Communicated on 2 November 2015

THIRD SECTION

Application no. 15086/07 Raisa Aleksandrovna MAZEPA and others against Russia lodged on 6 April 2007

STATEMENT OF FACTS

A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. The applicants are Russian nationals who live in Moscow. They are represented before the Court by Ms K. Moskalenko and Ms A. Stavitskaya , lawyers practicing in Strasbourg and Moscow.

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.

The first applicant is the mother of the second applicant and of Ms Anna Politkovskaya who was born in 1958 and die d in 2006. The third and fourth applicants are Anna Politkovskaya ’ s children.

Anna Politkovskaya was a well-known investigative journalist who made a name for herself covering alleged violations of human rights in the Chechen Republic committed in the course of the counterterrorism operation in the region widely known as the “Second Chechen War”. Ms Politkovskaya was also an adamant critic of President Putin ’ s politics.

On 7 October 2006 Anna Politkovskaya was fatally shot in the lift in her block of flats in Moscow. A Makarov pistol and four bullet cartridges were found on the stairs.

On the same date the prosecutor ’ s office opened a criminal investigation under Article 105 § 2 (b) of the Russian Criminal Code (“murder of a person committed in connection with his or her professional or civic duties”).

On 9 October 2006 forensic experts established that the death had been caused by gunshot wounds to the victim ’ s head, chest and right leg. On the same date a certificate of death was issued.

On 12 October 2006 the fourth applicant was granted victim status. Later the third applicant also received such status.

On 27 August 2007 the Prosecutor General of Russia made a statement at a press conference according to which there had been serious progress in the investigation of Ms Politkovskaya ’ s killing and that ten persons had been arrested in connection with the investigation. Another official of the Prosecutor General ’ s Office stated that Mr P.R. had been arrested. On 28 August 2007 the Tvoy Den ’ newspaper ( « Твой День ») published a list of persons arrested in connection with Ms Politkovskaya ’ s murder and commented that there were known hitmen among those detained. On 29 August 2007 a press officer of the Moscow city court (“the city court”) disclosed to the public a list of ten names detained in connection with Anna Politkovskaya ’ s assassination.

In the course of August 2007 Mr D.M., Mr I.M., Mr P.R. and Mr S.Kh . were arrested in connection with the killing.

In June 2008 Mr D.M., Mr I.M. and Mr S.Kh . were formally charged with contract killing in conspiracy. Mr S.Kh . was considered to be a leader of the organised criminal group. Mr P.R. was charged in the same set of proceedings with abuse of powers and extortion.

At some point Mr R.M., a person who was allegedly implicated in the assassination, fled Russia on a forged passport. His name was put on an international wanted list. On 16 June 2008 a criminal case against Mr R.M. was severed from the case against Mr S . Kh ., Mr P.R., Mr D.M. and Mr I.M.

In June 2008 the investigators prepared a case against Mr S . Kh ., Mr P.R., Mr D.M. and Mr I.M. for transfer to a court. The applicants requested that the case file remain with the investigators as in their view the investigation had been incomplete and sending the case file to a court would be premature. Nonetheless, the case file was transferred to the Moscow circuit military court (“the circuit court”) to be tried by a jury.

In the course of the court hearings in 2008-09 Mr D.P., a high ranking officer of the Moscow department of the interior, was questioned as a prosecution witness. He submitted that, acting in his professional capacity, he had organised and conducted surveillance on Anna Politkovskaya shortly prior to her assassination. A certain Mr L.-A.G. was also questioned as a witness.

Mr O.G. informed the applicants that he was willing to testify as a witness. Upon the applicants ’ request, an investigator questioned him. Mr O.G. submitted that Mr D.P. had been implicated in the murder.

On 19 February 2009 the jury delivered a not-guilty verdict in respect of Mr S . Kh ., Mr P.R., Mr D.M. and Mr I.M.

On 20 February 2009 the circuit court acquitted Mr S . Kh ., Mr P.R., Mr D.M. and Mr I.M. The prosecution appealed. The third and fourth applicants decided not to appeal against the acquittal.

On 25 June 2009 the Supreme Court of Russia quashed the judgment of 20 February 2009 on appeal and remitted the case to the circuit court for a fresh examination.

Later the case was transmitted to the prosecutor ’ s office for further investigation. It appears that the charges against Mr P.R. were dropped at some point and that Mr L.-A.G. was indicted.

On 31 May 2011 Mr R.M. was arrested.

On 26 August 2011 the Basmanny district court of Moscow (“the district court”) ordered Mr D.P. ’ s placement in custody.

On 31 August 2011 Mr D.P. entered a guilty plea with the investigation. On 29 August 2012 the criminal case against him was severed in a separate investigation; the applicants disagreed with the decision. On 14 December 2012 the Moscow city court (“the city court”) sentenced Mr D.P. to eleven years ’ imprisonment. The applicants appealed against the judgment considering the sentence too lenient, but to no avail. On an unspecified date Mr D.P. ’ s conviction was upheld on appeal.

At some point the case file against Mr S.Kh ., Mr R.M., Mr D.R., Mr I.R. and Mr L.-A.G. was transferred for a trial to the city court.

On 20 June 2013 the city court commenced a jury trial of Mr S.Kh ., Mr R.M., Mr D.R., Mr I.R. and Mr L.-A.G.

On 14 November 2013 the jury was dismissed for the reason that only eleven jurors out of twelve appeared in the court room.

On 14 January 2014 hearings before a new composition of the jury commenced.

On 29 May 2014 the jury deliver ed the verdict finding all five co ‑ accused guilty.

On 9 June 2014 the city court sentenced Mr R.M., who was identified as an organiser, and Mr L.-A.G., identified as a hitman, to life imprisonment. Mr D.R. and Mr I.R. were sentenced to fourteen and twelve years ’ imprisonment, respectively. Mr S.Kh . was sentenced to twenty years ’ imprisonment. In the applicants ’ submission, the person(s) who financed the crime have not been identified and prosecuted.

The judgment was appealed against. By June 2015, the appeal has been pending before the Supreme Court of Russia.

COMPLAINT

The applicants complain under Article 2 of the Convention in its procedural limb that the investigation into Anna Politkovskaya ’ s assassination was ineffective as it protracted for almost nine years and failed to identify those who had commissioned and paid for the crime.

QUESTION TO THE PARTIES

Having regard to the procedural protection of the right to life (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 104, ECHR 2000-VII), was the investigation into the killing of Ms Anna Politkovskaya by the domestic authorities sufficient to meet their obligation to carry out an effective investigation, as required by Article 2 of the Convention? In particular, has a requirement of promptness and reasonable expedition been met (see, with further references, Mustafa Tunç and Fecire Tunç v. Turkey ([GC], no. 24014/05 , § 178, 14 April 2015)?

The parties are requested to submit a copy of the judgment of 9 June 2014 by the Moscow city court and, once available, a copy of the appeal judgment by the Supreme Court of Russia.