CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 25 juin 2019

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s3B53EBD5 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:8pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Communicated on 8 November 2017 and 25 June 2019   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 51456/17 Dmytro Sergiyovych PONOMARENKO and Rayisa Oleksandrivna PONOMARENKO against Ukraine lodged on 20 July 2017 The facts and complaints in this application have been summarised in the Court’s Statement of facts and Questions to the parties, which is available in HUDOC. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Having regard to the procedural protection of the right to life (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 104, ECHR 2000 ‑ VII; and Karpylenko v. Ukraine , no. 15509/12, § 96, 11 February 2016), was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article 2 of the Convention?