text
stringlengths
332
3.61k
label
int64
0
12
58. The Government accepted, for the purposes of the proceedings before the Court, that the applicant had been detained by the army for five days in April 1996 and ill-treated in the manner described. They maintained, however, that he was not of sufficient interest to the Sri Lankan authorities to warrant his arrest a...
5
32. The Government noted at the outset that, in contrast to Peers v. Greece (no. 28524/95, § 75, ECHR 2001‑III), where the applicant had spent at least two months in a remand facility and the Court had found a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention, in the present case, similarly to the Court’s decision in Kara...
5
106. The Government argued that in so far as the applicants complained of a breach of the authorities’ procedural positive obligation under Article <mask> of the Convention to investigate the incident of 1 February 2011, their complaints were inadmissible for non-compliance with the six-month rule. They first explaine...
5
107. The applicants further relied on Article <mask> of the Convention, alleging that their relatives had been subjected to treatment in breach of Article 3 and that no investigation had been carried out into this claim. They also stated that as a result of their close relatives’ abduction and subsequent murder and th...
5
41. The applicant complained under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention that he had been subjected to torture in police custody on 1 May 2004 and that the domestic authorities had failed to conduct an effective investigation into his allegations of ill-treatment. The Court considers that the complaints fall to be exami...
5
82. The Government disagreed with these allegations and argued that, in the absence of any evidence suggesting that the applicant’s relatives had been abducted by representatives of the State, there were no grounds for alleging a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention on account of the applicant’s mental suffer...
5
100. The applicant alleged that in thus rejecting her request for a stay of execution, the Aliens Appeals Board, contrary to the Court’s case-law on Article 13 taken in conjunction with Article <mask> of the Convention, had deprived her of the only possibility under Belgian law of obtaining automatic suspension of the...
5
38. The applicant complained that she had been subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment and intense physical and mental suffering because, even though the domestic authorities had been aware of her serious medical condition, on 6 November 2014 she had been forced to wait eight hours for an interview at the DNA’s o...
5
28. The applicant complained that the transport conditions provided for his prison leave to attend his grandmother’s funeral, namely a small compartment without a seat belt or handles, had violated his rights under Article <mask> of the Convention. Being the master of the characterisation to be given in law to the fac...
5
60. The Government considered that the applicant’s rights set out in Article <mask> of the Convention had not been infringed and that there had never been any intent on the part of the Russian authorities to subject the applicant to torture through physical or mental suffering during the time he had been serving a pri...
5
75. The Government noted that, in the present case, the first applicant’s account of the risk of persecution by al-Qaeda until 2008 was essentially consistent and detailed, did not contain contradictory information, and was supported by relevant country-of-origin information. He had thus discharged his burden of proof...
5
50. The Government submitted that the applicant’s complaints had been investigated and it had been concluded that the applicant had not been ill-treated. The Government noted that the applicant’s complaints at the national level had been too general and had been submitted too late (for example, his complaint of 25 Oct...
5
50. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that he had been tortured in police custody during the investigation in 1999. He next complained under the same provision that he had suffered from diseases incompatible with imprisonment, while the doctors examining him had established incorrect diag...
5
26. The applicant submitted that his detention gave rise to a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention as it was inapt to his conditions. He further claimed that he had been mobbed and sexually assaulted by other inmates. He explained that, due to his intellectual impairment and general inability to communicate, ...
5
43. The applicant alleged that the life sentence imposed on him by vice-presidential decree, in denying him any possibility of early release, is inhuman and degrading. He also complained about the conditions of his detention in Pleven prison, the excessively strict prison regime applied to him, the lack of a legal fra...
5
260. The Government however went on to emphasise that improvement in prison conditions was a long process that engaged not only the authorities but society as a whole. In their view, the fact that the authorities had made efforts to improve these conditions and that overcrowding, while still a problem, had decreased a...
5
39. The Government denied that the applicant had been subjected to any form of treatment prohibited by Article <mask> of the Convention during or after his arrest. They acknowledged that abrasions on the applicant’s back and the back of his head had been found on 6 July 2001, when he had been in police custody; howeve...
5
95. The Government contested that the applicant had been subjected to ill-treatment contrary to Article <mask> of the Convention. They did not dispute the fact that on the day after his arrest, he had been taken to the specialist hospital in view of his complaints concerning lower back pain. The Government admitted th...
5
103. The applicant considered that his confinement to the restraint bed on 22 October 2009 and the use of force and handcuffs on him on the following day amounted to torture and inhuman punishment in violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. He argued that the measures of restraint had been used for punitive purp...
5
53. The Government submitted that the restrictions imposed on the applicant under the special prison regime had not attained the minimum level of severity required to fall within the scope of Article <mask> of the Convention. They stressed first of all that the restrictions in question had been necessary to prevent th...
5
42. The applicant submitted that in the specific context of military service the Government had both positive and negative obligations under Article <mask> of the Convention. The positive obligation consisted in ascertaining that individuals drafted for military service are sufficiently healthy and fit for such servic...
5
86. The Government argued that the applicant had had effective domestic remedies in respect of his complaint of ill-treatment under Article <mask> of the Convention, as required by its Article 13, but he had not availed himself of those remedies. In particular, they argued that under Article 125 of the Russian Code of...
5
43. The Government submitted that in view of the short duration of the detention, the threshold of severity required by Article 3 was not attained. The Court is not convinced by this, especially when looking at all the above elements cumulatively and taking into consideration the applicant's state of health at the tim...
5
78. The Government submitted that when suspects and accused people who faced detention on remand as a preventive measure were escorted to courthouses they were placed before the court on benches “behind a barrier (metal enclosure/cage)” measuring 355 cm in length, 225 cm in height and 115 cm in width. The metal enclos...
5
127. The applicants complained that Amir Magomedov, Ali Uspayev, Aslan Dokayev and Rustam Achkhanov had probably been ill-treated while in the hands of Russian servicemen following their abduction. They further submitted that, as a result of their relatives’ disappearance and the State’s failure to investigate it prop...
5
52. The Government objected that the applicant had not exhausted effective domestic remedies. In particular, he had not requested the public prosecutor to institute criminal proceedings in which those responsible could have been identified and punished for acts punishable under sections 142 or 143 of the Criminal Code...
5
103. The Government submitted that the allegation of the applicant's politically-based persecution had been checked by the Russian courts when examining his appeals against the extradition order and had been rejected as unfounded. The Russian courts had relied on the statement from the Uzbek Prosecutor General's offic...
5
14. The Government submitted that by not claiming compensation for the damage allegedly caused as a result of his detention in inhuman conditions, the applicant had failed to exhaust the available domestic remedies. They submitted a summary of forty-six cases examined by the domestic courts in which detainees had lodg...
5
67. The applicant complained (i) under Article <mask> of the Convention that on 22 August 2004 the police had tortured him to make him confess to robbery and murder; (ii) under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention that his arrest and detention had been unlawful; and (iii) under Article 6 § 2 of the Convention that his dete...
5
50. The Government acknowledged that during almost the entire period of the applicant’s detention in Łowicz Prison the space per person in his cells had been inferior to 3 square metres. They argued, however, that the applicant had not suffered inhuman or degrading treatment which attained the minimum level of severit...
5
40. The applicant complained that the conditions of his detention in Dnipropetrovsk SIZO no. 3, including physical, sanitary and health-care arrangements, had been inhuman and degrading, that he had been beaten by guards on 28 February 2006 and that there had been no effective investigation into his complaint of ill-t...
5
15. The applicant complained that the conditions of his detention in Ljubljana prison amounted to a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. In particular, he complained of severe overcrowding which had led to a lack of personal space, poor sanitary conditions and inadequate ventilation, as well as excessive res...
5
49. The applicant complained that on 9 June 2006 police officers had ill‑treated him in order to make him confess, and that the investigation into the alleged ill-treatment had been ineffective. In particular, he complained that during his arrest and at the police station he had been punched and kicked in the head and...
5
127. The applicants complained that their son Rasul Tsakoyev had been subjected to severe ill-treatment by the State agents, as a result of which he had died, and that the domestic authorities had failed to effectively investigate the circumstances of his death. Under the same head, the applicants complained of mental...
5
38. The applicant complained of a violation of his rights guaranteed under Article <mask> of the Convention. He referred to his earlier description of conditions of detention (see paragraphs 25-27 above) and added that the Government had failed to rebut several of his assertions about the conditions, such as overcrowd...
5
31. The Government firstly submitted that the positive obligations under Article <mask> of the Convention did not encompass an obligation on States to conduct compulsory screening for the presence of tuberculosis. They claimed in this connection that the first time the applicant had voiced his grievances concerning po...
5
29. The Government did not contest that the applicants had been beaten by police officers. However, they contended that the applicants' suffering had not attained the minimum level of severity required under Article <mask> of the Convention. Furthermore, they considered that the applicants had themselves provoked the ...
5
31. The Government confirmed that injuries had been caused to the applicant. As a consequence, the criminal proceedings against the police officers had been reopened on 20 March 2006 in view of the necessity of performing a number of additional investigative actions significant for the legal evaluation of the police o...
5
78. The applicant complained that she had been subjected to an act of police brutality which had caused her serious physical and mental suffering and that the domestic authorities, including the investigative authorities and courts, had failed to carry out an effective investigation into the incident capable of identi...
5
109. The Government noted in their written observations that, according to the most recent information provided by the Migration Agency, the intensity of violence in Baghdad still did not constitute a real risk of treatment contrary to Article <mask> of the Convention. They referred, inter alia, to the United Kingdom ...
5
62. The Government raised a preliminary objection as to non-exhaustion of domestic remedies concerning that complaint under Article <mask> of the Convention. They maintained that the applicant and his representative had failed to challenge the decision of the prosecutor refusing to institute criminal proceedings withi...
5
39. The Government were also of the view that the issue of reducibility had been found to be irrelevant in Vinter (cited above), due to a newly established condition concerning the justification of the continued imprisonment on legitimate penological grounds. In this regard, they submitted that the applicant had so fa...
5
63. The Government submitted that there was no causal link between the alleged violation and the pecuniary loss allegedly sustained, since such a link can be established only in case of finding a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, not of Article <mask> of the Convention. The Government further consider that the...
5
62. The Government submitted that the respondent State had fully complied with its positive obligations under Article <mask> of the Convention, as the relevant authorities had not spared any effort to provide the applicant with due care in prison. In support, they stated that the applicant had been provided with compr...
5
80. The Government submitted that, in the present case, all investigatory steps necessary for establishing the circumstances of the case had been performed. A number of such steps had been performed on the same day. There had been five forensic medical examinations, however, the questions regarding the timing of the i...
5
35. The Government contested that argument. They argued that the use of force against the applicant had been lawful and justified. On numerous occasions he had failed to comply with internal regulations. He had been involved in fights and altercations with other inmates and refused to follow lawful orders given by the...
5
41. The applicants complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that their son had been ill-treated in the course of his arrest. They alleged that the arresting police officers had caused their son's injuries by using disproportionate force and had violated his dignity. They submitted that their son had not resis...
5
56. The applicant complained that his detention in a regular detention facility, in view of his state of health, amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment contrary to Article <mask> of the Convention. He further complained that the authorities’ refusal to transfer him to an outside hospital had stripped him of the o...
5
96. The applicant also insisted that after the parliamentary elections were over, the Lithuanian authorities loosened their grip on him. However, this does not appear to be based on the facts of his criminal case. It is true that between November 2007 and January 2008 the prosecutor granted several requests by the app...
5
79. The applicant complained that she had serious grounds to believe that her son had been ill-treated while in the hands of the authorities. She further complained that she had suffered severe mental distress and anguish in connection with her son’s disappearance and the lack of an adequate response on behalf of the ...
5
373. The applicants' representatives alleged that, during the night of 3 to 4 October 2002, the applicants, who were distressed and ill-informed, were subjected to acts of violence by the Georgian special forces. In particular, they drew the Court's attention to the case of Mr Aziev, who, when he refused to be extradi...
5
46. The applicants further complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that they had been ill-treated during the preliminary stage of the investigation. They relied on Article 5, complaining that their detention was unlawful. They relied on Article 6, stressing that the criminal proceedings in their case had bee...
5
86. The applicant also noted that the indictment issued by the Federal Grand Jury showed that he could face two sentences of life imprisonment. He also contended that his case was comparable to that of the applicant in Trabelsi (cited above), where the Court had declared that the life sentence liable to be imposed on ...
5
13. The applicant complained that the conditions of his detention in Ljubljana prison amounted to a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. In particular, he complained of severe overcrowding which had led to a lack of personal space, poor sanitary conditions and inadequate ventilation, as well as excessive res...
5
113. The Government claimed that the applicant’s complaint under Article <mask> of the Convention as regards the confinement in glass cabins was lodged out of time. They pointed out, in particular, that the six-month time‑limit should have been calculated from the day when the alleged ill‑treatment ceased, and not fro...
5
76. The applicant disagreed. He maintained that the treatment to which he had been subjected in the Odessa SIZO, during his transit to the Kryvyy Rig Colony and upon his arrival there had been incompatible with Article <mask> of the Convention and that he had had no effective remedies for his complaints within the mea...
5
63. The Government contended that the domestic authorities had taken all reasonable steps in order to discharge their procedural obligation under Article <mask> of the Convention. They specified that the examination of the applicant’s complaint had been carried out with the requisite expediency and thoroughness. At th...
5
65. The Government further submitted that the investigation had been opened immediately after the applicant’s allegations of ill-treatment, that numerous investigative actions had been carried out, such as interviews and confrontations between different witnesses, that all the essential circumstances of the applicant’...
5
44. The Government contested that the applicant had been subjected to ill-treatment contrary to Article <mask> of the Convention. They pointed to alleged discrepancies between the applicant’s submissions to the domestic authorities and his submissions to the Court. The Government, firstly, noted that he had lodged his...
5
52. The Government submitted that the applicant’s rights set out in Article <mask> of the Convention had not been violated by the actions of the national authorities. The use of force against the applicant was strictly necessary and was called for by the applicant’s unruly and threatening behaviour. The injuries he ha...
5
69. The Government submitted that the conditions in which the applicant had been transported were in compliance with Article <mask> of the Convention. Neither the prison vans nor the railway carriage were filled beyond the capacity for which they had been designed. The ventilation, heating and lighting were in good wo...
5
42. The applicants complained that during their arrest and subsequent detention they were subjected to acts of police brutality which inflicted on them great physical and mental suffering amounting to torture, inhuman and/or degrading treatment or punishment. They also complained that the Greek investigative and prose...
5
88. The applicants stated that in the proceedings before the Appeals Board Mr Lorsé had not asked for a decision on the compatibility with Article <mask> of the Convention of the EBI regime as such, but that he had confined the appeal to the extension of his detention in the EBI. The arguments presented on behalf of M...
5
72. The applicants complained that they and their deceased relatives had been subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment, and that there had been no effective investigation of their complaints, in breach of Article <mask> of the Convention. They further cited Articles 8 and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Prot...
5
43. The applicant complained that, if extradited to Kyrgyzstan, he would be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment because he belonged to the Uzbek ethnic minority. He referred to various sources, including publications by the UN Committee against Torture, Amnesty International and Human ...
5
58. The applicants complained that the conditions of their detention in Ljubljana prison amounted to a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. In particular, they complained of severe overcrowding, which had led to a lack of personal space, poor sanitary conditions and inadequate ventilation, as well as excessi...
5
64. The Government submitted that the applicant had failed to exhaust available domestic remedies. According to them, he could have applied to the domestic courts with claims for compensation in respect of any non­pecuniary damage allegedly resulting from the conditions of his detention. The Government also considered...
5
41. The Government submitted that the applicant had been detained in the satisfactory sanitary conditions. He had been given bedding and at all times had enjoyed at least eight hours' sleep. The food met the applicable standards. The applicant had been provided with adequate medical assistance and his health had impro...
5
94. The Government considered that the award claimed by the applicant in respect of non-pecuniary damages was grossly exaggerated. They cited the Sarban case on which the applicant had relied earlier and in which the Court had awarded EUR 4,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damages. In this respect, they pointed out tha...
5
34. The applicant alleged that his political activities as a member of the SLM-Unity and the DFEZ in Switzerland would put him at a real risk of persecution contrary to Article <mask> of the Convention if returned to Sudan. Relying on the case of S.F. and Others v. Sweden (no. 52077/10, § 68, 15 May 2012) he pointed o...
5
86. The applicants relied on Article <mask> of the Convention, submitting that they and Mr Ramzan Guluyev had been ill-treated by the State agents during his abduction. They also claimed that they had been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment prohibited by Article 3 of the Convention and that as a result of his...
5
52. The applicants complained that if they were deported from Sweden to Uzbekistan they would be persecuted, arrested, ill-treated and maybe even killed, primarily because the first applicant had participated in the demonstration in Andijan in May 2005 and was still sought by the Uzbek authorities. They also claimed t...
5
20. The Government submitted that there was no violation of Article <mask> of the Convention because the treatment to which the applicant had been subjected in remand prison IZ-77/1 had not attained the minimum threshold of severity required for that provision to apply. The conditions of detention in the remand prison...
5
46. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that he had been beaten by police officers on 27 November 2006 and that the authorities had not carried out a prompt and effective investigation of that incident. In his written submission of 5 January 2012, namely after the communication of the prese...
5
25. The applicant complained that, while he was detained in police custody between 14 and 17 July 1994, he had been subjected to ill-treatment amounting to torture within the meaning of Article <mask> of the Convention. In support of this allegation the applicant referred to the above-mentioned medical report of 17 Ju...
5
77. The Government, referring to their arguments under Article <mask> of the Convention that that complaint was manifestly ill-founded because the applicant had lost his victim status under Article 34 of the Convention, maintained that Article 13 of the Convention was inapplicable. In their view, a manifestly ill-foun...
5
49. The applicant complained that the conditions of his detention in Tver remand centre no. 69/1 from 24 November 2003 to 8 December 2004 had been in breach of Article <mask> of the Convention. In his submissions in August 2006 he also complained that the conditions of his detention in the remand centre from October 2...
5
101. The Government indicated one non-judicial and two judicial remedies open to the applicants to challenge the effectiveness of the investigation, as protected under Article <mask> of the Convention. Upon the applicants’ complaint about the decision of the public prosecutor to discontinue the investigation under Art...
5
28. The applicant complained that during his arrest and subsequent detention he had been subjected to acts of police brutality which had caused him great physical and mental suffering amounting to torture, inhuman and/or degrading treatment or punishment, in breach of Article <mask> of the Convention. He also complain...
5
63. The Government submitted that the Court should refrain from examining the complaint under Article <mask> of the Convention, as it has already, in its judgment on the inter-State application Georgia v. Russia (I) (cited above), found a violation of the right protected by Article 3 of particular nationals of the Rep...
5
68. The applicant further complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that he had contracted several diseases and had been ill-treated in the colony in 2000. He also complained under Article 6 § 3 (b)-(d) of the Convention that he had been denied a “fair hearing” in the proceedings concerning his transfer to a d...
5
43. The Government submitted that there had been no violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. They emphasised that on 29 December 2006 the witnesses at the police department who had attested to the seizure of the drugs had not seen any injuries on the applicant. On 2 January 2007 he had been given a medical exami...
5
67. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that during his arrest he had been subjected to degrading treatment, in particular that the manner of his handcuffing had been entirely unnecessary in the circumstances. The applicant underlined that his exposure in handcuffs to the hospital staff, pa...
5
115. The Government observed that on the basis of the medical evidence available it could not be said that the applicant’s treatment had attained the level of severity required for a breach of Article <mask> of the Convention. In this connection, they also pointed out that the applicant, after having been examined in ...
5
20. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that he had been beaten in police custody and that the police had refused to send him for medical examination. He also complained under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention about the unlawfulness of his arrest on 2 June 1998. The applicant further complain...
5
120. The Government, whilst not denying that the abduction of the applicants' relatives must have caused considerable emotional distress to the applicants, submitted that there was no causal link between the authorities' actions and this distress, in the absence of any findings by the domestic investigation confirming...
5
55. The applicant further complained, in relation to his proceedings concerning his preventive detention, that his detention amounted to torture contrary to Article <mask> of the Convention in that it was aimed at extracting a confession from him. Invoking Article 5 § 5 of the Convention, he claimed compensation for h...
5
33. The applicant complained that the police had beaten him during and after his arrest and left him overnight in a squatting position chained to a radiator in the corridor of a police station with no rest facilities. He also complained that the investigation into his allegations of ill-treatment had been ineffective....
5
119. The applicant maintained his claims. He stated that by 15 April 2005 there had been substantial grounds for fearing that he would be subjected to treatment in breach of Article <mask> of the Convention on his return to Tajikistan. Furthermore, he stated that he had in fact been ill-treated while detained in Tajik...
5
36. The applicant complained under Articles 3 and 6 of the Convention that on 27 April 1998 at Rīga Main police station he had been ill-treated by police officers who had put a gas mask and a plastic bag on his head and beaten him with the aim of extorting a confession. He alleged, in particular, that the manner in wh...
5
58. The applicant asserted that he had been detained in appalling conditions in remand prison no. IZ-44/1 in Kostroma. All the cells had been overcrowded. The applicant challenged the veracity of the data submitted by the Government as regards the population and the size of the cells in which he had been detained. In ...
5
134. The Government argued that the application was unfounded on the merits. They submitted that the “minimum threshold of severity” beyond which there was a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention had not been reached. They compared the present case to that of Messina v. Italy (no. 2) ((dec.), no. 25498/94, ECH...
5
57. The Government acknowledged the overcrowding in all of the detention facilities in which the applicant had been held. More specifically, the statistics provided by the Government in reply to the applicant’s allegations of overcrowding show that most of the time the applicant’s personal space was significantly less...
5
21. The applicant complained that that he had been subjected to acts of police brutality which inflicted on him great physical and mental suffering amounting to torture, inhuman and/or degrading treatment or punishment, in breach of Article <mask> of the Convention. He further complained that the Greek authorities had...
5
25. The Government submitted that the detention conditions at the Yalova police headquarters did not attain the level of severity required to be considered as inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of Article <mask> of the Convention. They provided photos of the detention facility, and copies of the logs re...
5
92. The applicants complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that the attack on their houses and their destruction had amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment, for which the State was responsible on the grounds that the authorities had been complicit in the attack and had failed to protect them from it and...
5
108. The Government disagreed with these allegations and argued that the investigation had not established that Said-Rakhman Musayev, Odes Mitayev and Magomed Magomadov had been subjected to treatment prohibited by Article <mask> of the Convention. In particular, the Government stressed that the investigation had been...
5
69. The applicant further complained that he had been unlawfully arrested. He complained, under Article <mask> of the Convention, that police officers had ill-treated him after his arrest. He also complained, under Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention, that he had not been provided with a lawyer and had been forced to ...
5
68. The applicants complained that it was very likely that Abdulkasim Zaurbekov had been subjected to torture and inhuman treatment and that no effective investigation had been conducted in this connection. They also submitted that they had suffered severe mental distress and anguish in connection with their relative’...
5
127. The applicant’s representative submitted that there had been a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention on account of the applicant’s secret transfer to Uzbekistan, which could only have been carried out with the active or passive involvement of the Russian authorities, and that the Russian authorities had f...
5