July 2010

Nedayborshch v Russia, 1 July 2010

A violation of Article 3 on account of the inhuman and degrading conditions of the applicant’s detention in the Kopeysk IVS.

 

Nikiforov v Russia, 1 July 2010

A violation of Article 3 under its substantive and procedural limbs.

 

Abdulazhon Isakov v Russia, 8 July 2010

In the event of the extradition order against the applicant being enforced, there would be a violation of Article 3; a violation of Article 5 § 1; a violation of Article 5 § 4; a violation of Article 13 in conjunction with Article 3.

 

Aleksandr Matveyev v Russia, 8 July 2010

A violation of Article 3.

 

Yuldashev v Russia, 8 July 2010

In the event of the extradition order against the applicant being enforced, there would be a violation of Article 3; a violation of Article 5 § 1; a violation of Article 5 § 4; a violation of Article 13 in conjunction with Article 3.

 

Lopata v Russia, 13 July 2010

A violation of Article 3 under its procedural limb; a violation of Article 6 § 3 (c) taken in conjunction with Article 6 § 1; the respondent State has failed to comply with its obligations under Article 34 of the Convention.

 

Gelayevy v Russia, 15 July 2010

A substantive violation of Article 2 in respect of Murad Gelayev; a violation of Article 2 in respect of the failure to conduct an effective investigation into the circumstances in which Murad Gelayev disappeared; a violation of Article 3 in respect of Murad Gelayev; a violation of Article 3 in respect of the failure to conduct an effective investigation into the torture of Murad Gelayev; a violation of Article 3 in respect of the second applicant; a violation of Article 3 in respect of the failure to conduct an effective investigation into the second applicant’s ill-treatment; a violation of Article 3 in respect of the applicants on account of their mental suffering; a violation of Article 5 in respect of Murad Gelayev; a violation of Article 13 in conjunction with Article 2.

 

Medvedev v Russia, 15 July 2010

A violation of Article 5 § 4 on account of the delayed judicial review of the applicant’s application for release.

 

Nikitina v Russia, 15 July 2010

A violation of Articles 6 and 13 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.

 

Salikova v Russia, 15 July 2010

A violation of Article 6 § 1 on account of the excessively long proceedings; a violation of Article 6 § 1 in respect of non-enforcement of the final judgment in the applicant’s favour; a violation of Article 13.

 

Vladimir Krivonosov v Russia, 15 July 2010

A violation of Article 13 on account of the lack of an effective remedy for the applicant to complain about the conditions of his detention; a violation of Article 3 on account of the conditions of the applicant’s detention in detention facility IZ-61/1 of Rostov-on-Don from 11 February 2002 to 23 April 2005; a violation of Article 5 § 3; a violation of Article 5 § 4; a violation of Article 6 § 1 on account of the excessive length of the proceedings against the applicant; a violation of Article 13 on account of the lack of an effective remedy for the applicant to complain about the length of the criminal proceedings.

 

Akhmatkhanovy v Russia, 22 July 2010

A substantive violation of Article 2 in respect of Artur Akhmatkhanov; a violation of Article 2 in respect of the failure to conduct an effective investigation into the circumstances in which Artur Akhmatkhanov disappeared; a violation of Article 3 in respect of the applicants; a violation of Article 5 in respect of Artur Akhmatkhanov; a violation of Article 13 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 2 of the Convention.

 

Benuyeva v Russia, 22 July 2010

A violation of Article 2 in respect of Abu Zhanalayev and Sayd-Selim Benuyev; a violation of Article 2 in respect of the failure to conduct an effective investigation into the circumstances in which Abu Zhanalayev and Sayd-Selim Benuyev disappeared; a violation of Article 3 in respect of the first, ninth and tenth applicants on account of their mental suffering; a violation of Article 5 in respect of Abu Zhanalayev and Sayd-Selim Benuyev; a violation of Article 13 in conjunction with Article 2.

 

Samoshenkov and Strokov v Russia, 22 July 2010

A violation of Article 5 § 1 on account of the second applicant’s unlawful detention from 17 April to 15 May 2003; a violation of Article 6 § 1 on account of the excessive length of criminal proceedings against the first applicant; a violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) on account of the lack of legal representation of the first applicant in the appellate proceedings.

 

Galina Kuznetsova v Russia, 29 July 2010

A violation of Article 6 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 on account of non-enforcement of the judgments of 12 February 2001 and 26 February 2003.

 

Karimov v Russia, 29 July 2010

In the event of the extradition order against the applicant being enforced, there would be a violation of Article 3; a violation of Article 5 § 1 in respect of the applicant’s detention between 21 and 24 July 2008; a violation of Article 5 § 4; a violation of Article 13 in conjunction with Article 3.

 

Konontsev v Russia, 29 July 2010

A violation of Article 5 § 1.

 

Kopylov v Russia, 29 July 2010

The applicant may still claim to be a victim and that there has been a violation of Article 3 on account of the treatment to which he was subjected from January to April 2001; a violation of Article 3 on account of the authorities’ failure to investigate effectively the applicant’s complaints about his ill-treatment from January to April 2001; a violation of Article 3 on account of the treatment to which the applicant was subjected on 27 June 2002; a violation of Article 3 on account of the authorities’ failure to investigate effectively the applicant’s complaints about his ill-treatment on 27 June 2002.

 

Shaposhnikov v Russia, 29 July 2010

A violation of Article 5 § 1.

 

Streltsov and Other 'Novocherkassk Military Pensioners' v Russia, 29 July 2010

In respect of all applications, a violation of Article 6 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in respect of the delayed execution of the judgments in the applicants’ favour listed in Annex I; in respect of all applications, a violation of Article 6 on account of the quashing by way of the supervisory-review proceedings of the judgments in the applicants’ favour listed in Annex I; in respect of sixty-eight applications listed in Part B of Annex I, a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 on account of the quashing by way of the supervisory-review proceedings of the judgments in the applicants’ favour, as listed in the relevant part of Annex I.

 

 
 
ĉ
Rights in Russia,
18 Nov 2010, 00:00
Comments