Cases 341 - 360 of 707

Ismailova and others v. Russia, (44313/11)

Judgement date: 18/09/2014
Communicated: 06/02/2012
Lodged: 12/07/2011
Date of violations: 16/04/2003
Location: Chechnya, Grozny
Representative: SRJI
Violation: Disappearance

At the material time the applicants and Aslambek Isayev lived together in Grozny. The applicants’ neighbourhood was surrounded by military checkpoints. The area was under curfew. At about 3 a.m. on 16 April 2003 a group of about ten armed servicemen in camouflage uniforms arrived at the applicants’ house in two UAZ vehicles. They broke into the house, asked the applicants in Russian whether any firearms were hidden on the premises and quickly searched it. After that they told the applicants that identity checks had been conducted in the area and that more than fifty persons had been already arrested as the result. Then they said that they would check Aslambek’s identity, put him in one of the UAZ cars and drove away. The applicants have not seen Mr Aslambek Isayev since his abduction on 16 April 2003.

 

Aguyeva and others v. Russia, (52076/11)

Judgement date: 18/09/2014
Communicated: 06/02/2012
Lodged: 11/08/2011
Date of violations: 21/01/2003
Location: Chechnya, Gudermes
Representative: SRJI
Violation: Disappearance

At the material time the town of Gudermes was under curfew; it was surrounded by military checkpoints. A special military unit no. 291 of the 42nd regiment of the motorised infantry division of the Russian Ministry of Defence called ‘Battalion Vostok’ (батальон 291-го мотострелкового полка 42-ой гвардейской мотострелковой дивизии Министерства Обороны РФ) was stationed in the settlement. According to the applicants, the battalion was involved in special operations of the Russian federal forces. Dzhandar and Dzhalil Ismailov lived with their families, including the applicants, on the second floor of block of flats at no. 52 in Kavkazskaya Street in Gudermes. In the early hours of 21 January 2003 a group of about ten to fifteen servicemen in camouflage uniforms and masks arrived at the applicants’ address in a grey UAZ vehicle with smeared registration numbers. The only one serviceman without mask had dark hair and a clearly visible scar on the left cheek. The intruders, who were armed with machineguns, dispersed throughout the building on each floor. Then they broke into the applicants’ flat; quickly searched it and took away gold jewellery and 250,000 Russian rubles (RUB) (about EUR 6,500). They were in a rush and gave no explanations for their actions; after the search they took Dzhandar and Dzhalil outside without allowing them to put on warm clothing. They forced the brothers in the UAZ vehicle and drove away in the direction of Grozny. About two of three months after the abduction the second applicant was informed by Mr A.Kh., an officer from the Vostok battalion, that his sons were detained by the battalion’s commander Dzhabrail Yamadayev. The applicants have not seen their relatives since their abduction on 21 January 2003.

 

Sangariyevy v. Russia, (52182/11)

Judgement date: 18/09/2014
Communicated: 06/02/2012
Lodged: 11/08/2011
Date of violations: 12/02/2001
Location: Chechnya, Starye Atagi
Representative: SRJI
Violation: Disappearance

On the night between 11 and 12 February 2001 two cousins Said-Ibragim Sangariyev and Idris Sangariyev were staying at the house of their uncle Said-Khussein in Stariye Atagi. At 6 a.m. a group of about forty to fifty military servicemen arrived in three APCs at Said-Khussein’s house. Other military vehicles and URAL lorries cordoned off the neighbourhood; the servicemen ordered the neighbours to stay inside. The servicemen climbed over the fence and broke into the house. Threatening to blow up the dwelling, they took Said-Khussein outside and put him on the knees against the wall demanding that he told them where were his nephews Said-Ibragim and Idris. Then the servicemen searched the house looking for the two cousins; about an hour later they found them and dragged them outside. Then the servicemen reported the arrest to their superiors via portable radios using code numbers ‘22-23-43’. After that they took Said-Ibragim’s VAZ-2107 car with registration number C96 AP 20RUS, put both cousins there and drove them away in the direction of Grozny. According to the documents submitted, the applicants’ relatives were taken to Khankala, the headquarters of the Russian federal forces in Chechnya. In less than a month after the abduction, the fourth applicant saw that Said-Ibragim’s car was driven around by a group of military servicemen of Slavic appearance, whose uniform had small stars on the shoulder straps. The applicants have not seen their relatives since their abduction on 12 February 2001.

 

Nutayevy v. Russia, (55055/11)

Judgement date: 18/09/2014
Communicated: 06/02/2012
Lodged: 23/08/2011
Date of violations: 26/02/2003
Location: Chechnya, Starye Atagi
Representative: SRJI
Violation: Disappearance

At the material time the village of Stariye Atagi was under curfew.   It was surrounded by military checkpoints situated in all roads leading   to and from the settlement. A military unit of the Russian federal forces   was stationed at the outskirts of the village, on the premises of the   former mill factory (‘the mill’). According to the applicants, the   mill was used as a filtering point by the military for the processing   and detention of local residents detained during special operations.  At about 5 a.m. on 26 February 2003 a group of about twenty armed   military servicemen in camouflage uniforms arrived at the applicants’   house in two grey UAZ minivans and two VAZ-2121 (‘Niva’) cars. The   vehicles surrounded the house. Some of the servicemen were wearing masks;   some of them had helmets on. The servicemen broke into the applicants’   house and ordered everyone to show their identity documents. Then they   grabbed Saykhan, forced him outside and put him into one of the vehicles.   The applicants, accompanied by a neighbour, also got in a car and followed   the abductors to the premises of the military unit at the mill. There   they tried to gain access to the military compound, but to no avail.   On-duty servicemen denied having seen any cars leaving or entering the   premises. The applicants have not seen their son since his abduction on 26 February   2003.

 

Dashtayev and others v. Russia, (66831/11)

Judgement date: 18/09/2014
Communicated: 06/02/2012
Lodged: 21/10/2011
Date of violations: 20/07/2003
Location: Chechnya, Novye Atagi
Representative: SRJI
Violation: Disappearance

According to the applicants, who live in the same street, on 20 July 2003 the Russian federal forces conducted a sweeping-up operation in Noviye Atagi, as the result of which at least three local residents were arrested, including the applicants’ relatives. Military checkpoints were situated in all of the roads leading to and from the settlement. The area was under curfew. At about 5 a.m. on 20 July 2003 a convoy of military vehicles, consisting of at least three APCs (with hull numbers 100, 101 and F-121), one URAL lorry (with registration number 75-99 6 RUS) and a UAZ all-terrain car, arrived at the applicants’ street. A group of about fifty heavily-armed military servicemen in camouflage uniforms got out of the vehicles and broke into at least four houses in the street, including those of the applicants. A group of about fifteen servicemen climbed over the fence and broke into the house of the Akhmadov family. They checked identity documents of the male residents, quickly searched the house without producing any warrant or giving explanations to their actions and took Idris Akhmadov outside. The servicemen also took some of the family valuables. They put Idris into the UAZ minivan, and then they dragged him out and forced him into the APC and drove away. At about 5.30 a.m. group of fifteen to twenty servicemen in a yellow UAL lorry with registration number 75 99 86 broke in the house of the Dashtayev family. Several APCs and a UAZ minivan were waiting in a neighbouring street. They found in the yard Imran Dashtayev; they demanded his passport. Imran’s passport was submitted for renewal, so the servicemen told his relatives that they would take him for an identity check. Then they forced Imran in the yellow lorry and drove away. The applicants have not seen their relatives since their abduction on 20 July 2003.

 

Glot and Ivanov v. Russia, (58446/13)

Communicated: 10/09/2014
Lodged: 26/08/2013
Date of violations: 26/12/2012
Location: Kabardino-Balkaria, Nalchik
Representative: M. Abubakarov
Violation: Fair trial

The applicants served as clean-up workers at the site of the Chernobyl nuclear plant accident. As a result they suffered from extensive exposure to radioactive emissions which later led to their disability. In late 2010 they lodged a complaint with the Nalchik Town Court of the Republic of Kabardino-Balkaria$ and, by a judgment of 17 January 2011, the Town Court allowed the claims in part and awarded 1,100,000 Russian roubles. However, on 28 February 2013 the Supreme Court of Kabardino-Balkaria quashed the decision and restored the time-limit for appealing against the judgment of 17 January 2011.The Supreme Court further ordered them to return the money they had received pursuant to the judgment of 17 January 2011.

 

Shavorskiy v. Russia, (56960/13)

Communicated: 10/09/2014
Lodged: 26/08/2013
Date of violations: 26/12/2012
Location: Kabardino-Balkaria, Nalchik
Representative: M. Abubakarov
Violation: Fair trial

The applicant served as clean-up workers at the site of the Chernobyl nuclear plant accident. As a result he suffered from extensive exposure to radioactive emissions which later led to his disability. In late 2010 he lodged a complaint with the Nalchik Town Court of the Republic of Kabardino-Balkaria and, by a judgment of 17 January 2011, the Town Court allowed the claims in part and awarded 1,100,000 Russian roubles. However, on 28 February 2013 the Supreme Court of Kabardino-Balkaria quashed the decision and restored the time-limit for appealing against the judgment of 17 January 2011.The Supreme Court further ordered him to return the money he had received pursuant to the judgment of 17 January 2011.

 

Ruslan Khadzhimuradov v. Russia and 16 other applications, (21194/09)

Communicated: 01/09/2014
Lodged: 31/03/2009
Date of violations: 05/02/2000
Location: Chechnya, Novye Aldy
Representative: D. Itslayev
Violation: Killing

The facts of the present cases (nos. 21194/09, 21200/09, 24693/09, 24700/09, 27063/09, 27064/09, 27159/09, 27259/09, 30531/09, 30538/09, 30578/09, 32851/09, 32855/09, 32862/09, 32992/09, 18777/10, 22304/10) are connected to the case Musayev and Others v. Russia, nos. 57941/00, 58699/00 and 60403/00, 26 July 2007, in so far as the applicants claim that their relatives were killed by the same persons and in the same circumstances as the relatives of the applicants in the Musayev and Others case.
The applicants allege, principally, that their twenty-one close relatives (spouses, children, brothers and uncle) have been killed on 5 February 2000 in the Novye Aldy settlement at the outskirts of Grozny by the State servicemen.
A criminal investigation into the murders and looting of property was opened on 5 March 2000 by the Grozny Town Prosecutor’s Office. The applicants, or close members of their families, have been granted victim status in the proceedings. It appears that these proceedings are still pending. It appears that only one applicant (application no. 22304/10) had been in Novye Aldy at the time of the events; other applicants had been out of the district, or out of Chechnya, due to heavy fighting in the preceding months. In support of their claims, the applicants submitted copies of the death certificates issued in respect of their relatives, copies of some documents from the criminal investigation file, decisions to grant them or their close relatives the status of victims in the criminal proceedings, statements produced by them and by several persons who had witnessed the killings, press and NGO reports about the events. Several applicants also submitted documents issued in 2000 by the local administration or “neighbourhood committees” confirming that the houses where they had lived had been destroyed or damaged in 2000.

 

Zholayev and Others v. Russia, (19156/13)

Communicated: 27/08/2014
Lodged: 22/02/2013
Date of violations: 17/11/2012
Location: Kabardino-Balkaria, Nalchik
Representative: M. Abubakarov
Violation: Fair trial

The applicants were clean-up workers at the site of the Chernobyl nuclear plant accident. As a result they suffered from extensive exposure to radioactive emissions which later led to their disability. In early 2011 the applicants lodged a complaint with the Nalchik Town Court of the Republic of Kabardino-Balkaria (“the Town Court”) against the Russian Ministry of Finance seeking compensation of non pecuniary damage in the above connection.On 12 April 2011 the Town Court allowed the applicants’ claims in part and awarded the applicants compensations. The judgment above has not been appealed against and became final and enforceable. On 17 August 2012 the Department of the Federal Treasury Fund in the Republic of Kabardino-Balkaria lodged an appeal with the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kabardino Balkaria and requested that the statutory ten day time limit for lodging such an appeal against the judgments be restored. On 24 August 2012 the Town Court ordered that the time limit for appeal be extended on the grounds that there was no evidence that the FTF had received copy of the judgment in due course. The applicants complain, among others, under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that restoration of the time-limit for an appeal resulting in quashing of the final judgment in their favour violated the principle of legal certainty.

 

Kibalo and Others v. Russia, (35845/11)

Communicated: 13/04/2014
Lodged: 06/06/2011
Date of violations: 07/02/2008
Location: Chechnya, the Dubovskaya village
Representative: EHRAC/Memorial
Violation: Private and family life

On 7 February 2008 the applicant's husband arrived at the penitentiary facility in the Amur Region in the Far-East of Russia, some 8,000 kilometres away from the Dubovskaya village in the Chechen Republic, where his family lives. According to the applicant, it became virtually impossible for her and her daughters to visit her husband in prison as they could not afford to travel so far. The applicant complains under Article 8 of the Convention that such a transfer to remote penitentiary facilities effectively amount to a breach of family ties between the detainees and their wives and children.

 

ALEKSANDROV v. RUSSIA, (26083/07)

Communicated: 13/04/2014
Lodged: 11/05/2007
Date of violations: 24/04/2006
Location: the Kurgan Region
Representative: No representative
Violation: Private and family life

On 6 February 2007 it was established that penitentiary facilities of the Kurgan Region were populated up to the maximum capacity and it was decided that the applicant should be transferred to a strict regime penitentiary facility in the Udmurt Republic. However, penitentiary facility of in the Udmurt Republic is located 1,200 km away from Kurgan where applicant’s family lives. According to him, it became virtually impossible for his wife and two daughters to visit him in prison as they could not afford to travel to the Udmurt Republic. The applicant complains under Article 8 of the Convention that such transfers to remote penitentiary facilities effectively amount to a breach of family ties between the detainees and their wives and children.

 

AUSHEVY v. RUSSIA, (44279/10)

Communicated: 01/04/2014
Lodged: 27/07/2010
Date of violations: 17/06/2007
Location: Ingushetia, the village of Surkhakhi
Representative: EHRAC/Memorial
Violation: Torture

Magomed Osmanovich Aushev and Magomed Maksharipovich Aushev complain under Article 3, 5 and 13 of the Convention that they were abducted, unlawfully detained and ill-treated by law-enforcements authorities and that the investigations into their allegations of ill-treatment and unlawful detention were ineffective.

 

Bugayev and Others v. Russia, (23199/13)

Communicated: 21/03/2014
Lodged: 25/03/2013
Date of violations: 17/01/2011
Location: Kabardino-Balkaria, Nalchik
Representative: No representative
Violation: Fair trial

On 17 January 2011 the Nalchik Town Court awarded the applicants compensation of non pecuniary damage in the connection with suffering from exposure to radioactive emissions which later led to their disability. On 1 June 2011 the Department of the Federal Treasury Fund in the Republic of Kabardino-Balkaria lodged an appeal with the Supreme Court of Kabardino Balkaria against the judgment of 17 January 2011 requesting that the statutory ten-day time limit for lodging such an appeal against the judgment be restored. The Supreme Court restored the limit and ordered the applicants to return the money they had received pursuant to the judgment of 17 January 2011.The applicants complain under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that restoration of the time-limit for an appeal resulting in quashing of the final judgment in their favour violated the principle of legal certainty.

 

Sokiryanskaya and others against Russia, (4505/08)

Communicated: 12/03/2014
Lodged: 27/12/2007
Date of violations: 16/10/2006
Location: Ingushetia, Nazran
Representative: EHRAC/Memorial
Violation: Freedom of expression

On 16 October 2006 the applicants tried to take part in a peaceful assembly (‘picket’) in Nazran, the Republic of Ingushetia. At the site of the planned picket the applicants were attacked by the men in civilian clothes, who beat and injured some of the picketers and subsequently apprehended them without giving any reasons for the arrest. Relying on Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention, the applicants allege that by failing to give sufficient reasons for the prohibition of the picket and by preventing them from holding the picket, the authorities breached the applicants’ rights to hold a peaceful assembly to express their solidarity with Ms Politkovskaya and protest against her murder.

 

Tamayev v. Russia, (54728/09)

Judgement date: 27/02/2014
Communicated: 09/01/2012
Lodged: 11/09/2009
Date of violations: 06/01/2001
Location: Chechnya, the settlement of Roshni-Chu
Representative: Others
Violation: Disappearance

At the material time Mr Akhdan Tamayev lived together with his family and the applicant in the settlement of Roshni-Chu. The settlement was under curfew. According to enclosed documents, on 4-6 January 2001 Russian servicemen conducted a sweeping-up operation in Roshni-Chu. The operation’s head office was stationed on the outskirts. On 6 January 2001 at around 9 a.m. the applicant went to the local administration, taking Akhdan’s passport with him. A group of servicemen arrived at the applicant’s house and took Akhdan with them because he failed to show his passport. They put him in a GAZ-66 lorry and drove to the outskirts of Roshni-Chu. Akhdan’s wife, who witnessed the abduction, ran to the local administration, where she met the applicant and told him about the events. When the applicant returned home, Akhdan was not there. The house was surrounded by servicemen armed with machineguns, accompanied by the head of the administration, Mr Mamatsuyev. A serviceman took Akhdan’s passport and confirmed to the applicant that his soon would soon be released. Shortly thereafter Mr G.A. Gadzhiyev, the military commander for the Urus-Martan district, and Mr Z.K. Kuryayev, the head of the Urus-Martan ROVD, arrived at the spot. They informed the applicant that Akhdan would be taken to the ROVD for an identity check and released. On the same day the servicemen arrested two other residents, the brothers Muslim and Alikhan Movkayev. After their release that evening, the brothers informed the applicant that Akhdan had been arrested with them. The servicemen had taken the three of them to the outskirts of town in the GAZ lorry, kept them there until 5 p.m. and then took them to the ROVD. At around 6 p.m. Muslim and Alikhan had been released, whereas Akhdan had remained at the police station. On 7 January 2001 Mr Mamatsuyev told the applicant that he had gone to the ROVD, where he had been promised that Akhdan would be released at 10 a.m. on the same day. However, the applicant’s son was not released. On 5 February 2001 the applicant went to the police station. An officer informed him that Akhdan’s detention there had been registered and that he had been transferred to the premises of an FSB department. The applicant has not seen Mr Akhdan Tamayev since his abduction on 6 January 2001.

 

Khamzat Dzhabrailov and Others v. Russia, (8620/09)

Judgement date: 27/02/2014
Communicated: 09/01/2012
Lodged: 09/01/2009
Date of violations: 15/12/2001
Location: Chechnya, Argun
Representative: EHRAC/Memorial
Violation: Disappearance

According to the applicants, on 13-15 December 2001 Russian servicemen conducted a sweeping-up operation in Argun. The town was surrounded by military checkpoints and the residents required authorisation to enter or leave the town. On-duty servicemen in the streets made it impossible for the residents to move around. At the material time the applicants and Yakub Dzhabrailov lived as a family in two neighbouring houses. On 14 December 2001 a group of twenty servicemen arrived at the applicants’ house in an APC and a UAZ “tabletka” car with obscured registration plates. The servicemen were camouflaged and unmasked, of Russian or Asian appearance and spoke unaccented Russian. Having searched Yakub’s house, they made a threat to the applicants that they would take Yakub with them and added that those whom they had taken away had never returned home. On 15 December 2001 at around noon the same servicemen arrived in the neighbourhood in the APC and cordoned off the area. Some of them broke into the applicants’ house and locked the applicants in, while two others entered Yakub’s house. They forced Yakub outside, put him in the APC and drove to the military commander’s office. Servicemen patrolling the streets witnessed the events but did not interfere. Later on the same day the second applicant went to the Argun town administration where she met about fifty relatives of other men arrested during the special operation. Two representatives of the town council informed her that the arrestees had been taken to a “filtering” point on the outskirts of Argun and agreed to pass on clothes to Yakub. In the evening the applicant learnt that the arrested men would be transferred to the military commander’s office. On 17 December 2001 the military commander’s office informed the applicants that the special operation had been conducted by a special forces unit which did not report to the office and that none of the arrested men had been brought to their premises. Subsequently the applicants learnt that Yakub and seven other persons arrested on 13-15 December 2001 had not been released. On 18 December 2001 the first applicant heard Yakub screaming at the district military commander’s office. The applicants have not seen Mr Yakub Dzhabrailov since his abduction on 15 December 2001.

 

Usumovy v. Russia, (47770/09)

Judgement date: 27/02/2014
Communicated: 09/01/2012
Lodged: 02/09/2009
Date of violations: 30/06/2001
Location: Chechnya, Kurchaloy
Representative: EHRAC/Memorial
Violation: Disappearance

At the material time Mr Moul Usumov worked at the Kurchaloy FSB. The Kurchaloy district military commander’s office and the FSB department’s office were situated on the eastern outskirts of Kurchaloy, close to the 33rd regiment (33 бригада) of the Russian armed forces stationed on the premises of the Roads Department (дорожно-ремонтно-строительное управление, ДРСУ). On 30 June 2001 at 3.30 a.m. a group of fifteen to twenty armed servicemen in camouflage uniforms with dogs cordoned off the applicants’ neighbourhood in APC no. L119 (Л119), a UAZ car and two URAL lorries. Seven servicemen broke into the applicants’ house and ordered the applicants to lie down on the floor in unaccented Russian. After searching the premises, the servicemen took away money, a number of valuables and Moul’s military service card. One of the servicemen hit Moul with the rifle butt, demanding that he spell out his name. Then the servicemen handcuffed Moul, took him outside, put him in the APC and drove away. The first applicant and her relative, Mr Sheykhi Usumov, followed the vehicles and saw them entering the premises of the 33rd regiment. The applicant also saw other Kurchaloy residents driving towards the regiment. She learnt that seven other men had been arrested that day. Later on the same day the Kurchaloy district military commander and the head of the Kurchaloy FSB, Mr Viktor Ivanovich, agreed to talk to the first applicant and seven other women. The military commander acknowledged that the servicemen of the 33rd regiment had arrested their relatives but denied his subordinates’ involvement in the abduction. The head of the FSB told the applicant: “It comes as a shock to me to hear that Mr Usumov has been arrested. He belongs to us. Don’t worry; he will be released by 4 p.m.” He replied to the other women: “You should have cried earlier, not now. Your sons are up to the elbows in blood and they shall be held liable.” However, Moul was not released that day. On 1 July 2001 the head of the FSB informed the first applicant that, despite Moul’s innocence, under the law, the servicemen of the 33rd regiment could detain him for up to ten days. He asked the applicant to bring some clothes for her husband. However, a day later, the officer told her that he could not help her as some superior power structures had taken care of Moul. The applicant was no longer allowed to talk to Mr Viktor Ivanovich. Some time later the deputy military commander informed the applicants that Moul had been released between 15 and 18 July 2001 along with the other seven detainees. Those individuals later confirmed that they had been detained together with Moul but he had not been released with them. The applicants have not seen Mr Moul Usumov since his abduction on 30 June 2001.

 

Suleymanova and others v. Russia, (11674/09)

Judgement date: 27/02/2014
Communicated: 09/01/2012
Lodged: 19/02/2009
Date of violations: 29/10/2002
Location: Chechnya, Gudermes
Representative: SRJI
Violation: Disappearance

According to the applicants, in September-October 2002 federal servicemen conducted a special operation in Gudermes and arrested about thirty people, including the Suleymanov brothers. The servicemen took the arrested men to the Gudermes district department of the interior (“the ROVD”) in buses belonging to the Federal Security Service (“the FSB”). After their fingerprints were checked and pictures taken, the arrested men were released. At the material time the applicants and Salambek, Khasanbek and Anderbek resided in two neighbouring houses in Gudermes. The town was under curfew. On 28 October 2002 two neighbours, Mr Ali Mukhadiyev and Mr Musa Zakayev, visited the applicants. Anderbek joked that the applicants kept bombs in the basement. It appears that Musa Zakayev had previously been detained by the FSB and released on condition of providing information. According to the applicants, he could have informed the FSB about the joke. On 29 October 2002 at around 4 a.m. a group of camouflaged servicemen in masks and helmets arrived at the applicants’ houses in two UAZ “tabletka” cars. They were armed with short-barrelled automatic rifles (Тюльпанчик). The servicemen stormed inside, quickly searched the houses, looking for drugs, firearms, and, in particular, for the bomb allegedly hidden in the basement. Threatening the applicants in unaccented Russian, the servicemen ordered them to lie down on the floor. They collected the applicants’ and the three brothers’ identity documents, put the latter in the UAZ and drove off in the direction of the town centre, with unobstructed passage through a checkpoint on the way. A week later a former classmate of Khasanbek told the applicants that their relatives had been detained in a temporary detention centre (“the IVS”) on the ROVD’s premises. FSB officers guarded them and occasionally took them out. Khasanbek had passed an item of his clothing over to his parents through another acquaintance and asked him to inform them of his place of detention. However, the ROVD officers denied that the brothers were detained there and did not allow the applicants to enter the premises. Another of the applicants’ neighbours, a ROVD officer, also confirmed that the three men had been held at the ROVD. The applicants subsequently learnt from anonymous sources that in 2003 the brothers had been detained at the premises of an FSB department, that in 2003 Salambek had been taken to Rostov and onward to Yaroslavl and that Mr Aslan Dzhamadayev, the head of the criminal search unit at the ROVD, had ordered the abduction. The applicants have not seen their three relatives since their abduction on 29 October 2002.

 

Chankayev and Chankayeva v. Russia, (16488/09)

Judgement date: 27/02/2014
Communicated: 09/01/2012
Lodged: 13/03/2009
Date of violations: 19/09/2001
Location: Chechnya, Urus-Martan
Representative: SRJI
Violation: Disappearance

On 19 September 2001 a group of about fifteen servicemen arrived at the applicants’ neighbourhood in Urus-Martan and cordoned off the area. Their UAZ car had no registration plates and the registration number of their URAL lorry was obscured with mud. All of the servicemen were armed, in camouflage uniforms and masks, save for the commanding officer. The latter was unmasked, had Slavic features and had an FSB emblem on his sleeve. After a quick search of the applicants’ house, the servicemen told them in unaccented Russian that they had to take away Ramzan and Aslan to check their fingerprints at a laboratory, which was situated on the premises of an Azeri market on the western outskirts of Urus-Martan. As the applicants refused to let their relatives go, the commander started shooting in the air. After that, the servicemen collected the bullet shells, put Aslan in the UAZ and Ramzan in the URAL and drove away. Immediately after the arrest, the first applicant went to the market and the Urus-Martan district military commander’s office but his arrested relatives were not there. Then he went to the district prosecutor’s office, where he was told that the two men had been taken to the IVS at the Urus-Martan ROVD. In the evening, an official from the local administration confirmed this information to the second applicant, adding that both men would be released as soon as they had had their fingerprints checked. Mr Radmir Arbekov, an assistant to the district prosecutor, agreed to pass on some food brought by the applicant for them. However, Ramzan and Aslan were not released that day. On 20 September 2001 the ROVD officers informed the applicants that their relatives had been transferred to the district military commander’s office. However, nobody at the office acknowledged their detention. On 8 October 2001 the second applicant saw the commanding officer who had participated in her relatives’ arrest at the military commander’s office. Sometime later she saw two other servicemen, who could have also participated in her relatives’ abduction. When approached, one of the servicemen introduced himself as Vitaliy. The applicants have not seen Ramzan and Aslan Chankayev since their abduction on 19 September 2001.

 

Sultanova and others v. Russia, (21133/09)

Judgement date: 27/02/2014
Communicated: 09/01/2012
Lodged: 30/03/2009
Date of violations: 05/11/2004
Location: Chechnya, Samashki
Representative: SRJI
Violation: Disappearance

Mr Dzhamali Sultanov has been suffering from a disability. In September 2004 he had an argument with Mr Ruslan Solgiriyev, a local police officer. According to the applicants, the latter, in order to get back at Dzhamali, could have deliberately misinformed the Achkhoy-Martan ROVD that Dzhamali was involved in illegal activity. On 5 November 2004 at around 3 a.m. a group of servicemen arrived at the applicants’ house. Five of them broke into the house. They were in camouflage uniforms and armed with machineguns; three of them wore masks and the others were wearing helmets and caps. Those with open faces were of Slavic appearance; the servicemen spoke Russian and Chechen. They asked whether the applicants had any weapons or drugs, then checked Dzhamali’s passport, forced him outside and put him in a khaki UAZ car. They said that they were taking him to Grozny. Then the UAZ departed in the direction of Achkhoy-Martan, accompanied by a convoy of about ten vehicles, including UAZs, GAZEL minivans, VAZ-21099 and Lada (Жигули) civilian cars. Later in the night a serviceman manning a roadblock in the vicinity confirmed that the convoy had entered Achkhoy-Martan. According to the applicants, the abductors acted on the false information given to the ROVD by Ruslan Solgiriyev. Five days later the applicants’ acquaintance, Mr Akhdan, who served at the seventh military commander’s squadron stationed in Achkhoy-Martan (седьмая ачхой-мартановская комендантская рота), confirmed having seen the convoy in Achkhoy-Martan. He submitted that a UAZ car had entered the the ROVD’s grounds, while the rest of the convoy continued to drive. According to Mr Akhdan, Dzhamali had been detained at the ROVD and had been questioned by Mr V.N. Kulikov, the head of the ROVD’s criminal search department. According to the applicants, Mr V.N. Kulikov was the head of the Zheleznodorozhniy ROVD in Voronezh and was on a temporary assignment in Achkhoy-Martan. According to the Memorial NGO, in November 2006 Mr Kulikov had participated in the abduction of another Samashki resident, Mr Murad Magomadov. In a meeting with the first applicant, Mr A. Sadovnikov, Mr Kulikov’s deputy at the Achkhoy-Martan ROVD denied that Mr Dzhamali had been detained at the ROVD. Mr Akhdan was killed several days after the conversation with the applicants. The applicants have not seen Mr Dzhamali Sultanov since his abduction on 5 November 2004.

 
Cases 341 - 360 of 707