24 November 2016
The ECHR ruled partially in favour on the case of Saypudinov v. Russia and ordered the Russian authorities to pay compensation to the applicant
During their work on the case, Russian Justice Initiative’s lawyers noted numerous violations committed in drawing up the interrogation reports and the conduct of the various investigation procedures. An application on the case was sent to the ECHR in 2011. The application affirmed that Articles 3 and 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms were violated with regard to Supaydinov.
11 November 2016
Moscow’s Perovo District Court returns custody rights to the mother of five children
“In November 2015, the UN Committee on Elimination of Discrimination against Women, in its comments on a report by the Russian Federation, noted that the idea in the North Caucasus that children ‘belong’ to the father means in practice that after divorce, women often lose all contact with their children”, said lawyer with Russian Justice Initiative Bike Gyulmagomedova. “Iman Khadzhimuradova’s case is thus not an exception but is a result of trends that Russia is supposed to combat. As yet, the situation has not changed, and after her divorce, Iman Khadzhimuradova was prevented from having any involvement in bringing up her children. This lack of contact with the children was the grounds the applicant then used to attempt to have Iman deprived of her parental rights. The Perovo District Court rejected the applicant’s demand”.
1 November 2016
Response to Russian Government memorandum on the case of Leyla Muruzheva sent to the ECHR
We received the Government’s commentaries, which included among the attached documents, among others, the explanations of the children’s father, who took them from Muruzheva”, said lawyer with Russian Justice Initiative Bike Gyulmagomedova. “His explanations state that the children are at a health resort with their grandmother and ‘new mother’. Let me recall that in June 2014, the Izmailovsky District Court ruled that the children should live with their mother, but they have not been returned to her. The bailiffs say that the children’s emotional state prevents the court decision from being executed. The children’s reaction is understandable, given their age (four and eight), the length of time they have been separated from their mother (more than two-and-a-half years now), and the hostile attitude their father and his parents, who are effectively raising the children now, take towards their mother. We think that in this case, the Russian authorities did not take all the timely action that we would have expected of them to ensure the court decision’s enforcement, and in this way, they violated the applicant’s right to respect for her family life, guaranteed in Article 8”.