Sadulaeva v. Russia. ECHR Decision

On 8 April 2010, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) issued a decision on the complaint “Sadulaeva v. Russia” (38570/05). The complaint was filed on 16 September 2005 by Chovka Sadulaeva, mother of Aslan Sadulaev, born in 1978, who was illegally detained by employees of Russian security forces and went missing.
The applicant’s interests were represented by the “Memorial” Human Rights Center and the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC, London).
On 9 December 2002, when Aslan Sadulaev’s friend was driving him and a girl in a VAZ-2109 car, they were stopped by Russian soldiers in two armored personnel carriers at the turn from the Urus-Martan—Alkhazurovo road to the village of Komsomolskoye (Urus-Martan district of the Chechen Republic).
At the same time, a bus arriving from Urus-Martan to Alkhazurovo pulled up to the turn. The soldiers stopped it and checked the documents of two passengers. People traveling on the bus saw the soldiers checking the documents of three people from the purple “nine” (VAZ-2109) belonging to Sadulaev’s friend. Among them, witnesses recognized Aslan Sadulaev. One of the witnesses often saw him in Alkhazurovo, where he came to visit his grandmother, who lived next door. Another recognized Aslan because he often visited her house.
After this, the soldiers released the girl, the young men were put into an armored personnel carrier, a soldier took the wheel of the “nine”, and they all drove off towards Urus-Martan.
Sadulaev’s friend was soon released. According to him, the soldiers said they would question them and release them. The detainees were brought to the Urus-Martan district military commandant’s office. When they were being taken into the building, Sadulaev’s friend saw an acquaintance who was an employee of the commandant’s office. He recognized him and asked for him to be released. Where Aslan was taken and where he is, is still unknown.
On 31 January 2003, the Prosecutor’s Office of the Urus-Martan district initiated a criminal case on the kidnapping of a person. Two months later, it was suspended.
On 22 May, the acting head of the village of Martan-Chu issued a certificate to Sadulaeva’s mother stating that Aslan did not participate in hostilities.
On 14 May 2004, the Urus-Martan City Court partially satisfied Sadulaeva’s complaint, acknowledging that the investigation into her son’s kidnapping had not been conducted in full. However, the court did not allow Sadulaeva to familiarize herself with the materials of the criminal case.
On 28 October, the investigation into the case was resumed. Nevertheless, effective measures to investigate the crime were again not taken.
On 3 March 2005, Sadulaeva applied to the Urus-Martan City Court with a request to oblige the prosecutor’s office to conduct an effective investigation.
On 22 March, the court refused to satisfy this complaint.
On 15 June, the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of Chechnya upheld the city court’s decision.
On 16 September, the applicant appealed to the ECHR.
After four and a half years, on 8 April 2010, the Court issued a decision on the applicants’ case.
The ECHR recognized that responsibility for the kidnapping and probable killing of Aslan Sadulaev lies with state representatives and that the authorities did not conduct an effective investigation of the crime.
The ECHR recognized that Article 2 (right to life), Article 5 (right to liberty and security of person), and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) in conjunction with Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights were violated in relation to Sadulaev.
The ECHR also ruled that Article 3 (prohibition of torture) of the Convention was violated in relation to the applicant.
The ECHR ordered the payment of compensation to the applicant in the amount of 60,000 euros for moral damage. The ECHR also obliged the Russian authorities to pay the applicants’ representatives 1,110 euros for services provided.