Mukhitdinov v. Russia

Key Judgment

Legal Relevance

Keywords: Obligation to Prevent | Deprivation of Liberty | Systemic Practice | Duty to Investigate | Duty to Prosecute | Interim/Urgent Measures | Extraterritorial Jurisdiction | Refugees and Migrants | Reparations

Themes: Characteristics of the Crime | Persons and Groups Affected | Prevention | Related Crimes

Reaffirming its position that individuals whose extradition was sought by the Uzbek authorities on charges of religiously or politically motivated crimes constituted a vulnerable group, the Court was satisfied that the enforcement of the extradition order and the victim's return to Uzbekistan exposed him to a real risk of ill-treatment. It was also satisfied that State authorities were aware before and after the applicants’ release that he faced a real risk of forcible transfer to the country where he could be subjected to ill-treatment, and found that these circumstances, coupled with the victim's background, would have required appropriate measures of protection which the State failed to take. The Court added that the victim's disappearance had to be seen against the background of many similar incidents that took place in the country, pointing to an established and consistent pattern of disappearances of individuals who were under the State protection. For this reason, and having regard to the fact that the victim was last seen in the custody of the authorities, the Court concluded that the State was responsible for his disappearance. In light of the fact that the victim's whereabouts were still unknown at the time of the decision, the Court maintained the previously indicated interim measures claiming that he was still liable to be extradited pursuant to the final judgments of the Russian courts.