CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 17 avril 2012

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sE6469D77 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5BA5B7C7 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s25F5CC02 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } 17 April 2012 FIRST SECTION Application no. 31890/11 Nizomkhon Khaydarovich DZHURAYEV against Russia lodged on 23 May 2011 ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS 1.     In view of the applicant’s representatives’ submissions of 29 March and 9 April 2012, the Government are requested to comment on their substantiated assertion that the applicant was forcibly and unlawfully transferred to Tajikistan in the wake of his release from detention by the Russian authorities and that such an operation could not have been possible without active or passive involvement of Russian State agents. The Government are requested to explain, in particular, how the applicant had travelled to Tajikistan without his passport and without complying with the border and other formalities in the Russian Federation (see Iskandarov v.   Russia , no. 17185/05, §§ 113-115, 23 September 2010).   In answering this question the Government are requested to submit the relevant documents in support of their information, and, in particular, the following:   (a)     a list of investigative actions undertaken in response to the applicant’s representative’s request for opening of criminal proceedings submitted to the Investigative Department for the Zelenogradskiy District of Moscow on 3 April 2012; (b)     a decision to open or to refuse opening criminal proceedings on account of the applicant’s disappearance and alleged forcible transfer to Tajikistan; (c)     border control records of the Russian border post in Orenburg between 29 March and 7   April 2012; (d)     if available, CCTV footage (записи камер видеонаблюдения) of the Zelenograd detention centre IZ ‑ 50/12 covering the period between 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. on 29 March 2012.   2.     In view of the applicant’s representatives’ submissions of 29 March and 9 April 2012, has there been a hindrance by the State to the effective exercise of the applicant’s right of application enshrined in Article 34 of the Convention on account of the applicant’s alleged transfer to Tajikistan notwithstanding the interim measures applied by the Court?   3.     The Government are requested to provide the Court with their own substantiated explanation of the increased frequency of the applicants’ disappearance from Russia and subsequent emergence at the hands of the Tajikistani authorities, notwithstanding the application of the interim measures by the Court (see the appended letter by the Court’s Registrar of 25 January 2012 and the Committee of Ministers’ decision in the case of Iskandarov adopted on 8 March 2012 at the 1136th meeting of the Ministries’ Deputies, points 5-8). Do the Government consider that a lack of conclusive investigation of – and effective reaction to – the above incidents by the Russian authorities would amount to Russia’s failure to cooperate with the Court under Article 38 of the Convention, compelling it to draw such inferences and to take such steps as it deems appropriate (see Rules 44 A, B and C of the Rules of the Court)?