issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 166 (2022)
24.05.2022
Judgments of 24 May 2022
The European Court of Human Rights has today given notification in writing of seven judgments1:
two Chamber judgments are summarised below;
separate press releases have been issued for two other Chamber judgments in the cases of Pretorian
v. Romania (application no. 45014/16) and Alıcı and Others v. Turkey (no. 70098/12);
three Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court, can
The judgments below are available only in English.
Dokukiny v. Russia (application no. 1223/12)
The applicants, Yuliya Dokukina and Alina Dokukina, are Russian nationals who were born in 1976
and 2005 respectively and live in Lipetsk (Russia). They are mother and daughter. The latter was four
years old at the time of the events.
The case concerns their alleged ill-treatment by the police after they were stopped in a park shortly
before midnight with their husband/father and another family. The two fathers were taken to the
police station for “disturbance of public order accompanied by obscene language in a public place”.
They were released the next day.
Relying on Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention on
Human Rights the applicants allege that they were pushed and kicked while their husband/father
was being taken away by the police and that no effective investigation was carried out into their
complaints.
Violation of Article 3 (investigation and ill-treatment)
Just satisfaction:
non-pecuniary damage: 10,000 euros (EUR) to each applicant
costs and expenses: EUR 70
Sinan Çetinkaya and Ağyar Çetinkaya v. Turkey (nos. 74536/10 and 75462/10)
The applicants, Sinan Çetinkaya and Ağyar Çetinkaya, are Turkish nationals who were born in 1966
and 1964 respectively and live in Istanbul.
They were the general director and chairman of the board of directors of a car company and, in
1999, were charged with allegedly having obtained bank loans from the Ziraat Bank on behalf of
76 customers by using forged documents and for using those loans for personal purposes. In the
meantime, due to the introduction of a new law, the legal status of the Ziraat Bank changed from a
public bank into a public limited company, with the result that its employees were no longer
1
Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a Chamber
judgment’s delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a
panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and
deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the
Convention, judgments delivered by a Committee are final.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution
