2 October 2008

For immediate release

European Court: Russia responsible for ‘presumed death’ of Chechen teenagers

Today the European Court of Human Rights found Russia responsible for the ‘presumed death’ of Murad Lyanov and Islam Dombayev following their unacknowledged detention by State servicemen in June 2000 in violation of Article 2 (right to life) of the European Convention on Human Rights. Russia was ordered to pay a total of €74,000 in damages to Asiyat Lyanova and Rashan Aliyeva, the boys’ mothers. Asiyat was represented by the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC) based at London Metropolitan University and the Russian NGO, Memorial. Rashan was represented by the NGO, Stichting Russian Justice Initiative.

At around 11pm on 28 June 2000, 16 year-old Murad, 15 year-old Islam and a third person, T, left Murad’s house in Grozny, Chechnya, to spend the night at T’s home nearby. Their families have not seen or received any news of them since.

The Court established that the Pskov OMON (special police forces) and Obron-8 (special mission brigade no. 8 of the Interior Ministry troops) conducted an operation in T’s street on the night in question and apprehended three people fitting the description of the missing boys. As the Government failed to “provide another plausible explanation for the events in question” the Court found that the boys “must be presumed dead following their unacknowledged detention” by State servicemen.

When faced with conflicting information from OMON and Obron-8 the official investigation into the events in question made “no meaningful efforts” to clarify these and led the Court to conclude that “the authorities failed to take prompt and effective measures to safeguard [Murad and Islam] against the risk of disappearance.”

In addition, the Court found a grave violation of Article 5 (right to liberty and security), as Murad and Islam’s

“…detention was not acknowledged, was not logged in any custody records and there exists no official trace of their subsequent whereabouts or fate. In accordance with the Court's practice, this fact in itself must be considered a most serious failing, since it enables those responsible for an act of deprivation of liberty to conceal their involvement in a crime, to cover their tracks and to escape accountability for the fate of a detainee.”

Violations were also found of Article 3 (inhuman treatment) on the basis of the applicants’ ongoing distress and anguish at not knowing what happened to their sons and Article 13 (effective remedy).

EHRAC’s Director, Professor Philip Leach, said:

“In this case it has been established exactly which units of servicemen detained Murad and Islam. There is therefore no reason why the authorities could not and cannot bring the individual perpetrators to justice and in so doing provide some form of redress to Murad and Islam’s mothers, who for eight years have been unable to find out what happened to their sons.”

http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/londonmet/library/c45147_3.pdf