CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 octobre 2014

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sDD7CB8CD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:7pt } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase }     Communicated on 13 October 2014   FIRST SECTION Application no. 43955/11 Rimma Vasilyevna MAKSIMOVA and Sergey Mikhailovich KAPUSTIN against Russia lodged on 30 June 2011 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicants, Mr Rimma Vasilyevna Maksimova and Mr Sergey Mikhailovich Kapustin, are German and Russian nationals, who were born in 1941 and 1963, respectively, and live in Potsdam and Moscow, respectively. They are represented before the Court by Mr P. Leach, Ms   J.   Evans and Mr B. Bowring, lawyers of the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC), an NGO based in London. The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. The first applicant is the mother of Mr Maksim Maksimov, who worked at the material time as an investigative journalist in St   Petersburg. The second applicant is Mr Maksimov’s cousin. In June 2004 Mr Maksimov was carrying out a journalistic investigation into corruption among senior officers of the Ministry of the Interior. In particular, he was interested in the activities of Mr M.S., then a deputy head of a police department, and his subordinates. At around 7.30 p.m. on 29 June 2004 Mr Maksimov called his girlfriend, Ms A., and told her he was going to a meeting and that he would join her in her country house immediately after it. Neither Ms A. nor any other friend or relative has heard from Mr Maksimov since that moment. On 30 June or 1 July 2004 Ms A. went to the police to report her boyfriend’s disappearance. The police refused to register her report for the reason that she was not a family member. On 6 July 2004 the first applicant travelled from Potsdam to Russia to look for her son. On 9 July 2004 she visited police station no. 78 of St   Petersburg and reported her son’s disappearance. On the same date the police officers in her presence examined Mr Maksimov’s flat and seized a phone and a computer hard drive. On 15 July 2004 the Tsentralnyy district prosecutor’s office of St   Petersburg (“the district prosecutor’s office”) opened a criminal investigation into Mr Maksimov’s disappearance in case no. 747506 under Article 105 of the Russian Criminal Code (“murder”). Shortly after the investigators questioned the first applicant. On 24 July 2004 a police raid was carried out in the course of which Mr   Maksimov’s mobile phone was seized from Mr V.M. who claimed that he had bought a second-hand phone from an unknown seller at an electric goods’ market in St Petersburg. On 28 July 2004 Mr Maksimov’s abandoned car was found on a street of St   Petersburg. On 2 August 2004 the first applicant was granted victim status in case no. 747506. On two occasions, on 15 September and 4 November 2004, the term of investigation was extended. On 27 December 2004 the district prosecutor’s office decided to suspend the investigation owing to the impossibility to identify the perpetrators. The first applicant was not notified of the decision. On an unspecified date Mr I., allegedly a paid informer of Mr M.S., informed Mr Maksimov’s colleagues that Mr M.S. had instructed him to lure Mr   Maksimov inside a building in St Petersburg under the pretense of a meeting, where Mr M.S. or his acolytes had killed Mr Maksimov. Then Mr   M.S. and Mr L.P. had taken Mr Maksimov’s dead body to a forest and had buried him there. Mr I. also indicated the approximate area of the burial. The journalists gave Mr I.’s written statement to the investigators. On 8 April 2005 the deputy prosecutor of St Petersburg quashed the decision of 27 December 2004 owing to incompleteness of the investigation and indicated a number of investigative steps to be taken. In particular, it was deemed necessary to verify whether a certain Mr T. had been involved in Mr   Maksimov’s disappearance; to look for matches for the fingerprints discovered in Mr Maksimov’s car in the forensic fingerprints’ database; and to obtain and analyse records of Mr Maksimov’s mobile phone activity. On 13 May 2005 the investigation in case no. 747506 was suspended. It was resumed on 15 June 2005. On 6 July 2005 the first applicant was notified accordingly. By letter of 29 July 2005 the first applicant was notified that the Deputy Prosecutor General of Russia had opened a criminal investigation in case no. 172604 and had brought charges of corruption against Mr M.S., Mr L.P. and Mr A.B., officers of the Ministry of the Interior. The letter stated, in particular, that, according to the unidentified sources, the three officers had possibly been involved in the murder of Mr Maksimov, that cases nos.   172604 and 747506 might be joined at a later stage and that the first applicant would be informed of any further progress. On 25 April 2006 the North-West Federal Circuit Prosecutor’s Office notified the first applicant that the investigation into her son’s disappearance was ongoing and that no proof of involvement of Mr M.S. and Mr L.P. in the crime in question had been found. On 2 May 2006 the district prosecutor’s office informed the first applicant that they had searched for her son’s remains in forests and bodies of water in the St Petersburg area but in vain. On 6 October 2006 the first applicant was informed that the investigation into Mr Maksimov’s disappearance had been extended until 15   November 2006. On 2 November 2007 the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia informed the first applicant that the investigation in case no. 747506 had been extended until 5 February 2007. On 1 February 2008 they informed the first applicant that the investigation was again extended until 5 April   2007. It appears that there were clerical errors in the letters, which should have read “5 February 2008” and “5 April 2008”, respectively. On 7 April 2008 the investigation was suspended for a failure to identify those responsible. On the same date the first applicant was notified accordingly. She was also advised of her opportunity to appeal against the decision on suspension. On 9 January 2009 the first applicant wrote to the deputy head of the Investigative Committee of Prosecutor’s Office of Russia (“the investigative committee”) demanding to find the perpetrators. On 27 February 2009 the deputy head replied that all requisite measures had been taken but in vain and stated that there were no grounds to quash the decision of 7 April   2008. On 17 September 2009 the first applicant demanded the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia to resume the investigation in case no.   747506. On 18 January 2010 the investigation was resumed for one month and requisite investigative measures to be taken were indicated, such as an additional questioning of Mr M.S. and Mr L.P. On 18 February 2010 it was again suspended. On 30 July 2010 the investigation was once again resumed until 30   October 2010. Later the investigation deadline was extended until 30   December 2010. It appears that at some point in time additional witnesses were questioned but no progress was made in establishing Mr   Maksimov’s whereabouts. COMPLAINTS 1.     The applicants complain under Article 2 of the Convention that State agents, namely S. and P., were personally responsible for abducting and killing Mr Maksimov. They further complain under the same head as well as under Article 13 of the Convention that the investigation in Mr   Maksimov’s case did not meet the procedural requirements of Article   2 of the Convention. 2.     The first applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention that her son’s disappearance has caused her profound anguish and distress.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of Article 2 of the Convention in respect of the disappearance and presumed murder of Mr Maksim Maksimov? In particular, has the State complied with its obligation to carry out a thorough investigation into the crime in question?   2.     Has there been a breach of Article 3 of the Convention in respect of the first applicant on account of her mental suffering caused by her son’s disappearance?   3.     Can the second applicant claim to be the victim of an alleged violation of Article 2 of the Convention, that is, could he be considered as a person directly affected by the Mr Maksim Maksimov’s disappearance and presumed murder (see, mutatis mutandis , Lüdi v. Switzerland , 15 June   1992, § 34, Series A no. 238, and Velikova v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 41488/98, 18   May 1999)?