{"id":1291,"date":"2009-06-18T09:01:10","date_gmt":"2009-06-18T08:01:10","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rcstaging.co.uk\/ehrac\/?post_type=case-studies&p=1291"},"modified":"2023-10-31T20:23:30","modified_gmt":"2023-10-31T20:23:30","slug":"disappearance-magomadova-v-russia","status":"publish","type":"case-studies","link":"http:\/\/ehrac.org.uk\/en_gb\/key-ehrac-cases\/disappearance-magomadova-v-russia\/","title":{"rendered":"Magomadova v Russia"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\t\t
<\/div><\/div>
<\/div><\/div>
\n\t
\n\t\t
<\/div><\/div>\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\r\n
\r\n\t
\r\n\t\t
\n

Case No. 2393\/05
\nJudgment date: 18 June 2009<\/strong><\/p>\n

In Magomadova the\u00a0applicant\u2019s son was taken from her\u00a0home in Urus-Martan, Chechnya by\u00a0Russian servicemen on 12 April 2002.\u00a0The applicants was\u00a0unable to establish the whereabouts or\u00a0fate of her son despite searching for him\u00a0and applying to various official\u00a0bodies. The ECtHR ruled that the victim\u00a0must be \u201cpresumed dead\u201d following his\u00a0detention by Russian servicemen,\u00a0and that his\u00a0death was attributable\u00a0to the State, violating Art. 2 (right to\u00a0life) ECHR. Russia\u2019s failure to carry\u00a0out an effective investigation into\u00a0the\u00a0disappearance constituted\u00a0a further violation of Art. 2 and also\u00a0amounted to a failure to provide the\u00a0applicant with an effective domestic\u00a0remedy in violation of Art. 13. The ECtHR\u00a0held that the applicant\u2019s suffering\u00a0stemming from the disappearance of her\u00a0son constituted inhuman treatment\u00a0and violated Art. 3. The fact that\u00a0the son was held in unacknowledged\u00a0detention amounted to a violation of\u00a0Art. 5 (right to liberty). 35,000 euros\u00a0non-pecuniary damages were awarded\u00a0in this\u00a0case.<\/p>\n

To read about this and similar cases in full, please follow the link below.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Links<\/h3>\n