CASE OF ISAYEVA, YUSUPOVA AND BAZAYEVA v. RUSSIA

Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies);Violations of Art. 2;No separate issue under Art. 3;Violation of P1-1;Violation of Art. 13;Pecuniary damage - financial award;Non-pecuniary damage - financial awardsCosts and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings

The first applicant was born in DATE , the second applicant was born in DATE and the third applicant was born in DATE . The first CARDINAL applicants are residents of GPE . The third applicant currently lives in GPE .

The facts surrounding the bombing of the civilian convoy and the ensuing investigation were partially disputed . In view of this fact , the ORG requested the ORG to produce copies of the entire investigation files opened in relation to the bombing . ORG also asked the applicants to produce additional documentary evidence in support of their allegations .

The submissions of the parties on the facts concerning the circumstances of the attack on the convoy and the ensuing investigation are set out in Sections CARDINAL and CARDINAL below . A description of the materials submitted to ORG is contained in Part B.

The first and third applicant lived in the city of PERSON , and the second applicant in PERSON , which is a suburb of Grozny . In DATE hostilities began in GPE between the federal military forces and NORP fighters . The city and its suburbs were the targets of wide - scale attacks by the military . The applicants allege that at some date after DATE they learned from radio and television announcements , including on the all - NORP channels ORG and ORG , that on DATE a “ humanitarian corridor ” would be arranged for civilians to escape from the fighting in ORG .

Because of the attacks the third applicant and her family left PERSON on DATE and went to stay with relatives in the village of GPE . The first applicant and her relatives tried to cross the border with Ingushetia on DATE , but were told by the military at a roadblock that the corridor for civilians would be open DATE .

Early in the morning of CARDINAL DATE the first and the second applicants and their relatives CARDINAL persons in a ORG mini - van – left ORG along the road towards GPE , also known as the GPE – Baku highway , or the “ GPE ” highway . Around CARDINAL a.m. they reached the military roadblock “ Kavkaz-CARDINAL ” on the administrative border between GPE and Ingushetia . There was already a line of cars QUANTITY long . The first applicant and some relatives walked to the roadblock and the military informed them that they were expecting an order from their superiors to open the road , and that the order should arrive at TIME The weather was bad at that time , it was cloudy and raining .

The family of the third applicant left the village of PERSON at QUANTITY DATE in CARDINAL cars , a GPE , a GPE and a blue GAZ-CARDINAL , and travelled along the road to GPE . When they reached the queue in front of the roadblock , they were assigned numbers CARDINAL and CARDINAL in the line . The line of cars grew very quickly , and there were CARDINAL times as many cars behind them as in front . The third applicant estimated that there were CARDINAL cars in the column , including trucks , vans and buses .

People started asking the servicemen about the opening of the border . At first they were told that it should be opened after CARDINAL a.m. , and that the soldiers were expecting an order to that effect . The first applicant estimated that QUANTITY a senior officer came out and told the people that the “ corridor ” would not be opened DATE and that he had no information as to when it would be opened . According to the applicants , he also ordered everyone to clear the space in front of the roadblock and to return to ORG . The column started to turn around , but progress was very slow because there were several lanes of cars and little space .

The applicants turned around and were slowly moving with the convoy away from the roadblock . According to the second applicant , there was a large number of cars , and the column stretched over QUANTITY . Sometime later the clouds cleared and the applicants saw CARDINAL planes in the sky . The planes turned over the column and fired missiles .

The driver of the first and the second applicants ' minivan stopped and the passengers started to get out . The first applicant 's children , PERSON ( also spelled PERSON ) GPE ( born in DATE ) and PERSON ( born in DATE ) and her sister - in - law PERSON ( born in DATE ) were the first to get out . The first applicant saw them thrown to the side of the road by a blast . She recalled that the planes circled around the convoy and dropped bombs several times . The first applicant 's right arm was hit by a fragment of a shell and she fainted . When she regained consciousness and ran to her relatives , all CARDINAL were dead from shell - wounds . Another woman , PERSON , who was in the minivan , was also killed . After the attacks were over , the first applicant was taken by car with other wounded person to a hospital in GPE . The doctors treated the wounds and sent her home , because there was no room in the hospital . DATE the first applicant travelled to GPE , ORG , where she had an operation on her right arm . She needs another operation on her arm .

The second applicant recalls that , as their mini - van was nearing FAC , they saw CARDINAL planes in the sky launching rockets . In TIME a rocket hit a car immediately in front of theirs . The second applicant thought the driver was hit , because the car turned around abruptly . When they saw this , everyone started to jump out of the minivan , and then the second applicant was thrown over by another blast . She fainted , and when she regained consciousness , she realised that CARDINAL of the first applicant 's children , PERSON and ORG , were dead . The second applicant believes that there were CARDINAL explosions after the first one . She was dragged to the side of the road by others , but later she returned to the road to help the first applicant to collect the bodies . PERSON had a wound to the abdomen and PERSON 's head had been torn away , and one leg was crushed . The second applicant was wounded by shells in the neck , arm and hip . Their minivan was not hit , and they used it to leave the scene afterwards . On DATE she was taken to ORG by ambulance for further treatment .

The third applicant was in a GPE car with her husband and his friend . Her son and CARDINAL of her husband 's nephews , one with his wife , were in the ORG car behind them . She recalled that the rain stopped and the sky cleared when they passed the village of ORG and were nearing the village of ORG . Then there was a powerful blast , and their car was thrown to the left side of the road . All its windows were broken . The third applicant realised that there had been a blast behind , and she ran over to see if her son and his cousins were alive . She believes that in the QUANTITY she ran along the road to find her son 's car , she saw several destroyed cars , vans and trucks and CARDINAL dead bodies , disfigured and mutilated , some of them in vehicles , some thrown around by the blasts . She recalled a bus with the rear side totally destroyed and a ORG truck with human and cattle bodies inside .

The third applicant , her husband and their friend picked up some people who needed help . Their GPE car had flat tyres , but they reached ORG , where they changed tyres . They then travelled back to PERSON where their relatives lived . In the meantime , the applicant 's son picked up the wounded and took them to a hospital in LOC , the district centre . He later returned to the place of the bombing , as he was not sure if the third applicant had been able to leave it . The planes were still flying over the remains of the convoy and struck again . Their GAZ car with all the family possessions was destroyed by a direct hit , as well as their FAC car . The applicant 's son and his cousins ran on foot through neighbouring villages , and in the evening reached PERSON . They later fled to ORG .

The applicants are not certain about the exact timing of the attack , as they were in a state of shock . They accepted the timing of the attack given by the Government . They submitted transcripts to the ORG of interviews with other witnesses of the attack . In their testimonies these witnesses described the bombing of a convoy of refugees from ORG near the village of ORG on DATE , confirming that after the strikes they saw numerous burned and damaged cars , including CARDINAL ORG truck filled with civilians and CARDINAL bus . They also confirmed that there were CARDINAL of victims , killed and wounded . Several testimonies concerned the deaths of the first applicant 's relatives ( see Part B below for a description of the testimonies ) .

The applicants submitted that they saw only civilians in the convoy , and that they did not see anyone from the convoy attempting to attack the planes .

According to the Government , on CARDINAL DATE the representative of ORG decided to evacuate the office to ORG . As he did not co - ordinate the move with the military authorities , when he and a convoy of vehicles reached the check - point “ Kavkaz-CARDINAL ” on the administrative border with ORG , they had to turn back as the check - point was closed .

ORG could have used the opportunity to inform the security and military authorities in advance about their travel , which would have made it possible for them to ensure a safe evacuation route . The checkpoint was closed because it could not supervise the passage of a “ fair quantity of refugees ” . On the way back to PERSON the convoy was joined by a ORG truck carrying rebel NORP fighters .

At that time the military authorities were planning and conducting counter - terrorist operations in ORG , aimed at preventing supplies and personnel of the rebel fighters being brought to PERSON by heavy transport , as well as identification and suppression of any other persons , supporting networks or command centres offering armed resistance to the authorities .

As part of that mission , on CARDINAL DATE CARDINAL military SU-CARDINAL aeroplanes , flown by military pilots identified for security reasons as “ PERSON and “ PERSON , were on a mission to conduct reconnaissance and to suppress such movements . At TIME , when flying over the village of ORG , they saw vehicles moving towards PERSON . The planes were attacked from a ORG truck with large - calibre infantry fire - arms . The pilots reported the attack to an air - traffic controller identified as “ NORP ” at the command headquarters , and were granted permission to use combat weapons . At QUANTITY the planes fired CARDINAL rockets each from a height of QUANTITY at the ORG , which they estimated carried CARDINAL fighters , and destroyed it . They then located a second ORG truck on the same road on an intersection with a road to the village of LOC , from which they were also attacked . The pilots retorted by launching CARDINAL missiles each at the target . They then returned to their deployment aerodrome . In their submissions on the admissibility of the applications , the Government indicated the timing of the attack as CARDINAL – CARDINAL p.m. and CARDINAL – MONEY p.m.

The Government conceded that apart from the CARDINAL ORG trucks targeted , other vehicles were destroyed or damaged . From the observations on the merits submitted by the Government , it appears that CARDINAL civilian vehicles were damaged . This resulted in QUANTITY civilians being killed and CARDINAL wounded . Among the killed were QUANTITY employees of the local ORG and the first applicant 's CARDINAL relatives . Among the wounded were the first and the second applicant . The Government did not submit any information about the number or names of wounded or killed fighters in the ORG trucks .

At the same time , the ORG submitted that the pilots had not foreseen and could not have foreseen the harm to the civilian vehicles , which appeared on the road only after the rockets had been fired . In the ORG 's view , the fighters were deliberately using the convoy , which had been moving without authorisation , as a human shield . The radius of damage of the rockets is QUANTITY , which explained the casualties .

In connection with the incident , ORG ( ICRC ) in GPE issued a press release on DATE . It stated that , according to the local branch of ORG , on DATE a convoy of vehicles , among them CARDINAL vehicles of ORG , had tried to cross the border into ORG but had been turned back at the check - point and were returning to ORG . All CARDINAL cars were clearly marked with ORG sign , and the truck displayed a red cross on its roof . They were attacked by missiles from aeroplanes , as a result of which CARDINAL ORG workers were killed and a third was wounded . A number of other vehicles were also hit , resulting in some CARDINAL civilian deaths and over CARDINAL injured .

The NORP military air force issued a press release which stated that on CARDINAL DATE at TIME a column of trucks with fighters and ammunition was moving along the road from GPE towards ORG . A SU-CARDINAL plane flying over the convoy was shot at with automatic weapons and called a second plane for support . The planes hit the convoy with missiles at an interval of TIME , as a result of which QUANTITY trucks full of fighters were destroyed . The press service denied that civilians could have been hit by the air strikes .

On DATE ORG ( ORG ) , GPE , stated that on CARDINAL DATE CARDINAL TV journalists , CARDINAL working for a GPE - based company , and the other for a local station in ORG , were killed during a military attack on a convoy of refugees fleeing PERSON near the village of ORG . According to the statement , the CARDINAL journalists were covering the movement of a convoy , and when the first rocket hit a bus with refugees , they went out to film the scene . As another rocket hit a nearby vehicle , both were fatally injured .

The attack on the convoy was reported in the NORP and international media .

On DATE , at the first applicant 's request , ORG of Ingushetia certified the deaths of PERSON , born on CARDINAL DATE , and PERSON , born on DATE , “ due to shell - wounds received as a result of bombing of a convoy of refugees from PERSON by fighter planes of the NORP military air force on the “ NORP ” road between the villages of ORG and ORG on DATE , TIME ” .

In DATE the ORG introduced a request for supervisory review to the ORG of ORG , by which he sought to quash the decision of DATE . On DATE the request was granted , and the decision was quashed . The case was remitted to ORG . The Government submitted that the first applicant failed to appear at FAC for a new consideration and that her place of residence was unknown . On DATE ORG adjourned the case due to the first applicant 's failure to appear on summonses .

On DATE the military prosecutor of the LOC military circuit ( военная прокуратура Северо- Кавказcкого военного округа ) , military unit no . CARDINAL , located in GPE , the NORP federal military headquarters in GPE , opened a criminal investigation , no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL/CARDINAL - CARDINAL , concerning the aerial bombardment of a refugee convoy near the village of LOC on DATE .

The investigation confirmed the fact of the bombardment , the deaths of the first applicant 's relatives and the wounding of the second applicant . It also identified several witnesses and relatives of other victims of the bombardments , who were questioned . Some of them were granted victim status and recognised as civil plaintiffs . The investigation identified a number of individuals who had died as a result of the strikes and who were wounded . It also identified CARDINAL pilots who had fired at the convoy and the control tower operator who had given permission to use combat weapons . The pilots , who were questioned as witnesses , stated that their targets had been CARDINAL solitary ORG trucks with armed men , who fired at the planes . In response , the pilots used CARDINAL S-CARDINAL air - to - ground missiles against the first truck and CARDINAL such missiles against the second truck . No one was charged with having committed a crime ( see Part B below for a description of the documents in the investigation file ) .

On DATE the criminal investigation was closed due to lack of corpus delicti in the acts of the pilots . This decision was appealed to the military court by a victim of the attack , PERSON . Following her complaint of DATE , ORG quashed the investigator 's decision on DATE and remitted the case for a new investigation to the military prosecutor of the LOC military circuit ( see § CARDINAL below ) .

After the hearing of DATE the Government submitted a document of CARDINAL DATE issued by a military prosecutor of the LOC military circuit . By this decision the criminal investigation was again closed due to the absence of corpus delicti in the acts of the pilots ( see § § CARDINAL below ) .

The applicants stated in their submissions that they were not aware of any adequate steps taken by the authorities to conduct an efficient and meaningful investigation and to ensure their participation in it . The first applicant submitted that some time after her complaint to the ORG had been communicated to ORG , her elder brother , PERSON , was twice visited at his house in GPE by the military prosecutors , who were looking for her . After the second visit the prosecutors left a note for the first applicant , instructing her to appear at the FAC military base for questioning . The first applicant failed to do so . She submitted that GPE was the main military base of the federal forces in GPE , was not freely accessible to civilians and was heavily guarded and surrounded by numerous check - points . It would be very difficult and unsafe for her to attempt to get there on her own , and she believed that the prosecutors could have found her either in GPE , where she was staying , or in GPE , where she travelled . The first applicant was also aware that prosecutors from the NORP town of ORG were once looking for her in Ingushetia , while she was in PERSON .

The second and third applicants were never called for questioning . They were not given any official information in relation to the incident . None of the applicants was officially informed that they had been granted the status of crime victims ( потерпевшие ) , as provided by LAW .

The parties submitted numerous documents concerning the investigation into the killings . The main documents of relevance are as follows :

The Government submitted a copy of the investigation file in the criminal case , divided into CARDINAL volumes . No list of documents was provided , but it is apparent from the numbering of the pages that there were initially CARDINAL volumes and that a certain part of the file is missing . According to the documents submitted , the investigation made some attempts to locate the first applicant and , to a lesser extent , the second applicant . Although some of their relatives were questioned and granted victim status ( it is not clear whether they were informed of this ) , the investigators did not contact the first and the second applicant directly . It does not appear that the third applicant was ever sought . The documents contained in the case - file present a coherent and detailed account of the attack of which the applicants complain .

The most important documents contained in the file are as follows :

ORG of ORG ( ICRC ) addressed ORG in GPE in relation to the attack on the convoy on DATE . On DATE the ICRC urgently informed ORG that , due to a rapid deterioration of the security situation in PERSON , the local personal of the ICRC and of ORG were being evacuated from ORG by a convoy of QUANTITY trucks and CARDINAL passenger vehicles . The letter stated that the vehicles would not be marked by any emblem .

Later on DATE the ICRC again urgently informed ORG that the ORG personnel were unable to cross the border with ORG . The road between PERSON and PERSON was under fire and one of the ORG trucks had been damaged .

On DATE , in reply to a request from ORG Office of DATE , Mr PERSON , chairman of ORG and ORG , submitted his account of the attack . He submitted the following :

“ I have been the Chairman of ORG of ORG since DATE . We worked together with the ICRC , taking care of CARDINAL elderly and disabled persons in GPE ... From DATE we had to close the food centres since electricity and gas had been cut off , but we continued to bake bread using diesel fuel and to distribute it to CARDINAL elderly persons ... Starting from DATE PERSON came under heavy air bombardment , and on CARDINAL DATE we stopped all programmes , because it was impossible not just to work , but to stay there . We started to prepare to evacuate , and I informed ORG in Nalchik [ Kabardino - Balkaria ] of this fact .

Because all public media were declaring that an exit route to ORG would be opened for refugees on DATE , we decided to evacuate on DATE , together with the ORG staff . In order to evacuate we needed special permission , and on CARDINAL DATE we brought all our transport to the [ rebel ] commandatura , which issued a permit to travel . I went ahead of the convoy to check the road , and saw several craters from explosions on the road , so I personally ensured that we had flags with red crosses on the roofs of our QUANTITY trucks .

Our cars travelled in a convoy , and at TIME we were in a line of cars on the Rostov- Baku highway . The line extended for QUANTITY from the check - point [ at the border with Ingushetia ] . TIME at the check - point , where CARDINAL people were waiting and no one was let through , a general appeared ... and said that no one would be allowed to cross , because the check point was not prepared . He said that it would open DATE , that everyone should go back , and that he guaranteed that the road would not be attacked . Until TIME we could not turn around , because of a line of cars QUANTITY long behind us . At TIME we started to move towards PERSON . I was heading the convoy in a GPE car , the others were behind me . Other refugees followed our convoy , having seen our red cross symbols ; they were also flying white flags .

QUANTITY before ORG I saw CARDINAL military planes launching rockets . As cars were also approaching from opposite direction , I thought that they had been shooting at something by the side of the road . In order to verify , I accelerated and went ahead of the convoy . When I reached the bridge , I saw the road turning to the left and the planes bombing the road . When I reached the spot , QUANTITY trucks were lying on the left side of the road , both on their sides , on the right side a GPE car was burning after a direct hit and nearby a woman covered in blood was trying to take out of the car a man 's beheaded body . I stopped to help , but at that moment passengers in my car whom I had picked up on the road to PERSON started to scream and pointed to the skies . I saw CARDINAL military planes coming towards us . I got back into the car and drove forward . After QUANTITY the car jolted and the back windscreen was broken . The car slowed down because CARDINAL of the back wheels had been punctured . After QUANTITY I reached ORG , where I let the passengers out , changed the tyre and returned to the convoy . When I approached the bridge I saw a horrible site . In front , on the bridge , was our ORG truck . Its cabin was almost entirely gone . Other cars were behind it . I ran to the truck and saw that the bodies of CARDINAL drivers , PERSON and PERSON , were torn apart . Then I started to look for the others . To the right under the road I found PERSON , who was wounded in the back . Then I found other colleagues who were assisting the wounded from a PAZ bus , which had taken a direct hit by a rocket ; CARDINAL people had been killed on the spot . We took the wounded and CARDINAL cars with broken windows which could drive and went to the village of ORG . I told the staff to unload the trucks and take away the dead after things had calmed down . In the meantime I drove the wounded to the village of ORG . At TIME I returned to my colleagues in ORG . They told me that the planes had returned and attacked the convoy twice more , and that they had descended to a very low height and shot at the cars with machine - guns .

To sum up , on DATE CARDINAL p.m. on the bridge near the village of ORG , military planes attacked a civilian convoy containing refugees CARDINAL times ; consequently , CARDINAL of cars were destroyed , CARDINAL persons were killed and CARDINAL were wounded . I believe that many victims were hurt because numerous refugees followed our convoy , having noticed ORG sign .

I and my colleagues categorically deny that the planes were allegedly shot at from the convoy . Starting from the cross - roads with the road to ORG , not only we did not see any cars with an anti - aircraft gun , but we did not see not a single armed person . While in GPE we ourselves suffered from the [ NORP ] fighters , who accused us on many occasions of working for the NORP , and our office and staff had been attacked , so we were very cautious . I can not state that the pilots deliberately aimed at the ORG convoy , but they could not have failed to see our trucks with the crosses on the ill - fated bridge , and afterwards they were striking at the civilian convoy for TIME . ”

To this statement were appended copies of the identity documents of the CARDINAL drivers who had been killed , PERSON and PERSON . There was also a travel permit for CARDINAL vehicles , issued by an “ independent NORP authority ” – the PERSON commandatura – on DATE .

Three other testimonies were collected from ORG workers in DATE . They confirmed PERSON 's statements as regards the timing and the circumstances of the attack and the identity of the victims who had been ORG employees .

On DATE a military prosecutor from military unit no . CARDINAL in GPE issued a decision not to open a criminal investigation into the complaint by ORG . The decision said that a review of the complaint established that the ORG convoy was travelling on DATE to ORG , and that it could not cross the administrative border because the check - point had not been prepared . The convoy movements were not coordinated with the headquarters of ORG ( UGA ) . When returning to ORG , the convoy , together with other vehicles , was attacked at the bridge near the village of ORG by “ unidentified airborne devices ” . The decision further referred to information from the headquarters of the ORG that , according to the operations record book , on DATE the ORG aviation forces had not conducted flights in the vicinity of LOC . The investigator concluded that there was no proof that the servicemen from federal forces had been involved in the air bombardment of the ORG convoy and refused to open a criminal investigation because of the absence of a corpus delicti in the actions of servicemen of the armed forces .

On DATE a prosecutor of ORG for LOC in GPE - on - PERSON quashed the decision of CARDINAL DATE and ordered an investigation . On DATE the military prosecutor of military unit no . CARDINAL accepted the case no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL/CARDINAL - CARDINAL for investigation . On DATE the case - file was transferred to another investigator within the same military unit .

After communication of the case by ORG to ORG in DATE , ORG for the LOC requested information about the case from ORG . On DATE ORG opened criminal investigation no . CARDINAL into the killing of the first applicant 's CARDINAL relatives and the wounding of the first and the second applicants . In DATE the criminal case was forwarded for investigation to military unit no . CARDINAL . On DATE a military prosecutor in the same military unit joined it with the investigation no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL/CARDINAL CARDINAL .

It appears that at some point in DATE the criminal case was transferred for further investigation to ORG in GPE - on - Don .

Among the victims of the attack were PERSON and PERSON , residents of PERSON . The husband was killed in the attack , and the wife was wounded . On DATE PERSON wrote to the local military prosecutor in ORG , where she was staying . She stated that on DATE she and her husband travelled along the “ humanitarian corridor ” that had been declared for ORG residents . Through a local transport agency , they had arranged in advance for a truck to collect them and their movable property . As the roadblock was closed , they had to go back to PERSON . At TIME near the village of ORG they were attacked by military planes . Their car was thrown to the side by a blast , which killed her husband , and wounded her and the driver . Ms GPE was taken away by passers - by for first aid , but returned for her husband 's body , which had in the meantime been taken to a village mosque . With the assistance of a local resident , she took her husband 's body to a roadblock near ORG and buried it in a shallow grave . On CARDINAL November she reached PERSON , where her daughter lived . She was treated in hospital for head trauma and concussion . Upon release from the hospital , on DATE , she returned to GPE to collect her husband 's body . On DATE she placed it in the PERSON town morgue . She requested the military prosecutor of FAC to open a criminal investigation into the attack and to order a forensic expert report on her husband 's body .

On DATE a forensic report on the body of PERSON concluded that he had died of a shell wound to the chest , possibly in the circumstances indicated in his wife 's statement . On DATE the PERSON civil registration office issued a death certificate for PERSON , who had died on CARDINAL DATE in the village of ORG , GPE .

The documents pertaining to the case were forwarded to the military prosecutor of military unit no . DATE , who on DATE issued a decision not to start criminal investigation because no crime has been committed . There were no grounds to conclude that military pilots could have been involved in the death of PERSON .

On DATE that decision was quashed by a military prosecutor of military unit no . CARDINAL . The investigation was joined to investigation of criminal case no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL/CARDINAL - CARDINAL , which concerned the attack on the ORG convoy .

On DATE PERSON was questioned as a witness . On DATE an investigator of ORG , acting upon directions from the military prosecutors , issued a decision to recognise her as a victim and as a civil plaintiff in the case .

On DATE CARDINAL of the first applicant 's relatives – her brother PERSON and nephew PERSON were questioned as witnesses . PERSON testified that his wife and son , the first and the second applicants and other relatives ( he named CARDINAL persons ) had left PERSON on TIME of DATE for ORG . The witness had remained at home , and at CARDINAL p.m. his relatives had returned with the same minibus . CARDINAL of the people inside had been killed and the rest were wounded , as a result of an air strike at the convoy . The first applicant 's CARDINAL children , PERSON and ORG , were buried in the GPE cemetery near GPE . PERSON , a teenager who was in the minibus , testified about the circumstances of the attack and about his splinter wound in the left shoulder . He was treated in the NORP hospital immediately after the incident , and then stayed for some time in the GPE hospital in GPE .

On DATE the investigators questioned PERSON , a relative of the ORG , who was in the minivan on DATE and who gave a detailed account of the events . He submitted that there were CARDINAL passengers in the minibus , himself included , plus the driver . He estimated the timing of the attack DATE , because some people had stopped by the road for the TIME prayer ( namaz ) . He recalled that first he heard an explosion in front of their car , where a ORG truck had been travelling . Their minivan stopped and everyone started to get out of the car and ran towards the shoulder of the road . At that point a second explosion occurred on the right side of the road . The witness was wounded by shrapnel in both legs , CARDINAL arm and his back and he was in a state of shock , but he recalled CARDINAL other explosions somewhere nearby . He further recalled being brought by his relatives to the hospital in PERSON , where he was operated on and shrapnel were extracted from his body . CARDINAL passengers in the van were killed : the witness 's mother ( PERSON ) and CARDINAL sisters , the first applicant 's CARDINAL children and another woman . The witness submitted that no forensic examinations were performed on the bodies before burial and that he objected to exhumation of the bodies of his mother and CARDINAL sisters . CARDINAL passengers in the minivan , including himself and the driver , received shrapnel wounds of varying severity . When asked if he had heard anyone shooting from the convoy at the planes , the witness denied it and said that he did not see any armed men in the convoy . He also produced a detailed drawing of the site , with an indication of the placement of the cars on the road and the explosions .

The investigators attempted to find the first and the second applicants . In DATE they questioned a resident of GPE , who stated that in DATE – DATE CARDINAL families of refugees , the NORP and ORG had lived in his house . He did not know anything of the attack in DATE and did not know where they had gone afterwards .

On DATE the investigators of military unit no . CARDINAL , together with CARDINAL employees of ORG who had witnessed the attack , travelled to the site . They found the damaged carcass of the ORG truck QUANTITY from the bridge and photographed it and the fresh asphalt patch on the road where the witnesses stated the crater had been . ORG submitted their own photographs of the destroyed truck and of the explosion craters on the road .

The investigation attempted to identify and question other victims of the attack or their relatives and to collect medical records and death certificates . Requests were sent to the local departments of the interior in GPE , to the district prosecutors ' offices and to the CARDINAL largest refugee camps in ORG .

On several occasions in DATE and CARDINAL CARDINAL workers from ORG of ORG were questioned about the circumstances of the attack . They gave detailed explanations , accompanied by drawings of the site . Relatives of the CARDINAL deceased ORG drivers were questioned . They testified about the deaths and identified the graves . An order for exhumation and a forensic report was issued , but the relatives objected and the order was not carried out . The father of CARDINAL driver was granted victim status in the proceedings in DATE .

In addition to the relatives of the first and the second applicants , ORG and ORG staff , the investigators identified other victims . CARDINAL correspondents of local TV stations , PERSON and PERSON , were killed during the attack . The investigators questioned PERSON 's mother and widow , who objected to his exhumation . They submitted his death certificate and medical documents about his wounds . It does not appear that PERSON 's relatives were questioned .

The relatives of PERSON , driver of the truck in which the PERSON family had been travelling , testified that he had died from his wounds DATE after the events . His widow was questioned and granted victim status in the proceedings . She also produced her husband 's medical documents and death certificate and objected to his exhumation .

Five other persons who were killed during the attack on the convoy were identified , their relatives were questioned and some were granted victim status . In addition , CARDINAL local resident from the village ORG was killed not far from the road when he was washing his car by a pond , apparently by the same air strikes . His brother was also granted victim status .

The investigation established a total of CARDINAL deaths .

The witnesses also consistently referred to a PAZ bus ( a CARDINAL-seater ) , which received a direct hit and where CARDINAL persons were killed . They also referred to a ORG truck containing refugees – mostly women and children – and cattle which was directly hit and burned down , apparently with no survivors . It does not appear that the passengers of these CARDINAL vehicles or their relatives were ever established .

On DATE the investigators questioned a woman , whose name was not submitted to the ORG , identified as “ ORG ” . She testified that on CARDINAL DATE , together with CARDINAL other persons , she tried to leave in their car for ORG through the “ humanitarian corridor ” . After they were refused permission to cross at the checkpoint , they turned back at TIME and reached PERSON safely . Later she learned that the refugees had been attacked from the air , and that many people were killed and wounded . She submitted that on the road back she had seen a group of CARDINAL men on the edge of the LOC forest , dressed in camouflage and with machine - guns . Their car , a mud - splattered all - terrain UAZ vehicle , was nearby . The witness presumed that these were NORP fighters , who could have provoked the military planes , circling in the skies , to strike at the refugees on the road . When asked , the witness said that she did not see a ORG or any other trucks with fighters .

Through witnesses testimonies and medical documents the investigators also identified several persons who had been wounded , among them the first and second applicants .

In DATE CARDINAL medical records of the wounded on DATE were sent from the Urus - Martan hospital for forensic reports . The reports concluded that the injuries –shrapnel wounds , traumatic amputations of limbs , concussion , head traumas DATE could have been received in the circumstances described by the victims , i.e. during an air strike . CARDINAL of the wounded died later and their relatives were granted victim status in the proceedings . CARDINAL was PERSON , a local TV reporter . It appears that other wounded persons or their relatives were not found by the investigators , despite certain attempts to that effect .

On DATE the investigator issued CARDINAL decisions to grant victim status to persons whose relatives had been killed or wounded , among them the first and second applicants . These decisions were not countersigned by the victims , as prescribed by LAW , and there is no indication that they were sent to the applicants or to their relatives whose addresses had been established .

The investigators questioned CARDINAL residents of ORG . They testified that there were air - strikes on the road and that dead bodies had been brought to the village mosque on DATE . They also testified about giving first aid to the victims .

DATE . In DATE and DATE the investigators questioned medical personnel from the hospitals in ORG , PERSON ( PERSON ) , ORG and ORG ) . They testified about the wounded who had been brought to the hospitals on DATE . It appears that the majority of the victims were brought to ORG hospital , which was the closest to the site . However , no records were made DATE because the large number of victims meant that all the staff was busy providing first aid for the heavy wounds . CARDINAL wounded persons were brought to the Urus - Martan hospital and CARDINAL to the Staraya Sunzha hospital , where a nurse recalled treating the second applicant and PERSON for shrapnel wounds .

In DATE in the course of the investigation into the applicants ' complaints , ORG in ORG requested the commander of the ORG and the military commandant of GPE to submit information about flights on DATE in the vicinity of ORG and ORG . It is unclear if any answers were submitted , and DATE the criminal investigation was transferred to the military prosecutor of military unit no . DATE .

In DATE the military investigators questioned CARDINAL military pilots and an air controller . They were questioned as witnesses and their real names were not disclosed to the ORG .

The air controller identified as “ PERSON ” submitted that on TIME on DATE he was informed , in accordance with procedure , about an aviation mission for the following day . The mission was to prevent the movement along the road towards PERSON of heavy vehicles , possibly carrying weapons , fighters and other supply equipment for the “ illegal armed groups ” defending the city . On TIME he informed CARDINAL pilots of the mission . Neither on DATE , nor later , until the questioning , had he been informed of a “ humanitarian corridor ” for civilians , about the movement of a ORG convoy on the road or about civilian casualties . He was not aware whether the “ Kavkaz-CARDINAL ” roadblock was functioning or not and received no information from that roadblock .

The witness further submitted that on DATE the pilots left for the mission without airborne forward controllers , because the mission was not perceived to be taking place close enough to the federal troops . The forward air controllers remained on the ground in the control tower . At QUANTITY air - crew reported a solitary ORG truck on the road near the village of ORG , not far from the Samashki forest , from which they were being fired at . The air controller , knowing from the reconnaissance information about the presence of fighters in the LOC forest and in view of the mission 's purpose , permitted them to open fire . The pilots did not report any other vehicles on the road or ORG signs on the truck . Neither did they report any errors in hitting the targets .

On DATE a pilot identified as “ PERSON ” testified that on DATE he was performing a mission to prevent the movement of heavy vehicles towards ORG . On the road near FAC , QUANTITY from the bridge , he observed a dark - green ORG truck with a canvass cover . He descended from QUANTITY for a closer look . The pilot could see the truck very clearly , was certain of its mark and was sure that it did not bear any signs of ORG . When asked , he responded that had he seen the ORG signs , he would not have fired at the vehicle . He was also certain that there were no other vehicles on the road at that time . The wingman reported fire from the truck , and the pilot requested the ground controller 's permission to open fire . Permission was granted and the pilot made a loop , aimed at the truck and fired rockets from the height of QUANTITY . By that time the truck had already crossed the bridge . The timing of the attack was QUANTITY CARDINAL p.m. He then climbed to QUANTITY . When flying over the site he noted that the truck had stopped . Then , at the crossroads near the village of LOC he noted a second solitary ORG truck , also dark - green , and a group of armed persons dressed in camouflage near it , firing at the planes with sub - machine guns . The crew 's attention was drawn to this new target and they no longer observed the first target . The visibility conditions were good and the sky was clear . No other cars were on the road at the time . The pilot submitted a drawing of the site with indications of the CARDINAL solitary trucks on the road .

On DATE a pilot identified as “ Petrov ” was questioned as a witness . His testimony begins with words “ I confirm my previous submissions ” , however no other testimonies from him were submitted to the ORG . He repeated , almost word for word , the first pilot 's submissions about the circumstances of the attack on DATE . He added that he did not see “ any refugee convoys ” or cars marked with a ORG symbol .

On DATE additional information was taken from the pilot identified as “ PERSON . The statement refers to CARDINAL previous interviews , of which only DATE dated DATE was submitted to the ORG . The pilot was questioned about the number and type of missiles fired . He said that he fired CARDINAL ORG missiles at the first ORG truck .

As well as answering questions , the pilots were asked to indicate the coordinates of their targets on a detailed map of the district , which they did . CARDINAL target was marked on the road before the bridge leading to the village of ORG , the other – QUANTITY away along the same road , on an intersection near the village of LOC .

The case - file also contains CARDINAL photographs of planes , undated and without descriptions .

On DATE the criminal case was closed due to the absence of corpus delicti in the pilots ' actions . It does not appear , however , that this decision was communicated in a timely manner to the victims or to the applicants . Nor was a copy of this decision submitted to the ORG .

On DATE PERSON wrote to the PERSON - on - Don Garrison Military Court asking for review of the decision not to open criminal proceedings . On DATE ORG of the LOC forwarded her complaint to ORG , along with the criminal case which comprised CARDINAL volumes . On DATE ORG established that the case should have been reviewed by ORG , but because the latter was not functioning , the case was transferred to ORG .

On DATE ORG quashed the decision of DATE and remitted the case for a new investigation . The court cited the decision of DATE , according to which the investigation had established that on CARDINAL DATE the pilots “ PERSON and “ PERSON ” struck at CARDINAL solitary ORG trucks containing rebel fighters on the road between the border between PERSON and PERSON . Both vehicles were destroyed . However , besides the CARDINAL vehicles , the rockets damaged the convoy of ORG vehicles and refugees . As a result of the attack , CARDINAL vehicles were destroyed and QUANTITY persons killed , including ORG husband ; QUANTITY persons were wounded . The investigation concluded that “ the convoy was indeed damaged by the actions of the pilots ' PERSON ' and ' PERSON ' from ORG , who were acting in accordance with their mission and aimed the missiles at the cluster of enemy personal and hardware . They did not intend to destroy the civilian population and the ORG convoy , because they did not and could not have foreseen such a possibility . Death and injuries were caused to the victims because they , on their own initiative , happened to be in the impact zone of the missiles , the extent of which exceeds QUANTITY ” .

ORG stated :

“ On DATE the criminal case was closed by an investigator of ORG for LOC under LAW , i.e. due to the absence of corpus delicti in the pilots ' actions , because the vehicles of ORG and of the refugees on their own entered into the impact zone of the missiles . The pilots did not and could have not foreseen such consequences .

The court believes that the pilots were executing an assigned task , namely to ' locate and destroy fortified points and the enemy mobile forces and resources ' in ' free chase ' mode , i.e. the decision to employ combat means was based on their own appreciation of the observed situation . There is no doubt that such assessment should include not only an assessment of the targets , but also of the possible harm to other vehicles and persons who were in the vicinity . Observing the said targets ( cars with ' fighters ' ) , they could not have failed to notice other vehicles with people nearby , and they should have proportionated the weapons according to their characteristics , precision , damage radius etc . The court finds that the pilots did not take all this properly into account , which explains that CARDINAL civilian vehicles were damaged , CARDINAL persons killed and QUANTITY persons were wounded as a result of the missile attack .

... taking into account that not all investigative measures were taken to the extent necessary to ascertain the pilots ' guilt , an additional investigation is needed in this case ” .

On DATE ORG accepted the case for further investigation .

On DATE a prosecutor of ORG again closed the criminal case due to the absence of corpus delicti in the pilots ' actions . A copy of this document was submitted by the Government after the hearings in GPE on DATE . The Government did not submit new documents from the investigation file to which the decision refers . From this document it follows that at some point ( presumably , after DATE ) the first and the second applicants were questioned as witnesses about the circumstances of the attack and granted victim status in the proceedings . Additional attempts were made to find and question the third applicant , but they were not successful .

The document also referred to some additional evidence obtained from the military . It mentioned a log book which noted the time of the missile strike on CARDINAL DATE in the vicinity of ORG as CARDINAL – CARDINAL p.m.

NORP The decision referred to undated statements of the CARDINAL pilots identified as P. and PERSON ( presumably the same ones as “ PERSON ” and “ PERSON , cited above in § § DATE ) . PERSON in his statement allegedly submitted that while on mission on DATE they noted a ORG truck on the eastern edge of the ORG forest , near the village of ORG . Some persons jumped out and ran towards the forest . At the same time the plane was shot at from the truck , probably with a large - calibre machine - gun . The pilot realised that the plane had been hit . He reported this to the leading pilot , who requested permission to use fire - power from the control centre . When the permission had been granted , they both fired at the truck CARDINAL rockets each , twice , from the height of QUANTITY . At that time they did not notice any other vehicles on the road in the vicinity of the truck . There were some vehicles further on the road , towards PERSON , but at a considerable distance . TIME after the missiles were fired the pilot noted another truck coming out of the Samashki forest and heading towards PERSON . The truck entered the impact zone . The pilot did not have time to verify what had happened to it or if there had been other vehicles on the road because of the danger of being shot at .

Pilot P. is further quoted as saying that they were informed that the road had been closed at the administrative border with ORG . They therefore presumed that the trucks were coming out of the LOC forest , where a considerable group of fighters ( “ boyeviki ” ) had gathered . They did not see any transport moving out of PERSON at that time . Pilot B. is quoted as having added to these statements that the missiles could have changed the direction on their own , or because they had been shot at from the ground .

The document further cites undated statements of CARDINAL unidentified airport technicians , who had on CARDINAL DATE examined CARDINAL SU-CARDINAL planes after their return from a mission . The pilots informed them that they had been shot at , probably with a large - calibre machine - gun . The examination of both planes , hull numbers CARDINAL respectively , revealed CARDINAL holes , CARDINAL and QUANTITY large , in the first plane and CARDINAL hole , QUANTITY large , in the second plane . CARDINAL technician suggested that the holes resulted from large - calibre machine - gun bullets . The decision further referred to CARDINAL undated protocols of inspection of planes CARDINAL . CARDINAL , which noted similar damage .

The decision further mentioned statements on unspecified dates by the commander of the military aviation unit and CARDINAL of the pilots ' colleagues , who apparently denied having heard anything about the attack on the civilian convoy on CARDINAL DATE .

In addition , the decision of CARDINAL DATE referred to the results of an investigative experiment , which showed that the sign of the red cross on the flag of ORG of ORG was clearly distinguishable from the distance of QUANTITY . The document also referred to information from the headquarters of ORG and ORG which defined the impact radius of the FAC missiles at QUANTITY .

The document concluded that harm to the civilians was caused by the actions of the pilots PERSON and PERSON , who had acted in permissible self - defence and had tried to prevent damage to the legitimate interests of the society and state from members of illegal armed groups . Furthermore , the pilots did not intend to cause harm to the civilians because they did not see them until the missiles had been launched . The criminal investigation was closed for absence of corpus delicti in the pilots ' actions . By the same decision the decisions to grant victim status in the civil proceedings were quashed , and the victims should have been informed of a possibility to seek redress from ORG through civil proceedings . It does not appear that the decision was sent to the victims , including the applicants .

The applicants submitted a number of additional documents relating to the circumstances of the attack and the investigation .

The applicants submitted additional statements about the circumstances of the attack and its effects . The second applicant submitted that the shock of DATE has stayed with her and her relatives . The third applicant submitted that “ since that attack on the road I am plagued by nightmares ... I am still sick every time I see a dummy in a shop window . It reminds me of the dead I saw on the Rostov - Baku highway . This effect is so strong that on several occasions I have fainted in shops . DATE I walked into a phone company store in GPE . They had a model of a hand in the shop window . That brought back the memory of a hand cut off and a woman 's leg that I saw right in front of me on the road on DATE . I felt sick and fainted . I was sick for DATE . Now I simply ca n't walk into a shop with dummies or with models of human bodies ” .

The third applicant also submitted a list of items which were inside the GAZ vehicle destroyed during the attack and documents for the CARDINAL vehicles destroyed during the attack – a “ GPE ” PERSON , produced in DATE , a “ PERSON , produced in DATE and a GAZ CARDINAL , produced in DATE . The list of items included cash in GPE dollars to the amount of CARDINAL , hi - fi and computer equipment to a value of MONEY , household items and clothing to the value of MONEY , jewellery to the value of MONEY , and CARDINAL cars to a value of MONEY . The total value was indicated at MONEY .

The applicants submitted CARDINAL additional testimonies from witnesses and victims , related to the circumstances of the attack . Witness A. testified that she was in the same car as PERSON and PERSON , TV reporters , both of whom were killed . After the first blast PERSON got out of the car and filmed the destruction around him ; he was killed by a second blast . Afterwards , they attempted to retrieve his camera and the tape , but they were beyond repair . PERSON 's widow testified about her husband 's death . Witness PERSON testified that their car was near LOC and returning to PERSON when the attack occurred . The witness and his brother were wounded and taken to ORG hospital for treatment . On DATE he was transferred to ORG . CARDINAL other witnesses , employees of ORG , also described the circumstances of the attack . All witnesses denied that there had been any shooting at the planes before or during the attack , or that there were armed men in the convoy .

The applicants submitted a report prepared by ORG in DATE , entitled “ A Summary of Human Rights Watch Research on Attacks on Fleeing Civilians and Civilian Convoys during the War in GPE , GPE , DATE and DATE ” . The submission , prepared for ORG , is based on eyewitness testimonies collected by the ORG researchers in ORG DATE and DATE . The report described CARDINAL independent incidents where civilians fleeing from fighting were attacked en route . The report stated that “ the NORP forces appear to have deliberately bombed , shelled , or fired upon civilian convoys , causing significant civilian casualties . ... The most egregious attack occurred on DATE when CARDINAL of civilian vehicles taking a so - called safe route out of PERSON on the LOC - Rostov highway were attacked by NORP aircraft . ” The report invoked provisions of international humanitarian law , namely Common Article CARDINAL to LAW of DATE , as well as LAW ) of LAW Additional to LAW of DATE . The report submitted that “ where aircraft make multiple attack passes over a civilian convoy , or convoys are subject to prolonged attack by ground troops , the most plausible inference is that such attacks are intentional and with the likely knowledge of the predominantly civil character of the convoy . Customary international law requires that any attacks discriminate between the civilians and military objects and that foreseeable injury to civilians be proportionate to the direct and concrete military advantage to be gained by the attack . ... Each of the incidents described below raises concerns that civilians may have been targeted intentionally or that the force used was not proportionate to the military advantage pursued ... ” .

NORP The report proceeded to describe in detail the announcement of the safe route on CARDINAL DATE , the closing of the administrative border with ORG and the attack itself . Based on interviews with witnesses , press articles and public statements , it presented information about the damaged vehicles . It referred to the van with CARDINAL passengers in which the first and the second applicants with their families were travelling . The second applicant and another passenger who had been in the minivan were interviewed and gave details of the attack .

ORG . The report concluded that the exact number of victims of the attack is unknown and it is unlikely that it would ever be known , since many victims were never identified . The eyewitnesses gave accounts of the number of persons killed , varying CARDINAL people . They were buried in nearby villages .

Various documents related to the establishment of facts of the first applicant 's children 's deaths were submitted to the ORG .

In her statement of CARDINAL DATE the first applicant asked ORG to certify the fact of her CARDINAL children 's deaths . She submitted that on DATE a refugee convoy was attacked by fighter planes on the “ GPE ” highway , between LOC and ORG . Many people were killed , among them her children PERSON and ORG . Their bodies were taken back to PERSON and buried in GPE , near ORG . The applicant could not attend her children 's funeral , because at that time she was being treated for her wounds by relatives in PERSON . She could not produce any documents about her children 's deaths nor about her own wounds , because no hospital or state body was functioning in GPE due to the hostilities . The applicant could not even obtain a burial certificate from the local authority . She requested that the second applicant and PERSON be called to testify about her children 's deaths , to which they had been eyewitnesses . At that time they were all living in the NORP refugee camp in GPE . The court decision was required to obtain death certificates , which the civil registration body had refused to issue in the absence of medical certification of the deaths .

On DATE the ORG granted the first applicant 's request . From the transcript of the proceedings it follows that the court heard the first applicant , who repeated her statement , and CARDINAL witnesses as she had requested . PERSON and the second applicant confirmed the deaths of PERSON and ORG ( see § DATE above ) .

Article CARDINAL of the LAW of GPE protects the right to life .

Article CARDINAL of the LAW guarantees the protection of rights and liberties in a court of law by providing that the decisions and actions of any public authority may be appealed to a court of law . LAW same LAW guarantees the right to apply to international bodies for the protection of human rights once domestic legal remedies have been exhausted .

Articles CARDINAL and CARDINAL provide that the rights of victims of crime and abuse of power shall be protected by law . They are guaranteed access to the courts and compensation by the ORG for damage caused by the unlawful actions of a public authority .

Article CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) provides for the restriction of rights and liberties by federal law , but only to the extent required for the protection of the fundamental principles of the constitutional system , morality , health , rights and lawful interests of other persons , the defence of the country and the security of the state .

Article CARDINAL of the LAW provides that a state of emergency may be declared in accordance with federal law . Certain rights , including the right to life and freedom from torture , may not be restricted .

Section CARDINAL of the Law on Defence ( Федеральный закон от CARDINAL мая DATE г. N CARDINAL-ФЗ " Об обороне " ) provides that “ supervision of adherence to laws and investigations of crimes committed in ORG , other Forces , military formations and authorities shall be exercised by ORG and subordinate prosecutors . Civil and criminal cases in ORG , other forces , military formations and authorities shall be examined by the courts in accordance with the legislation of GPE . ”

The PERSON on the Suppression of Terrorism ( Федеральный закон от CARDINAL DATE г. № DATE « О борьбе с терроризмом DATE ) provides as follows :

“ Section CARDINAL . Basic Concepts

For purposes of the present ORG the following basic concepts shall be applied :

... ' the suppression of terrorism ' shall refer to activities aimed at the prevention , detection , suppression and minimisation of the consequences of terrorist activities ;

' counter terrorist operation ' shall refer to special activities aimed at the prevention of terrorist acts , ensuring the security of individuals , neutralising terrorists and minimising the consequences of terrorist acts ;

' zone of a counter - terrorist operation ' shall refer to an individual terrain or water surface , means of transport , building , structure or LOC with adjacent territory where a counter - terrorist operation is conducted ; ...

Section CARDINAL . Legal regime in the zone of an anti - terrorist operation

In the zone of an anti - terrorist operation , the persons conducting the operation shall be entitled :

... CARDINAL ) to check the identity documents of private persons and officials and , where they have no identity documents , to detain them for identification ;

CARDINAL ) to detain persons who have committed or are committing offences or other acts in defiance of the lawful demands of persons engaged in an anti - terrorist operation , including acts of unauthorised entry or attempted entry to the zone of the anti - terrorist operation , and to convey such persons to the local bodies of ORG of GPE ;

CARDINAL ) to enter private residential or other LOC ... and means of transport while suppressing a terrorist act or pursuing persons suspected of committing such an act , when a delay may jeopardise human life or health ;

CARDINAL ) to search persons , their belongings and vehicles entering or exiting the zone of an anti - terrorist operation , including with the use of technical means ; ...

Section CARDINAL . Exemption from liability for damage

In accordance with and within the limits established by the legislation , damage may be caused to the life , health and property of terrorists , as well as to other legally - protected interests , in the course of conducting an anti - terrorist operation . However , servicemen , experts and other persons engaged in the suppression of terrorism shall be exempted from liability for such damage , in accordance with the legislation of GPE . ”

Articles CARDINAL - CARDINAL of LAW ( Гражданский процессуальный PERSON ) ) , in force at the material time , contained general formal requirements governing an application to a court , including , inter alia , the defendant 's name and address , the exact circumstances on which the claim was based and any documents supporting the claim .

Article CARDINAL part CARDINAL provided that the court had to suspend consideration of a case if it could not be considered until completion of another set of civil , criminal or administrative proceedings .

Article CARDINAL of the Code provided that if in the course of reviewing a complaint against the actions of an official or a civil claim a court came across information indicating that a crime had been committed , it was required to inform the prosecutor .

Chapter CARDINAL established that a citizen could apply to a court for redress in respect of unlawful actions by a state body or official . Such complaints could have been submitted to a court , either at the location of the state body or at the plaintiff 's place of residence , at the latter 's discretion . Under the same procedure , the courts could also rule on an award of damages , including non - pecuniary damages , where they concluded that a violation had occurred .

The Code of Criminal Procedure ( Уголовно-процессуальный PERSON РСФСР CARDINALг. с изменениями и дополнениями ) , in force at the material time , contained provisions relating to criminal investigations .

Article CARDINAL stated that where a victim had died as a result of a crime , his or her close relatives should be granted victim status . During the investigation the victim could submit evidence and bring motions , and once the investigation was complete the victim had full access to the case - file .

Article CARDINAL provided that criminal proceedings could be instituted on the basis of letters and complaints from citizens , public or private bodies , articles in the press or a discovery by an investigating body , prosecutor or court of evidence that a crime had been committed .

Article CARDINAL provided that the investigating body was to take one of the following decisions within a maximum period of DATE after notification of a crime : open or refuse to open a criminal investigation , or transmit the information to an appropriate body . The informants were to be informed of any decision .

Article CARDINAL provided , where an investigating body refused to open a criminal investigation , a reasoned decision was to be provided . The informant was to be made aware of the decision and could appeal to a higher - ranking prosecutor or to a court .

Article CARDINAL provided that military prosecutor 's office was responsible for the investigation of crimes committed by military servicemen in relation to their official duties or within the boundaries of a military unit .

Articles CARDINAL and CARDINAL contained information relating to the closure of a criminal investigation . Reasons for closing a criminal case included the absence of corpus delicti . Such decisions could be appealed to a higher - ranking prosecutor or to a court .

No state of emergency or martial law has been declared in GPE . No federal law has been enacted to restrict the rights of the population of the area . No derogation under LAW has been made .

On DATE ORG adopted Decree no . CARDINAL , by which an amnesty was granted in respect of criminal acts committed by the participants to the conflict on both sides in the period DATE and DATE . The amnesty does not apply to grievous crimes , such as murder .