Dashtayev and others v. Russia, (66831/11)
|Date of violations:||20/07/2003|
|Location:||Chechnya, Novye Atagi|
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)
|Date of violations:||26/12/2012|
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)
|Date of violations:||26/12/2012|
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)
|Date of violations:||05/02/2000|
|Location:||Chechnya, Novye Aldy|
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)
|Date of violations:||17/11/2012|
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)
|Date of violations:||07/02/2008|
|Location:||Chechnya, the Dubovskaya village|
|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)
|Date of violations:||24/04/2006|
|Location:||the Kurgan Region|
|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)
|Date of violations:||17/06/2007|
|Location:||Ingushetia, the village of Surkhakhi|
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)
|Date of violations:||17/01/2011|
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.
Tamayev v. Russia, (54728/09)
|Date of violations:||06/01/2001|
|Location:||Chechnya, the settlement of Roshni-Chu|
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)
|Date of violations:||15/12/2001|
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)
|Date of violations:||30/06/2001|
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)
|Date of violations:||29/10/2002|
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)
|Date of violations:||19/09/2001|
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)
|Date of violations:||05/11/2004|
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.
Eldarov v. Russia, (36354/09)
|Date of violations:||09/08/2000|
At the relevant time the applicant and Aldan Eldarov lived in neighbouring houses in Gekhi. According to the applicant, on 9 August 2000 federal servicemen started a three-day sweeping-up operation in Gekhi. They surrounded the settlement in their UAZ cars and URAL lorries, cordoned off the area and blocked the roads leading to and from the settlement. The servicemen deployed on the eastern outskirts of Gekhi. Around two hundred of the village’s male residents were arrested during the operation. At around 10.30 a.m. a group of servicemen conducted a search at Aldan’s house. They took away a group photograph of Aldan, his brother and some police officers from Grozny, all of whom were in military uniforms. Then the servicemen left and Aldan went to see the applicant. Later, at around 11 a.m., two servicemen arrived at the applicant’s house in a UAZ lorry, no. OBS 31-62 (ОБС 31-62). The applicant knew the servicemen personally as Mr Vadim and Mr Oleg Yefimenko. The latter was in charge of the operation in the applicant’s street. Prior to their being sent to work with the Urus-Martan ROVD, both officers had worked in the economic crimes unit of the Penza ROVD. The servicemen told the applicant that they were to bring Aldan to the military base in connection with the photograph, then they put him in their car and left. The applicant was unable to follow them because his car was stopped by servicemen carrying out the special operation. On that day the servicemen also arrested Mr Akhmet Kadyrov and his two brothers. After checking their passports, the servicemen took them to the military base in an APC and placed them in cages and tents with other detainees. The cages were surrounded by dozens of military vehicles, including armoured personnel carriers (APCs), tanks and a helicopter. The detainees, who were questioned about whether they knew any rebel fighters or local residents who had weapons, were subjected to beatings. Akhmet shared his cell with Aldan. As Aldan was in a very bad state after questioning, servicemen took him in an APC to hospital. Akhmet and his brothers were released. On 10 August 2000 the head of the local administration, Mr Said-Selim Aydamirov, informed the applicant that the servicemen conducting the operation would release the detainee in exchange for a machinegun. The applicant agreed to the exchange. However, after having visited the military base, Mr Aydamirov stated that Aldan had been taken to hospital. In September 2000 a burial site was discovered on the outskirts of Gekhi. Two of the bodies identified belonged to the Musayev brothers, also Gekhi residents, who had been arrested in the same period of time as Aldan. The applicant has not seen Mr Aldan Eldarov since his abduction on 9 August 2000.
Anayeva and Elmurzayeva v. Russia, (32791/10)
|Date of violations:||21/04/2002|
|Location:||Chechnya, Starye Atagi|
At the material time the applicants resided in Stariye Atagi together with their family, including Ziyavdi and Zayndi, the first applicant’s husband. On 21 April 2002 at around 7.30 a.m. a group of about fifty or sixty armed servicemen in camouflage uniforms arrived at the applicants’ house in APC no. 422 BB (422 ВВ) and two armoured infantry combat vehicles nos. 344 and 346. They were of Slavic appearance and spoke unaccented Russian. The servicemen broke into the house, arrested Ziyavdi and Zayndi, dragged them outside, put them in the APC and departed towards the outskirts of Stariye Atagi. In about a hundred metres, they had to let Zayndi go as he was having a stroke. Then the servicemen continued driving until they arrived at a windmill on the outskirts of Stariye Atagi where a Russian military unit was stationed. The applicants, their relatives and neighbours followed the intruders. When they approached the windmill, they saw the three abductors’ vehicles parked on the premises of the military unit. The visitors attracted the servicemen’s attention to this fact and the latter obscured the plates with mud. The deputy head of the Stariye Atagi administration was not allowed to enter the premises. At around 3 p.m. on the same day servicemen left the military unit in two APCs, one of which had registration no. 422 BB, a white VAZ-2106 car and a khaki UAZ “tabletka” minivan with blackened windows. They drove in the direction of Grozny. The applicants have not seen Mr Ziyavdi Elmurzayev since his abduction on 21 April 2002.
Vakhita Ibragimov and others v. Russia, (25511/10)
|Date of violations:||17/01/2003|
At the material time Mr Islam Ibragimov and Mr Apti Sadulayev resided in two neighbouring houses in Shali with the applicants and their respective families. On 17 January 2003 at 4 a.m. a group of armed and masked servicemen arrived at the applicants’ homes in seven APCs with obscured plates. They burst into the two houses, ordered everyone to lie down on the floor in unaccented Russian and checked the identity documents of Isman, Apti and the first applicant. Then the servicemen took them outside, along with the second applicant and Mr Rashid Sadulayev, Apti’s cousin, forced them into an APC, pulling their T-shirts over their heads, and drove away. A package dropped off from an CAP. One of the servicemen told the third applicant to look for their relatives at the ROVD. At first, Islam, the first and the second applicants were placed in the same APC with Apti and Rashid. After about twenty-five minutes the servicemen pulled over, took the arrested men outside, made them lie down on the ground, then put them back in the APC, save for Ilyas, who was put in another APC, and continued to drive. The servicemen drove Ilyas to Tsotsan-Yurt and released him. As to the other four arrested men, their APC pulled over again and the men were put on the ground, asked to say their names and then placed in a wagon. Forty minutes later the servicemen put Rashid and the first applicant in a URAL lorry and drove away. After about thirty minutes the two men arrived at a garage-like building where they were kept until 18 January 2003. According to the applicants, the two men must have been detained in a windmill in Staryie Atagi, which was used as a filtering point by Russian servicemen (see Arzu Akhmadova and Others v. Russia, no. 13670/03, § 195, 8 January 2009). After that, the men were taken in an APC to the vicinity of the town of Argun and released. In the days following the abduction, the applicants, their relatives and neighbours contacted various authorities. In particular, while in Khankala, Mr Khasin Abkayev met Generals Said-Selim Tsuyev and Ibragim Suleymanov, who promised their assistance, and Generals Abrashin and Pospelov, who said that the matter was not in their competence. Furthermore, Mr Bachal Baysuyev talked to Akhmed-Khadzhi Kadyrov and to General Makarov, both of whom promised to help to solve the matter within a week but failed to do so. According to them, a criminal investigation had been opened against Islam and Apti and the latter was being questioned by the prosecuting authorities. Mr Fedorov, the Shali military commander, confirmed this on local TV, adding that Islam and Apti were safe and sound. The applicants did not manage to obtain a copy of the TV programme. The applicants have not seen Mr Islam Ibragimov and Mr Apti Sadulayev since their abduction on 17 January 2003.
Shishkov v. Russia, (26746/05)
|Date of violations:||09/04/2004|
The applicant alleged that he had been held in appalling conditions in a temporary detention centre in in the town of Mayskiy in the Kabardino-Balkariya Republic in 2004 and 2005, and that he had no effective remedies in this respect; that the domestic courts had refused, on spurious grounds, to examine a number of cases brought by him; and that the prison authorities had failed to dispatch his correspondence to the Court. He cited Articles 3, 6, 13 and 34 of the Convention.
Z. and Khatuyeva v. Russia, (39436/06; 40169/07)
|Date of violations:||28/12/2004|
|Location:||North Ossetia, Beslan|
On 28 December 2004 Zhamalayla Yanayev was supposed to take the flight Beslan-Moscow and checked in at Beslan airport. Before the flight took off several servicemen, identifying themselves as officers of the regional Directorate for Combating Organised Crime of the Ministry of the Interior of the Russian Federation by showing their service certificates, entered the secure airport premises. The servicemen arrested Yanayev and left the airport with him. Yanayev has been missing since.