1960; Apti Murtazov, born in 1964; Zelimkhan Osmayev, born in 1975; and, Idris Elmurzayev, born in 1974. They were abducted from their family homes in the early hours of 27\u00a0March 2004 by groups of armed men, some wearing uniforms and masks. Starting on the day of the abduction, the applicants complained to a number of State law-enforcement agencies about the abduction. Investigation into the abductions was opened; the applicants and the Government differ as to its date. The applicants alleged that government officials had told them in unofficial contacts that their relatives were held in the military base in Khankala, and had given them a copy of an unsigned and undated document which stated that the inquiry into the abduction of their relatives had established that they were being held in the Khankala. The Government submitted that there was no such document in the investigation file. The applicants provided a copy of the latter document to the Court. <\/span><\/p>\n On 9 April 2004, an unidentified person discovered the dead bodies of the applicants\u2019 relatives near the village of Serzhen-Yurt in the <\/a>Chechen Republic. The Government submitted that criminal proceedings were opened into the killings of the applicants\u2019 relatives, on the day when the bodies were found. <\/span><\/p>\n Upon the request of the Court, the Government produced several documents related to the investigation into the abduction of the applicants\u2019 relatives, but refused to produce the entire file referring to incompatibility with domestic legislation. The Government also submitted a domestic court judgment of October 2004 awarding monetary compensation for non-pecuniary damage inflicted by the unlawful actions of a prosecutor\u2019s office. <\/span><\/p>\n Violations of Article 2 (right to life in respect of Bayali and Sharip Elmurzayev, Khusin and Isa Khadzhimuradov; Lechi Shaipov, Apti Murtazov, Zelimkhan Osmayev, and Idris Elmurzayev and lack of effective investigation into their deaths)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Violation of Article 5 (unacknowledged detention of Bayali and Sharip Elmurzayev, Khusin and Isa Khadzhimuradov; Lechi Shaipov, Apti Murtazov, Zelimkhan Osmayev)<\/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 from EUR\u00a04,200 to EUR 35,000 in respect of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage, and EUR\u00a08,608\u00a0in respect of costs and expenses.<\/span><\/p>\n 3.\u00a0Gakiyev and Gakiyeva v. Russia <\/span>(no. 3179\/05)<\/span><\/p>\n The applicants in the third case are two Russian nationals who live in Argun (<\/a>Chechen Republic). They are the parents of Idris Gakiyev, born in 1980, who was abducted from his family home in the early hours of 30\u00a0November 2003 by a group of armed men wearing camouflage uniforms. After the kidnapping, the perpetrators severely beat the father of Idris, and when he lost consciousness, they poured petrol over his body and set the family house on fire. Idris\u2019 father managed to escape the burning house after the perpetrators had left. After the abduction, the applicants complained to various State agencies and officials; most of their complaints were forwarded to different prosecutors\u2019 offices. An investigation was opened into the abduction, and the applicants were informed on a few occasions that it was on-going. <\/span><\/p>\n Idris Gakiyev\u2019s dead body showing signs of a violent death was found on 29\u00a0March 2004. The Government submitted that an investigation into his murder was opened on the same day the body was found. <\/span><\/p>\n Both investigations were joined and were still on-going. Despite specific request by the Court, the Government did not disclose any documents of the investigation file referring to incompatibility with domestic legislation. <\/span><\/p>\n Violations of Article 2 (right to life in respect of Idris Gakiyev and lack of effective investigation into his abduction and death)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Violations of Article 3 (inhuman treatment in respect of the father of Idris Gakiyev of account of him being ill-treated by servicemen and lack of effective investigation into this ill-treatment)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Violation of Article 3 (inhuman treatment as a result of mental suffering of both applicants)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Violation of Article 5 (unacknowledged detention of Idris Gakiyev)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Violation of Article 13 (lack of an effective remedy) in connection with Articles 2 and 3 <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n The Court awarded the applicants jointly EUR\u00a035,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, and EUR\u00a04,500\u00a0in respect of costs and expenses.<\/span><\/p>\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n
\n<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n