Magomadov and Magomadov v. Russia
Systemic Practice | Duty to Investigate | Obligation to Prevent
The Court found that the failure of authorities to take prompt steps to investigate allegations of unlawful detention may have contributed to the likelihood of the disappearance, gave rise to a strong presumption of acquiescence on the authorities' behalf, raises strong doubts about the objectivity of the investigation, and amounted to a failure to take prompt and effective measures to protect the victim.
July 12, 2007
Article 2 (substantive) [ECHR], Article 2 (procedural) [ECHR], Article 3 [ECHR], Article 5 [ECHR]
Articles not violated / not dealt with
Article 3 [ECHR], Article 34 [ECHR]
Facts of the Case
On 2 October 2000, the applicants' house and their neighbours' house was searched by an armed unit of the Federal Security Service. The abductors arrived in five UAZ vehicles and several armoured personnel carriers. Mr. Ayubkhan Magomadov was arrested in his house by men in military uniforms. They drove him away and he has not been seen since. The authorities accepted that he had been detained on 2 October 2000 but maintained that he had been released the following day. In 31 May 2004, the Court was informed by the applicants that the first applicant, Mr. Yakub Magomadov, had disappeared following a trip to Moscow in April 2004 and that his relatives had not heard from him since 19 April 2004. The applicants maintained that his disappearance was connected to the complaint he had made to the Court and his efforts to locate his brother, Mr. Ayubkhan Magomadov.