Communicated on 22 September 2015

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 29910/08 Sultan MAGOMEDOV and others against Russia and 9 other applications (see list appended)

A. General information pertaining to all of the applications

The applicants in the present cases are Russian nationals residing in different towns and villages in the Chechen Republic, Russia, as specified below. Most of the applicants are represented before the Court by lawyers of Stichting Russian Justice Initiative (SRJI) , an NGO based in the Netherlands with a representative office in Russia (in partnership with NGO Astreya), lawyers of Memorial Human Rights Centre and NGO “Materi Chechni” practicing in Chechnya. The applicants in Inalkayeva v. Russia (64272/11), Tsumayevy v. Russia (67743/11) and Asukhanovy v. Russia (38383/12) are not legally represented.

The facts pertaining to all the applications, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.

B. Events surrounding the abductions

The applicants are close relatives of men, who disappeared after their abduction from various checkpoints in the Chechen Republic in 200 0-2004 by groups of servicemen. According to the applicants, the servicemen belonged to the Russian federal troops as they were in camouflage uniforms, had Slavic features and spoke unaccented Russian. Armed with machineguns, the servicemen stopped the applicants ’ relatives for identity check and took the latter away in military vehicles, such as armoured personnel carriers (APCs) and UAZ cars . The abductions took place in the Argun, Grozny, Urus-Martan and Achkhoy-Martan districts of Chechnya.

C. Main features of the investigation into the abductions

In each of the cases the applicants complained about the abduction to law-enforcement bodies and an official investigation was instituted. In every case the proceedings, after being suspended and resumed on several occasions, have been pending for several years without attaining any tangible results. The investigation has been repeatedly stayed by the prosecutors ’ offices owing to their inability to identify the culprits and further resumed by the supervisory bodies who pointed out a number of flaws therein, such as the failure to question witnesses or carry out basic expert evaluations. Some applicants were granted victim status in the criminal proceedings. It is unclear whether all of the applicants were questioned by the investigating authorities.

It follows from the documents submitted that no active investigative steps have been taken by the authorities other than forwarding formal information requests to their counterparts in various regions of Chechnya and the North Caucasus. Further to such requests, the authorities generally reported that servicemen ’ s involvement in the abduction had not been established, that the applicants ’ relatives had not been arrested or detained on their premises.

In all of the cases the applicants requested information about the progress of the proceedings from the investigative authorities; in response they received formal letters usually stating that the investigation was in progress and that their requests had been forwarded to another law-enforcement authority for examination. According to the applicants, the investigative authorities either failed to take the most important investigative steps, such as questioning of witnesses to the abductions, or they took those essential steps with significant and inexplicable delays.

D. Peculiarities of the individual applications

Summaries of facts for each of the applications and the most important investigative steps taken by the authorities are outlined below.

1 . Application no. 29910/08 Sultan Magomedov and Others v. Russia

The applicants are:

1) Mr Sultan Magomedov, who was born in 1951;

2) Mr Alash Magomedov, who was born in 1937;

3) Mr Vakha Magomadov, who was born in 1954;

4) Ms Marusa Magomadova, who was born in 1961;

5) Ms Bella Madomadova, who was born in 1985;

6) Ms Khava Magomadova, who was born in 1986, and

7) Mr Umar Magomadov, who was born in 1989.

The applicants live in Mesker-Yurt village, Chechnya. They are represented before the Court by lawyers of Memorial Human Rights Centre.

The applicants are close relatives of Mr Usman Magomadov, who was born in 1957. The first, second and the third applicants are his brothers, the fo u rth applicant is his wife, the fifth, sixth and seventh applicants are his children.

(a) Abducti on of Mr Usman Magomadov

On 28 March 2002 Mr Usman Magomadov left his home in Mesker-Yurt and was driving to work in Argun in his white Zhiguli model car when a group of about four armed military servicemen in camouflage uniforms and masks stopped him at checkpoint no. 136 situated at the entrance to Argun. They pulled Mr Usman Magomadov out of his car, forced him into one of the two armoured personnel carriers (APCs) waiting nearby and drove off in the direction of Argun.

The abduction was witnessed by several bystanders, including the fourth applicant and her relative Ms E.D.

Ms E.D. asked one of the servicemen at the checkpoint where Mr Usman Magomadov had been taken to. The serviceman replied that he had been taken to the Argun military commander ’ s office. She immediately took a taxi and followed the APCs until they reached the premises of the commander ’ s office. Then the military vehicles turned in the direction of Khankala, where the main base of the Russian forces in Chechnya was located. Somewhere on the road the vehicles stopped. Ms E.D. got out of the taxi and was approaching them on foot when a Niva model car pulled over. A serviceman, who appeared to be a military colonel, got out of the car and asked her about what was happening. She explained the situation and he promised to help. Then he approached the APCs and spoke to the servicemen. Having finished the conversation, the colonel and the servicemen drove off to Khankala.

Several days later the driver of the Niva car informed Ms E.D. that Mr Usman Magomadov was detained in the Grozny department of the Federal Security Service (the FSB).

The whereabouts of Mr Usman Magomadov remain unknown since the date of his abduction.

(b) Official investigation into the abduction

Immediately after the abduction the applicants informed the authorities thereof and requested that a criminal investigation be opened.

On 30 April 2002 the Argun inter-district prosecutors ’ office opened criminal case no. 78051 under Article 126 of the Criminal Code (abduction).

On 5 May 2002 the fourth applicant was granted victim status.

On 14 June 2002 Mr V.S., a police officer , who had manned the checkpoint on the day of the abduction , was questioned. He stated, in particular, that in the morning on that date thirty-five to forty military servicemen from a commander ’ s squadron had arrived at the checkpoint in four APCs . From their conversation between ea ch other he had understood that they were look ing for certain men in a white Zhiguli model car who had allegedly committed an armed a ttack on the federal forces the day before.

On 20 June 2002 the crime scene was inspected. No evidence was collected .

On the same day the investigators questioned Mr V.B., another police officer who had manned the checkpoint on the abduction day . He had not witnessed the moment of the abduction; however he confirmed the presence of armed military servicemen and four APCs at the checkpoint at the time of the events.

On 19 June 2003 the investigation was suspended for failure to identify the perpetrators. Subsequently, it was resumed on several occasions each time following the supervisors ’ orders and criticism and then again suspended. Thus, the investigation was resumed on 25 December 2003, on unspecified dates in April and September 2004, 6 February 2007 and 5 June 2007. It was suspended on 5 February 2004, 9 May 2004, 9 October 2004, 6 March 2007 and 10 July 2007.

It appears that the investigation is still pending.

(c) Procee dings against the investigators

On 1 December 2006, 7 May and 22 November 2007 the fourth applicant challenged her lack of access to the case file and the investigators ’ failure to take basic steps before the Shali District Court (the court).

On 8 February 2007, 8 June and 14 December 2007 the court allowed the complaint in part having ordered that access to the case file be granted.

2. Application n o. 62409/10 Khuchbarova and Others v. Russia

The applicants are :

1) Ms Zaira Khuchbarova, who was born in 1979;

2) Ms Satsita Murdalova, who was born in 1951;

3) Mr Shaykhan Murdalov, who was born in 1997;

4) Ms Rayana Murdalova, who was born in 2002, and

5) Ms Radima Murdalova, who was born in 2004.

The applicant s live in the village of Valerik, Chechnya. They are represented before the Court by Mr Dokka Itslayev, a lawyer practicing in Grozny.

The first applicant is the wife of Mr Shamkhan Murdalov , who was born in 1977. The second applicant is his mother. T he third, fourth and fifth applicants are his children.

(a) Abduction of Mr Shamkhan Murdalov

Mr Shamkhan Murdalov was a member of illegal armed groups operating on the territory of Chechnya during the first military campaign in 1994-1996.

In the morning on 21 May 2004 Mr Shamkhan Murdalov with his relative Mr R.B. and acquaintance Mr Kh.Z. left his home in Valerik and went to Grozny to buy building supplies. On their way, at the entrance to Grozny, they were stopped by a group of about ten armed police officers in uniforms at the “Chernorechensky” traffic police station. Some of the police officers were masked; those unmasked were of Slavic and Chechen appearance. They forced Mr Shamkhan Murdalov, Mr R.B. and Mr Kh.Z. out of the car, pulled black plastic bags over their heads, put them into a “Gazel” minivan vehicle parked nearby and drove off in the direction of Grozny.

On 24 May 2004 Mr R.B. and Mr Kh.Z. were released. They stated that following their arrest at the traffic control post, they had been taken to the Russian military base in Khankala and questioned.

On the same date, 24 May 2004, the police arrived to search the applicants ’ house in Valerik. Instead of searching the entire house, the police officers went straight to the rooftop where they found hidden machine guns and bullets.

The whereabouts of Mr Shamkhan Murdalov remain unknown since 21 May 2004. His abduction took place in the presence of several witnesses.

(b) Official in vestigation into the abduction

After the abduction the applicants requested a number of law enforcement agencies to provide assistance in the search for their relative.

On 5 April 2005 the Zavodskoy district prosecutor s ’ office in Grozny opened criminal case no. 41035 under Article 126 of the Criminal Code (abduction).

On an unspecified date the second applicant was granted victim status.

On 14 June 2005 the investigation was suspended for failure to identify the perpetrators. It was resumed on an unspecified date and suspended on 19 February 2006. On 10 October 2007 the latter decision was quashed by the supervisors and the investigation was resumed. On 19 November 2008 it was again suspended and then resumed on 23 June 2008.

It appears that the investigation is still pending.

3. Application n o. 41884/11 Temersultanova and Others v. Russia

The applicants are:

1) Ms Fatima Temersultanova, who was born in 1981;

2) Mr Magomed Mezhiyev, who was born in 2002, and

3) Mr Musa Mezhiyev, who was born in 1962.

The first and second applicant s live Grozny; the third applicant lives in Staryye Atagi village, Chechnya. They are represented before the Court by lawyers of Stitching Russian Justice Initiative (SRJI) (in partnership with NGO Astreya) .

The first applicant is the wife of Mr Yusup Mezhiyev, who was born in 1973. The second applicant is his son and the third applicant is his brother.

(a) Abduction of Mr Yusup Mezhiyev and subsequent events

In the morning on 23 June 2002 Mr Yusup Mezhiyev and his acquaintances, Mr K.A., Mr B.A., Ms B.A. and Ms A.A., left their homes in Staryye Atagi and went to work in Grozny. At about 8:30 a.m. a group of military servicemen stopped their car at checkpoint no. 33 in Oktyabrskiy district in Grozny. Having checked the identity documents, the servicemen handcuffed and blindfolded Mr Yusup Mezhiyev. Then they forced him into an UAZ minivan ( “ таблетка ” ) parked nearby and drove off in the direction to the Oktyabrskiy district temporary police department in Grozny ( ВОВД Октябрьского района г . Грозный ) .

The whereabouts of Mr Yusup Mezhiyev remain unknown since that date. His abduction took place in the presence of several witnesses.

(b) Official in vestigation into the abduction

Immediately after the abduction the applicants informed the authorities thereof and requested that criminal proceedings be opened.

On 5 July 2002 the Grozny town prosecutors ’ office opened criminal case no. 52075 under Article 126 of the Criminal Code (abduction).

On 24 July 2002 the third applicant was granted victim status.

On 5 September 2002 the investigation was suspended for failure to identify the perpetrators. It was subsequently resumed on 22 May 2003 following the supervisors ’ orders and criticism, suspended on 30 August 2003 and then again resumed on 26 January 2011.

On several occasions between 2002 and 2005 the applicants complained to vari ous law-enforcement authorities about the disappearance and requested assistance in the search for their relative . In reply the applicant s re ceived letters stating that the law-enforcement agencies were taki ng measures to establish their relative ’ s whereabouts .

On 25 May 2010 the first applicant was granted victim status.

It appears that the investigation is still pending.

(c) Proceed ings against the investigators.

On 28 December 2010 the applicants challenged the investigators ’ failure to take basic steps before the Oktyabrskiy District Court of Grozny (the court).

On an unspecified day in January 2011 (the date is illegible) the court rejected the complaint.

4. Application n o. 44296/11 Shavanova and Others v. Russia

The applicants are:

1) Ms Birlant Shavanova, who was born in 1940;

2) Mr Ismail Shavanov, who was born in 1942;

3) Ms Zhanati Zakrailova, who was born in 1972;

4) Ms Markha Shavanova, who was born in 1998;

5) Ms Malika Shavanova, who was born in 1989;

6) Mr Ovkhan Shavanov, who was born in 1992;

7) Mr Zelimkhan Shavanov, who was born in 1996;

8) Ms Luiza Taipova, who was born in 1981;

9) Ms Diana Shavanova, who was born in 2000, and

10) Mr Askhab Shavanov, who was born in 2001.

The applicants live in Staryye Atagi village, Chechnya. They are represented before the Court by lawyers of SRJI (in partnership with NGO Astreya) .

The applicants are close relatives of Mr Mayr-Ali Shavanov, who was born in 1966, and Mr Lyoma (also spelled as Lema) Shavanov, who was born in 1986 (in the documents submitted the date was also referred to as 1981). The first and second applicants are their parents. The third applicant is the wife of Mr Mayr-Ali Shavanov and the fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh applicants are his children. The eighth applicant is the wife of Mr Lyoma Shavanov. The ninth and tenth applicants are his children.

(a) Abduction of the Shavanov brothers

At about 7 a.m. on 18 February 2001 Mr Mayr-Ali Shavanov, Mr Lyoma Shavanov and their acquaintance Mr Sh.U. went from Staryye Atagi to Grozny to buy fuel. T hey were stopped by a large group of armed military servicemen in camouflage uniforms at a roadblock next to the Prigorodnoye village , on the tenth kilometre of the Grozny-Shatoy motorway. The servicemen spoke unaccented Russian; they were in three APCs with the registration numbers 318, 314 and 354.

Having checked the identity documents, the servicemen pulled bags over the Shavanov brothers ’ heads, forced them into one of the APCs waiting nearby and drove off in the direction of Grozny.

Mr Sh.U. asked one of the servicemen where the brothers were being taken to. He answered that they were being taken to Khankala.

The whereabouts of Mr Mayr-Ali Shavanov and Mr Lyoma Shavanov remain unknown since 18 February 2001.

(b) Official i nvestigation into the abduction

On 18 February 2001 some applicants went in person to the Grozny district police department and the Grozny district prosecutors ’ office and reported the incident, requesting the authorities to open a criminal case into the abduction.

On 1 April 2001 the Grozny district prosecutors ’ office opened criminal case no. 19044 under Article 127 of the Criminal Code (unlawful deprivation of liberty). The decision to open the criminal case stated that the brothers had been detained by federal military servicemen.

On 1 June 2001 the investigation was suspended for failure to identify the perpetrators. It is unclear whether the applicants were informed about this decision.

The investigation was subsequently resumed and then suspe nded on several occasions, including the suspensions on 30 May 2004, 21 November 2006 and 15 May 2008.

On 15 January 2004 the first applicant was granted victim status.

On numerous occasions between 2001 and 2006 the applicant s complained to vari ous military and law-enforcement authorities about the disappearance and requested assistance in the search for their relatives . In reply the applicant s re ceived letters stating that the law-enforcement agencies were taki ng measures to establish the Shavanov brothers ’ whereabouts .

It appears that the investigation is still pending.

(c) Proceed ings against the investigators

On 10 April 2008 the applicants challenged the investigators ’ failure to take basic steps before the Grozny District Court (the court).

On 18 April 2008 the court disallowed the complaint having found that several days earlier the investigators had already resumed the proceedings.

5. Application n o. 64272/11 Inalkayeva v. Russia

The applicant is Ms Kazban Inalkayeva, who was born in 1957 and lives in Grozny. She is not legally represented before the Court.

The applicant is the mother of Mr Imran Inalkayev, who was born in 1980.

(a) Abduction of Mr Imran Inalkayev

On an unspecified date in the beginning of February 2000 (in certain documents submitted the date was referred to as 2 February 2000) Mr Imran Inalkayev was going from Sleptsovskaya settlement to the town of Urus ‑ Martan, Chechnya, in a regular local bus. At the stationary checkpoint located at the crossroad next to the villages Valerik, Shalazhi and Gekhi a group of armed military servicemen in camouflage uniforms stopped the bus for the passengers ’ identity check. Having checked his documents, the servicemen detained Mr Imran Inalkayev and took him into the checkpoint ’ s building.

The whereabouts of Mr Imran Inalkayev remain unknown since. His abduction took place in the presence of numerous witnesses ‑ passengers of the bus.

(b) Official i nvestigation into the abduction

On an unspecified date in February 2000 and subsequently on several occasions in 2001, 2002 and 2003 the applicant informed the authorities of the abduction and requested assistance in the search for her son.

On 14 April 2003 the Urus-Martan district prosecutors ’ office refused to open a criminal case into the incident.

On 28 August 2003 the supervising prosecutor quashed the above decision and opened criminal case no. 34089 under Article 126 of the Criminal Code (abduction).

On 6 September 2003 the applicant was granted victim status and questioned.

On 28 October 2003 the investigation was suspended for failure to identify the perpetrators. Subsequently, it was resumed on 7 October 2004 following the supervising prosecutors ’ orders and criticism, then suspended on 15 November 2004, again resumed on 16 May 2011 and suspended on 26 May 2011.

On 20 May 2011 and 24 May 2011 the investigators questioned several eyewitnesses of the events. They confirmed the circumstances of the abduction as stated above.

On several occasions between 2000 and 2011 the applicant complained to vari ous law-enforcement authorities about the disappearance and requested assistance in the search for her son. In reply she re ceived letters stating that the law-enforcement agencies were taki ng measures to establish Mr Imran Inalkayev ’ s whereabouts .

It appears that the investigation is still pending.

(c) Procee dings against the investigators

On 5 May 2011 the applicant challenged the investigators ’ failure to take basic steps before the Urus-Martan District Court (the court).

On 16 May 2011 the court rejected the complaint having found that earlier on the same day the investigators had resumed the proceedings.

6. Application n o. 66830/11 Talkhigova and Others v. Russia

The applicants are:

1) Ms Zara Talkhigova, who was born in 1958;

2) Ms Nina Zilbukharova, who was born in 1928;

3) Ms Makka Zilbukharova, who was born in 1956;

4) Mr Alaudi Zilbukharov, who was born in 1955;

5) Ms Amina Tsurayeva, who was born in 1997;

6) Mr Adam Tsurayev, who was born in 2002;

7) Ms Aza Chabiyeva, who was born in 1970;

8) Ms Khadizhat Ibragimova, who was born in 2003;

9) Mr Islam Ibragimov, who was born in 2002;

10) Ms Elima Ibragimova, who was born in 2000;

11) Mr Magomed Altamirov, who was born in 1993;

12) Ms Rozaliya Altamirova, who was born in 1968, and

13) Mr Chingiz Ibragimov, who was born in 1979.

The first and fourth applicants live in the village of Gekhi-Chu, Chechnya. They are the adoptive parents of Mr Isa Zilbukharov, who was born in 1975.

The second and third applicants live in Gekhi-Chu. They are, respectively, the grandmother and the mother of Mr Ruslan Zilbukharov, who was born in 1979.

The fifth, sixth and seventh applicants live in Grozny. They are, respectively, the daughter, the son and the wife of Mr Aslan Tsurayev , who was born in 1972 (in the documents submitted the year of birth was also referred to as 1970).

The eighth, ninth and tenth applicants live in Gekhi-Chu. They are the children of Mr Cha-Borz (also spelled as Chaborz) Ibragimov, who was born in 1975. The thirteenth applicant, who also lives in Gekhi-Chu, is his brother.

The eleventh and twelfth applicants live in the village of Shalazhi, Chechnya. They are, respectively, the son and the wife of Mr Sharpuddi Altamirov , who was born in 1964.

The applicants are represented before the Court by lawyers of SRJI / Astreya.

(a) Abduction of the applicants ’ relatives

On 3 November 2003 a temporary military checkpoint was set up at the crossroads on the motorway between the villages Shalazhi and Gekhi-Chu. Military servicemen conducted check of passing vehicles and passengers.

At about 6 p.m. (in the documents submitted the time was also referred to as 8 p.m.) on 3 November 2003 Mr Ruslan Zilbukharov, Mr Isa Zilbukharov, Mr Aslan Tsurayev and Mr A.D. were driving through the checkpoint, when a group of twenty to twenty - five armed military servicemen stopped them for identity check. The servicemen were wearing camouflage uniforms and spoke unaccented Russian. Having checked the documents, the servicemen forced Mr Ruslan Zilbukharov, Mr Isa Zilbukharov and Mr Aslan Tsurayev into a GAZ-66 vehicle parked nearby.

Mr A.D., who witnessed the events, asked one of the servicemen where the three men were taken. The serviceman replied that they were taken to a police station.

Meanwhile, Mr Sharpuddi Altamirov and Mr Cha-Borz Ibragimov were passing through the same checkpoint. The servicemen also stopped them for identity check. They forced them into the GAZ-66 vehicle, in which Mr Ruslan Zilbukharov, Mr Isa Zilbukharov and Mr Aslan Tsurayev had already been put, and drove off in the direction of Gekhi-Chu.

The whereabouts of the applicants ’ relatives remain unknown ever since.

(b) Official in vestigation into the abduction

Immediately after the abduction the applicants informed the authorities thereof and requested that criminal proceedings be opened.

On 20 November 2003 the Urus-Martan district prosecutors ’ office opened criminal case no. 34118 under Article 126 of the Criminal Code (abduction).

On 5 December 2003, 19 December 2003, 9 January 2004, 25 July 2005 and 15 June 2010 the seventh, eighth, twelfth, fourth and third applicants, respectively, were granted victim status.

The investigation was suspended and resumed on numerous occasions, including the suspensions on 23 May 2008, 2 March 2009 and 16 June 2010.

On 27 October 2008 the twelfth applicant requested the investigators to grant her permission to access the contents of the investigation file and to resume the investigation. Her request was rejected.

On an unspecified date in April 2011 (the date is illegible) the investigators informed the fourth applicant that the proceedings in the case had been suspended and that the operational search activities were on the way in order to establish the whereabouts of his missing relative.

It appears that the investigation is still pending.

(c) Procee dings against the investigators

On 12 November 2008 the twelfth applicant challenged her lack of access to the investigation file and the investigators ’ failure to take basic steps before the Achkhoy-Martan District Court (the court).

On 13 January 2009 the court allowed her complaint in part having ordered that the investigation in the case be resumed. The lack of access to the investigation file was declared lawful.

7. Application n o. 67743/11 Tsumayevy v. Russia

The applicants are Ms Malika Tsumayeva, who was born in 1957, and Ms Roza Tsumayeva, who was born in 1959. The first applicant lives in Grozny and the second applicant lives in the village of Novyye Aldy, Chechnya. They are not legally represented before the Court.

The applicants are the sisters of Mr Alu Tsumayev, who was born in 1951.

(a) Abduction of Mr Alu Tsumayev

On 6 April 2000 Mr Alu Tsumayev was passing through the checkpoint “Chernorechye” located in the Zavodskoy district of Grozny when the police stopped him for identity check. He was detained and taken to the Zavodskoy district department of the interior in Grozny (ROVD).

The whereabouts of Mr Alu Tsumayev remain unknown since. On 24 May 2000 his burnt car was found in the Oktyabrskiy district in Grozny.

(b) Official invest igation into the disappearance

On 12 April 2000 the applicants informed the authorities of the disappearance and requested that criminal proceedings be opened.

On 20 April 2000 the Zavodskoy district temporary department of the interior in Grozny refused to open criminal proceedings relying on the ROVD deputy chief ’ s statements that on 6 April 2000 Mr Alu Tsumayev had indeed been detained by the police, but then released later on the same day.

On 10 August 2000 the Grozny town prosecutors ’ office quashed the above decision and opened criminal case no. 12115 under Article 105 of the Criminal Code (murder).

On 10 October 2000 the investigation was suspended for failure to identify the perpetrators. This decision was quashed on 24 November 2000 as premature and the proceedings were resumed. Subsequently, the investigation was suspended on several occasions, in particular on 26 December 2000, 7 September 2010 and 29 December 2010, and resumed on 31 July 2010, 24 December 2010 and 6 October 2011.

On 12 September 2002 the first applicant was questioned. Her statement concerning the circumstances of the abduction was similar to the applicants ’ account before the Court.

On 26 August 2010 the first applicant was granted victim status.

On 2 September 2010 the investigators requested a number of State authorities and detention facilities to inform them whether they had arrested or detained Mr Alu Tsumayev. No information in the positive was received.

On 3 September 2010 the crime scene was examined. No evidence was collected.

It appears that the investigation is still pending.

(c) Procee dings against the investigators

On 27 September 2011 the first applicant challenged the investigators ’ failure to take basic steps before the Staropromyslovskiy District Court of Grozny (the court).

On 7 October 2011 the court disallowed the complaint having found that a day earlier the investigators had already resumed the proceedings.

8. Application n o. 70640/11 Isayevy v. Russia

The applicants are:

1) Ms Zeyman Isayeva, who was born in 1957;

2) Mr Ruslan Isayev, who was born in 1984, and

3) Mr Yusup Isayev, who was born in 1985.

The applicants live in Samashki village, Chechnya. They are represented before the Court by lawyers of the NGO “Materi Chechni” practising in Chechnya.

The first applicant is the sister of Mr Rizvan Isayev, who was born in 1981, and the aunt of Mr Anzor Isayev, was born in 1983. The second and third applicants are the brothers of Mr Rizvan Isayev and the uncles of Mr Anzor Isayev.

(a) Abduction of Mr Rizvan Isayev and Mr Anzor Isayev

On 16 March 2003 Mr Rizvan Isayev and Mr Anzor Isayev were taking a bus from the Republic of Ingushetia to the village of Samashki, Chechnya. At about 2.20 p.m. the bus was stopped for the passengers ’ identity check at the checkpoint “Kavkaz” located at the administrative border between Ingushetia and Chechnya. A group of armed servicemen in camouflage uniforms requested the passengers to produce their identity documents. The servicemen spoke unaccented Russian; some of them were wearing balaclavas. Having checked passports, they forced Mr Rizvan Isayev and Mr Anzor Isayev outside, put them into an UAZ minivan and took them away to an unknown destination.

The whereabouts of Mr Rizvan Isayev and Mr Anzor Isayev remain unknown ever since. Their abduction took place in the presence of numerous witnesses.

(b) Official i nvestigation into the abduction

According to the applicants, immediately after the abduction they attempted to search for their relatives on their own. They went in person to various law-enforcement and military agencies asking about their relatives ’ whereabouts, but to no avail. On an unspecified date they lodged an official complaint with the prosecutors ’ office asking to open an investigation into the abduction.

On 12 June 2003 the Achkhoy-Martan inter-district prosecutors ’ office opened criminal case no. 44046 under Article 126 of the Criminal Code (abduction).

On an unspecified date in November 2003 (the date is illegible) the investigation was suspended for failure to identify the perpetrators. It was resumed on 27 May 2004 following the supervisors ’ orders and criticism and again suspended on 1 November 2004. It is unclear whether the applicants were informed about these decisions.

On an unspecified date the criminal case file was given another number ‑ 04600053.

On 31 January 2011 the first applicant requested the investigators to resume the proceedings, to grant her victim status and allow her to familiarise herself with the investigation file.

On 2 February 2011 the investigators resumed the proceedings and granted the first applicant victim status. The reminder of her request was rejected.

On 23 June 2011 the first applicant again requested that the proceedings be resumed and she be given full access to the file. Her request was rejected.

It appears that the investigation is still pending.

(c) Civi l proceedings for compensation

On 1 April 2011 the first applicant lodged a civil claim seeking for compensation of non-pecuniary damage incurred in connection with the abduction of her relatives.

On 3 May 2011 the Presnenskiy District Court of Moscow provisionally deferred the examination of the claim in view of a number of procedural defects. The applicant was allocated time to remedy the defects and to resubmit her claim.

The outcome of the proceedings is unknown.

(d) Proceedings ag ainst the investigators

On 27 June 2011 the first applicant challenged her lack of access to the investigation file before the Sunzhenskiy District Court in Ingushetia (the court).

On 5 July 2011 the court disallowed her complaint having found that the lack of full access to the investigation file had been lawful.

On 16 August 2011 the Supreme Court of Ingushetia upheld the above decision on appeal.

9. Application n o. 13874/12 Sugatiyeva and Others v. Russia

The applicants are:

1) Ms Balkan Sugatiyeva, who was born in 1968;

2) Ms Markha Sugatiyeva, who was born in 1923;

3) Ms Khava Sugatiyeva, who was born in 1990;

4) Mr Nasrudi Sugatiyev, who was born in 1989;

5) Ms Zulay Yusupova, who was born in 1949;

6) Ms Yakha Dzhurgayeva, who was born in 1977;

7) Ms Eliza Yusupova, who was born in 1997;

8) Mr Umar Abzayev, who was born in 1938;

9) Ms Zalpa Gilyayeva, who was born in 1981;

10) Ms Khava Abzayeva, who was born in 2001, and

11) Ms Rayzan Abzayeva, who was born in 1942.

The first, second, third and fourth applicants live in Dzhalka village, Chechnya. They are respectively the wife, the mother and the children of Mr Ruslan Sugatiyev, who was born in 1965. The fifth applicant lives in Shali, Chechnya. She is the mother of Mr Beslan Yusupov, who was born in 1971. The sixth and seventh applicants live in Grozny, they are respectively his wife and daughter. The eighth and eleventh applicants live in Dzhalka village, they are the parents of Mr Said-Magomed Abzayev, who was born in 1975. The ninth and tenth applicants also live in Dzhalka, they are respectively his wife and daughter.

The applicants are represented before the Court by lawyers of SRJI / Astreya.

(a) Abduction of Mr R uslan Sugatiyev, Mr Beslan Yusupov and Mr Said ‑ Magomed Abzayev

In the morning on 8 February 2002 Mr Ruslan Sugatiyev, Mr Beslan Yusupov and Mr Said-Magomed Abzayev were driving from Dzhalka village to Grozny in two UAZ vehicles. At about 7 a.m. on the same day they reached checkpoint no.111 known as “Otvaga”, where a group of military servicemen in camouflage uniforms and masks stopped their cars and ordered them to get out. The servicemen allegedly belonged to a military unit called “34 Obron” ( 34 Оброн ) stationed nearby ; they were armed with machineguns, grenade launchers and were in three APCs and an URAL vehicle. Having searched Mr Ruslan Sugatiyev, Mr Beslan Yusupov and Mr Said-Magomed Abzayev , they forced them into the URAL vehicle and drove off in the direction of Argun.

S everal days after the abduction the applicants received a handwritten note from the abducted men stating that they had been detained at a checkpoint and were taken to the premises of the 34 Obron military unit in Argun.

The whereabouts of the applicants ’ relatives remain unknown ever since. The abduction took place in the presence of several police officers manning the checkpoint who subsequently gave their statements to the investigators (see below).

(b) Official investigation into the abduction

Immediately after the abduction the applicants informed the authorities thereof and requested that criminal proceedings be opened.

On 18 February 2002 the Argun inter-district prosecutors ’ office opened criminal case no. 78021 under Article 126 of the Criminal Code (abduction).

On the same day the investigators questioned seven police officers who had manned the checkpoint on the day of the events and witnessed the abduction. Their statements concerning the circumstances of the abduction were similar to the applicants ’ account before the Court.

On an unspecified date another police officer who witnessed the abduction was questioned. He also confirmed the above circumstances.

On 18 April 2002 the investigation was suspended for failure to identify the perpetrators. Subsequently, the investigation was resumed on 8 May 2003, 14 November 2003, 15 December 2004 and then again suspended on 8 July 2003, 14 December 2003 and 18 February 2005.

On 13 May 2003 the investigators questioned Mr Ruslan Sugatiyev ’ s brother, Mr S.S. He confirmed the circumstances of the abduction as described above and additionally stated that the URAL vehicle, in which his brother had been taken away from the checkpoint on 8 February 2002, had been seen on several occasions entering the premises of the 34 Obron military unit. He also added that Mr Ruslan Sugatiyev ’ s and Mr Said-Magomed Abzayev ’ s UAZ vehicles had been taken away by military servicemen on the day of the abduction and were subsequently parked on the unit ’ s premises.

On 5 January 2005 the eighth applicant was granted victim status.

On an unspecified date the investigators ordered a forensic examination of the handwritten note received by the applicants shortly after the abduction. The examination showed that the note had partially been handwritten by Mr Said-Magomed Abzayev .

On 25 June 2008 the eighth applicant challenged the investigators ’ failure to take basic steps before the Shali Town Court. The outcome of the proceedings is unknown.

On 21 February and 27 August 2011 the first applicant requested the investigators to provide her with access to the case file and to inform her about the progress in the investigation. It appears from the documents submitted that no reply was given to these requests.

On 2 March 2011 the Argun deputy prosecutor informed the eighth applicant that the criminal investigation resulted in establishing military servicemen ’ s involvement in the abduction, and, therefore, the case file had been transferred to the Military Investigation Department of the Southern Military District Investigating Committee ( ВСУ СК РФ ЮВО ) for further investigation.

On 9 March 2011 the first applicant was granted victim status.

On numerous occasions between 2002 and 2011 the applicants complained to vari ous law-enforcement authorities about the disappearance and requested assistance in the search for their relatives . In reply the applicant s re ceived letters stating that the law-enforcement agencies were taki ng measures to establish their relatives ’ whereabouts .

It appears that the investigation is still pending.

10. Application n o. 38383/12 Asukhanovy v. Russia

The applicants are Ms Kheda Asukhanova, who was born in 1966, and Mr Yusup Asukhanov, who was born in 1992. The applicants live in Alkhan-Yurt village, Chechnya. They are not legally represented before the Court.

The first applicant is the sister of Mr Gilani (also spelled as Gelani) Asukhanov, who was born in 1970 (in the documents submitted the year of birth was also referred to as 1972). The second applicant is his son.

(a) Ab duction of Mr Gilani Asukhanov

On 12 February 2002 Mr Gilani Asukhanov was arrested and placed in the temporary detention centre at the Urus-Martan temporary district department of the interior in connection with criminal proceedings instituted against him. On 1 March 2002 he was released and went home in Alkhan ‑ Yurt accompanied by his legal counsel, relatives and acquaintances.

At about 7 p.m. on that day their car was passing through checkpoint no. 207 located at the exit from Urus-Martan, when it was stopped by a group of armed military servicemen in camouflage uniforms and masks. The servicemen were in an APC, UAZ-469 and VAZ-2106 vehicles. The latter ’ s registration number contained the “ Г 742 ”. The man in charge of the group introduced himself as a Major of the Main Intelligence Directorate ( майор ГРУ Вооруженных Сил РФ ) .

Having checked the identity documents, the servicemen put Mr Gilani Asukhanov into the VAZ-2106 vehicle and drove off to an unknown destination.

The whereabouts of Mr Gilani Asukhanov remain unknown ever since.

(b) Official in vestigation into the abduction

On 2 March 2002 Mr Gilani Asukhanov ’ s father, Mr A.A., informed the authorities of the abduction and requested assistance in the search for his son.

On the same date several witnesses of the abduction were questioned. Their statements were similar to the applicants ’ account submitted to the Court.

On 4 March 2002 the Urus-Martan district prosecutors ’ office opened criminal case no. 61054 under Article 126 of the Criminal Code (abduction).

On an unspecified date in March 2002 (the date is illegible) one of the servicemen manning the checkpoint on the day of the abduction was questioned. He confirmed the circumstances of the events as described by the applicants.

On an unspecified date in May 2002 (the date is illegible) the investigation was suspended for failure to identify the perpetrators. It was resumed on 19 June 2003 following the supervisors ’ orders and criticism and then again suspended on 19 July 2003. Subsequently, the investigation was resumed on an unspecified date, suspended on 6 April 2006 and again resumed on 2 November 2011.

Between 6 and 17 July 2003 several witnesses of the abduction were questioned. They confirmed the circumstances of the events as submitted by the applicants.

On 6 March 2006 Mr Gilani Asukhanov ’ mother, Ms L.A., was granted victim status.

On 20 and 21 June 2007 the investigators again questioned witnesses of the abduction who confirmed their previously given statements.

On 10 November 2011 the first applicant was granted victim status.

It appears that the proceedings are still pending.

(c) Procee dings against the investigators

On an unspecified date in 2011 the mother of Mr Gilani Asukhanov, Ms L.A., challenged the investigators ’ failure to take basic steps and the decision to suspend the proceedings before the Urus-Martan District Court (the court).

On 3 November 2011 the court rejected her complaint having found that a day earlier, on 2 November 2011, the investigators had resumed the proceedings.

COMPLAINTS

1. Relying on Article 2 of the Convention, the applicants in all the applications complain about the violation of the right to life of their relatives referred to as “abducted persons” in the Appendix and submit that the circumstances of their abduction indicate that the perpetrators had been State agents. The applicants further complain that no effective investigation was conducted into the matter .

2. Relying on Article 3 of the Convention, the applicants in all the applications complain that they suffer severe mental distress due to the indifference demonstrated by the authorities in connection with the abduction and subsequent disappearance of their close relatives and the State ’ s failure to conduct an effective investigation into the incidents.

3. The applicants in all the applications submit that the unacknowledged detention of their relatives referred to as “abducted persons” i n the Appendix violates all of the guarantees of Article 5 of the Convention.

4. The applicants in all the applications complain under Article 13 of the Convention of the lack of an effective remedy in respect of their complaints under Article 2 of the Convention. The applicants in applications Sultan Magomedov and Others v. Russia (29910/08) and Isayevy v. Russia (70640/11) complain of the lack of an effective remedy in respect of their complaints under Articles 3 and 5 of the Convention and the applicants in Shavanova and Others v. Russia (44296/11) and Sugatiyeva and Others v. Russia (13874/12) complain of the lack of an effective remedy in respect of their complaint under Article 3 of the Convention.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. In respect of the applications Inalkayeva v. Russia (no. 64272 /11) , Tsumayevy v. Russia (no. 67743/11), Isayevy v. Russia (70640/11), Sugatiyeva and Others v. Russia (13874/12) and Asukhanovy v. Russia (38383/12) have the applicants complied with the six ‑ month time-limit laid down in Article 35 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, were there on behalf of the applicants “excessive or unexplained delays” in submitting their complaints to the Court after the abduction of their relatives, have there been considerable lapses of time or significant delays and lulls in the investigative activity, which could have an impact on the application of the six-month limit (see, mutatis mutandis , Varnava and Others v. Turkey [GC], nos. 16064/90, 16065/90, 16066/90, 16068/90, 16069/90, 16070/90, 16071/90, 16072/90 and 16073/90, §§ 162, 165 and 166, ECHR 2009)? The applicants are invited to provide explanations for the delay in lodging their respective applications with the Court, as well as copies of documents reflecting their correspondence with the authorities in connection with the abduction and/or disappearance of their relatives.

2. Having regard to:

- the Court ’ s numerous previous judgments in which violations of Article 2 were found in respect of both disappearances of the applicants ’ relatives as a result of detention by unidentified members of the security forces and the failure to conduct an effective investigation (see, among recent examples, Aslakhanova and Others v. Russia , nos. 2944/06, 8300/07, 50184/07, 332/08 and 42509/10, 18 December 2012 and Mikiyeva and Others v. Russia , nos. 61536/08, 6647/09, 6659/09, 63535/10 and 15695/11, 30 January 2014), and;

- th e similarity of the present ten applications both to each other and to the cases cited above, as can be derived from the applicants ’ submissions and the interim results of the respective investigations:

(a) Did the applicants make out a prima facie case that their relatives (referred to as “abducted persons” in the Appendix) were arrested by State servicemen in the course of security operations?

(b) If so, can the burden of proof be shifted to the Government in order to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation of the circumstances of the applicants ’ relatives ’ abductions and ensuing disappearances (see, mutatis mutandis , Varnava and Others v. Turkey [GC], nos. 16064/90, 16065/90, 16066/90, 16068/90, 16069/90, 16070/90, 1607 1/90, 16072/90 and 16073/90, § 184 , ECHR 2009 )? Are the Government in a position to rebut the applicants ’ submissions that State agents were involved in the abductions, by submitting documents which are in their exclusive possession or by providing a satisfactory and convincing explanation of the events by other means?

(c) Has the right to life, as guaranteed by Article 2 of the Convention, been violated in respect of the applicants ’ missing relatives?

(d) Having regard to the procedural protection of the right to life under Article 2 of the Convention (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 104, ECHR 2000-VII), was the investigation conducted by the domestic authorities into the disappearances of the applicants ’ missing relatives sufficient to meet their obligation to carry out an effective investigation, as required by Article 2 of the Convention?

3. In respect of all the applications , h as the applicants ’ mental suffering in connection with the disappearance of their close relatives, the authorities ’ alleged indifference in that respect and their alleged failure to conduct an effective investigation into their disappearances been sufficiently serious to amount to inhuman and degrading treatment, within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention? If so, has there been a breach of Article 3 of the Convention in respect of the applicants?

4. In respect of all the applications , were the applicants ’ missing relatives deprived of their liberty within the meaning of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention on the dates or periods of time listed in the Annex? If so, was such a deprivation compatible with the guarantees of Article 5 §§ 1-5 of the Convention?

5. In respect of all the applications, did the applicants have at their disposal effective domestic remedies in respect of their complaints as required by Article 13 of the Convention?

6. Further to the provisions of Article 38 of the Convention, the Government are requested to provide the following information in respect of each of the applications:

(a) any information, supported by relevant documents, which is capable of rebutting the applicants ’ allegations that their missing relatives had been abducted by State servicemen;

and, in any event,

(b) a complete list of all investigative actions taken in connection with the applicants ’ complaints about disappearance of their missing relatives, in the chronological order, indicating dates and the authorities involved, as well as a brief summary of the findings;

as well as:

(c) copies of documents from the investigation files in respective criminal cases relevant for the establishment of the factual circumstances of the allegations and the evaluation of the effectiveness of the criminal investigations.

APPENDIX

No.

Number, application and date of introduction

Applicants ’ details

(name, year of birth, kinship to the abducted person, place of residence)

Representative

Name and year of birth of the abducted persons

Brief description of the circumstances of the abduction

Relevant details of the official investigation

29910/08

Sultan Magomedov and Others v. Russia

12/06/2008

1) Mr Sultan Magomedov

( 1951); Usman Magomadov ’ s brother; Mesker-Yurt, the Chechen Republic;

2) Mr Alash Magomedov

(1937); Usman Magomadov ’ s brother, idem;

3) Mr Vakha Magomadov

(1954); Usman Magomadov ’ s brother, idem;

4) Ms Marusa Magomadova

(1961); Usman Magomadov ’ s wife, idem;

5) Ms Bella Magomadova

(1985); Usman Magomadov ’ s daughter, idem;

6) Ms Khava Magomadova

(1986); Usman Magomadov ’ s daughter, idem;

7) Mr Umar Magomadov

(1989); Usman Magomadov ’ s son, idem.

MEMORIAL HUMAN RIGHTS CENTRE

Mr Usman Magomadov (1957)

On 28 March 2002 a group of armed servicemen detained Mr Usman Magomadov at checkpoint no. 136 at the entrance to Argun and took him away in an APC.

On 30 April 2002 t he Argun inter-district prosecutor ’ s offic e opened criminal case no. 78051. The investigation is still pending .

62409/10

K huchbarova and Others v. Russia

14/10/2010

1) Ms Zaira Khuchbarova

(1979); Mr Shamkhan Murdalov ’ s wife; Valerik, the Chechen Republic;

2) Ms Satsita Murdalova

( 1951); Mr Shamkhan Murdalov ’ s mother, idem;

3) Mr Shaykhan Murdalov

(1997); Mr Shamkhan Murdalov ’ s son, idem;

4) Ms Rayana Murdalova

(2002); Mr Shamkhan Murdalov ’ s daughter, idem;

5) Ms Radima Murdalova

( 2004); Mr Shamkhan Murdalov ’ s daughter, idem.

Mr Dokka Itslayev

Mr Shamkhan Murdalov

(1977)

On 21 May 2004 a group of about ten armed police officers detained Mr Shamkhan Murdalov at the “Chernorechenskiy” traffic control checkpoint at the entrance to Grozny and took him away in a “Gazel” minivan.

On 5 April 2005 t he Zavodskoy district prosecutor ’ s offic e in Grozny opened criminal case no. 41035. The investigation is still pending .

41884/11

Temersultan ova and Others v. Russia

01/07/2011

1) Ms Fatima Temersultanova ( 1981); Yusup Mezhiyev ’ s wife; Grozny, the Chechen Republic;

2) Mr Magomed Mezhiyev

( 2002); Yusup Mezhiyev ’ s son, idem;

3) Mr Musa Mezhiyev

( 1962); Yusup Mezhiyev ’ s brother;

Staryye Atagi, the Chechen Republic.

STICHTING RUSSIAN JUSTICE INITIATIVE / Astreya (SRJI/Astreya)

Mr Yusup Mezhiyev (1973)

On 23 June 2002 a group of armed servicemen detained Mr Yusup Mezhiyev at checkpoint no. 33 at the entrance to Grozny and took him away in an UAZ (“ таблетка ”) vehicle.

On 5 July 2002 t he Grozny town prosecutor ’ s offic e opened criminal case no. 52075. The investigation is still pending .

44296/11

Shavanova and Others v. Russia

14/07/2011

1) Ms Birlant Shavanova

( 1940); Mayr-Ali Shavanov ’ s and Lyoma Shavanov ’ s mother; Staryye Atagi, the Chechen Republic;

2) Mr Ismail Shavanov

( 1942); Mayr-Ali Shavanov ’ s and Lyoma Shavanov ’ s father, idem;

3) Ms Zhanati Zakrailova

( 1972); Mayr-Ali Shavanov ’ s wife, idem;

4) Ms Markha Shavanova

( 1998); Mayr-Ali Shavanov ’ s daughter, idem;

5) Ms Malika Shavanova

( 1989); Mayr-Ali Shavanov ’ s daughter, idem;

6) Mr Ovkhan Shavanov

( 1992); Mayr-Ali Shavanov ’ s son, idem;

7) Mr Zelimkhan Shavanov ( 1996); Mayr-Ali Shavanov ’ s son, idem;

8) Ms Luiza Taipova

( 1981); Lyoma Shavanov ’ s wife, idem;

9) Ms Diana Shavanova

( 2000); Lyoma Shavanov ’ s daughter, idem;

10) Mr Askhab Shavanov

( 2001); Lyoma Shavanov ’ s son idem.

SRJI/Astreya

1) Mr Mayr-Ali Shavanov (1966);

2) Mr Lyoma (also spelled as Lema) Shavanov (1986) (in the documents submitted the date of birth was also referred to as 1981).

On 18 February 2001 a group of armed servicemen detained Mr Mayr-Ali Shavanov and Mr Lyoma Shavanov at the checkpoint in Prigorodnoye village, Chechnya, and took them away in an APC .

On 1 April 2001 t he Grozny district prosecutor ’ s offic e opened criminal case no. 19044. The investigation is still pending .

64272/11

Inalkayeva v. Russia

23/09/2011

Ms Kazban Inalkayeva

( 1957); Imran Inalkayev ’ s mother;

Grozny, the Chechen Republic.

Not legally represented

Mr Imran Inalkayev (1980)

On an unspecified date in the beginning of February (in certain documents submitted the date was referred to as 2 February 2000) a group of armed servicemen detained Mr Imran Inalkayev at the stationary checkpoint next to the junction of villages Valerik, Shalazhi and Gekhi and took him into the checkpoint building.

On 28 August 2003 t he Urus-Martan district prosecutor ’ s offic e opened criminal case no. 34089. The investigation is still pending .

66830/11

Talkhigova and Others v. Russia

20/10/2011

1) Ms Zara Talkhigova

( 1958); Isa Zilbukharov ’ s adoptive mother; Gekhi-Chu, the Chechen Republic;

2) Ms Nina Zilbukharova

( 1928); Ruslan Zilbukharov ’ s grandmother, idem;

3) Ms Makka Zilbukharova ( 1956); Ruslan Zilbukharov ’ s mother, idem;

4) Mr Alaudi Zilbukharov

( 1955); Isa Zilbukharov ’ s adoptive father, idem;

5) Ms Amina Tsurayeva

( 1997); Aslan Tsurayev ’ s daughter, Grozny, the Chechen Republic;

6) Mr Adam Tsurayev

(2002) ; Aslan Tsurayev ’ s son, idem;

7) Ms Aza Chabiyeva

( 1970); Aslan Tsurayev ’ s wife, idem;

8) Ms Khadizhat Ibragimova ( 2003); Cha-Borz Ibragimov ’ s daughter; Gekhi-Chu, the Chechen Republic;

9) Mr Islam Ibragimov

( 2002); Cha-Borz Ibragimov ’ s son, idem;

10) Ms Elima Ibragimova

( 2000); Cha-Borz Ibragimov ’ s daughter; idem;

11) Mr Magomed Altamirov ( 1993); Sharpuddi Altamirov ’ s son; Shalazhi, the Chechen Republic;

12) Ms Rozaliya Altamirova ( 1968); Sharpuddi Altamirov ’ s wife, idem;

13) Mr Chingiz Ibragimov

( 1979); Cha-Borz Ibragimov ’ s brother; Gekhi-Chu.

SRJI/Astreya

1) Mr Isa Zilbukharov (1975);

2) Mr Ruslan Zilbukharov (1979);

3) Mr Aslan Tsurayev (1972) (in the documents submitted the year of birth was also referred to as 1970);

4) Mr Cha-Borz (also spelled as Chaborz) Ibragimov (1975);

5) Mr Sharpuddi Altamirov (1964).

On 3 November 2003 a group of armed servicemen detained the applicants ’ relatives at the checkpoint at crossroad between Gekhi-Chu and Shalazhi, Chechnya, and took them away in a GAZ-66 vehicle.

On 20 November 2003 t he Urus-Martan district prosecutor ’ s offic e opened criminal case no. 34118. The investigation is still pending .

67743/11

Tsumayevy v. Russia

11/10/2011

1) Ms Malika Tsumayeva

( 1957); Alu Tsumayev ’ s sister; Groznyy;

2) Ms Roza Tsumayeva

( 1959); Alu Tsumayev ’ s sister; Novyye Aldy.

Not legally represented

Mr Alu Tsumayev (1951)

On 6 April 2000 a group of police officers detained Mr Alu Tsumayev at checkpoint “Chernorechye” in the Zavodskoy District of Grozny and took him to the Zavodskoy district department of the interior in Grozny.

On 10 August 2000 t he Grozny town p rosecutor ’ s offic e opened criminal case no. 12115. The investigation is still pending .

70640/11

Isayevy v. Russia

27/10/2011

1) Ms Zeyman Isayeva

( 1957); Rizvan Isayev ’ s sister and Anzor Isayev ’ s aunt; Samashki, the Chechen Republic;

2) Mr Ruslan Isayev

( 1984); Rizvan Isayev ’ s brother and Anzor Isayev ’ s uncle, idem;

3) Mr Yusup Isayev

( 1985); Rizvan Isayev ’ s brother and Anzor Isayev ’ s uncle, idem.

Materi Chechni

1) Mr Rizvan Isayev (1981);

2) Mr Anzor Isayev (1983).

On 16 March 2003 a group of armed servicemen detained Mr Rizvan Isayev and Mr Anzor Isayev at checkpoint “Kavkaz” located at the administrative border between the Chechen Republic and the Republic of Ingushetia and took them away in a UAZ vehicle.

On 12 June 2003 t he Achkhoy-Martan inter-district prosecutor ’ s offic e opened criminal case no. 44046. Subsequently, the case was given the number 04600053. The investigation is still pending .

13874/12

Sugatiyeva and Other s v. Russia

27/02/2012

1) Ms Balkan Sugatiyeva

( 1968); Ruslan Sugatiyev ’ s wife;

Dzhalka, the Chechen Republic;

2) Ms Markha Sugatiyeva

( 1923); Ruslan Sugatiyev ’ s mother, idem;

3) Ms Khava Sugatiyeva

( 1990); Ruslan Sugatiyev ’ s daughter, idem;

4) Mr Nasrudi Sugatiyev

( 1989); Ruslan Sugatiyev ’ s son, idem;

5) Ms Zulay Yusupova

( 1949); Beslan Yusupov ’ s mother;

Shali, the Chechen Republic;

6) Ms Yakha Dzhurgayeva

( 1977); Beslan Yusupov ’ s wife; Grozny;

7) Ms Eliza Yusupova

(1997) ; Beslan Yusupov ’ s daughter, idem;

8) Mr Umar Abzayev

( 1938); Said-Magomed Abzayev ’ s father; Dzhalka;

9) Ms Zalpa Gilyayeva

( 1981); Said-Magomed Abzayev ’ s wife; idem;

10) Ms Khava Abzayeva

( 2001); Said-Magomed Abzayev ’ s daughter; idem;

11) Ms Rayzan Abzayeva

(1942); Said-Magomed Abzayev ’ s mother; idem.

SRJI/Astreya

1) Mr Ruslan Sugatiyev (1965);

2) Mr Beslan Yusupov (1971);

3) Mr Said-Magomed Abzayev (1975).

On 8 February 2002 a group of armed servicemen detained the applicants ’ relatives at checkpoint no. 111 (also known as “Otvaga”) in Argun and took them away in a URAL lorry.

On 18 February 2002 t he Argun inter-district prosecutor ’ s offic e opened criminal case no. 78021. The investigation is still pending .

38383/12

Asukhanovy v. Russia

30/05/2012

1) Ms Kheda Asukhanova

( 1966) Gilani Asukhanov ’ s sister; Alkhan-Yurt, the Chechen Republic;

2) Mr Yusup Asukhanov

( 1992); Gilani Asukhanov ’ s son, idem.

Not legally represented

Mr Gilani (also spelled as Gelani) Asukhanov (1970) (in the documents submitted the year of birth was also referred to as 1972).

On 1 March 2002 a group of armed servicemen detained Mr Gilani Asukhanov at checkpoint no. 207 at the exit from Urus-Martan and took him away in a VAZ-2106 vehicle.

On 4 March 2002 t he Urus-Martan district prosecutor ’ s offic e opened criminal case no. 61054. The investigation is still pending .