All | 2023 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 |
Feb | Apr | Apr | Mar | Jan | Jan | Feb | Sep | Apr | Mar | Feb | Feb | |
Jun | May | Jun | Mar | Mar | Mar | Dec | Jun | Apr | Mar | Mar | ||
Jul | Jul | Dec | May | May | Jul | Aug | May | Jun | Apr | |||
Aug | Aug | Jun | Jun | Aug | Oct | Jun | Sep | May | ||||
Jul | Jul | Sep | Dec | Nov | Jun | |||||||
Aug | Aug | Oct | Dec | Jul | ||||||||
Nov | Sep | Nov | Sep | |||||||||
Dec | Oct | Dec | Oct | |||||||||
Nov | Dec | |||||||||||
16 January 2017
Russian Justice Initiative provided prosecutors in Dagestan with 42 anonymous interviews collected during a study of female genital mutilation in the republic
On December 13, 2016, Russian Justice Initiative received via fax an official request from the Dagestan Prosecutor’s Office, stating that, in order to conduct an investigation, we “must provide information, complete with personal details, confirming the practice of these operations, on individuals involved in performing these operations, on the victims of these operations, on the individuals who surveyed the women and the experts, and information on the women and experts mentioned in the study”. Russian Justice Initiative published the study on female genital mutilation in Dagestan, with open access, on August 15, 2016. The study is based on results obtained through an anonymous qualitative study on the practice of female genital mutilation of girls in the Republic of Dagestan.
24 November 2016
The ECHR ruled partially in favour on the case of Saypudinov v. Russia and ordered the Russian authorities to pay compensation to the applicant
During their work on the case, Russian Justice Initiative’s lawyers noted numerous violations committed in drawing up the interrogation reports and the conduct of the various investigation procedures. An application on the case was sent to the ECHR in 2011. The application affirmed that Articles 3 and 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms were violated with regard to Supaydinov.
11 November 2016
Moscow’s Perovo District Court returns custody rights to the mother of five children
“In November 2015, the UN Committee on Elimination of Discrimination against Women, in its comments on a report by the Russian Federation, noted that the idea in the North Caucasus that children ‘belong’ to the father means in practice that after divorce, women often lose all contact with their children”, said lawyer with Russian Justice Initiative Bike Gyulmagomedova. “Iman Khadzhimuradova’s case is thus not an exception but is a result of trends that Russia is supposed to combat. As yet, the situation has not changed, and after her divorce, Iman Khadzhimuradova was prevented from having any involvement in bringing up her children. This lack of contact with the children was the grounds the applicant then used to attempt to have Iman deprived of her parental rights. The Perovo District Court rejected the applicant’s demand”.
1 November 2016
Response to Russian Government memorandum on the case of Leyla Muruzheva sent to the ECHR
We received the Government’s commentaries, which included among the attached documents, among others, the explanations of the children’s father, who took them from Muruzheva”, said lawyer with Russian Justice Initiative Bike Gyulmagomedova. “His explanations state that the children are at a health resort with their grandmother and ‘new mother’. Let me recall that in June 2014, the Izmailovsky District Court ruled that the children should live with their mother, but they have not been returned to her. The bailiffs say that the children’s emotional state prevents the court decision from being executed. The children’s reaction is understandable, given their age (four and eight), the length of time they have been separated from their mother (more than two-and-a-half years now), and the hostile attitude their father and his parents, who are effectively raising the children now, take towards their mother. We think that in this case, the Russian authorities did not take all the timely action that we would have expected of them to ensure the court decision’s enforcement, and in this way, they violated the applicant’s right to respect for her family life, guaranteed in Article 8”.
7 October 2016
Amur Khakulov, denied release from on health grounds by the court, has died in a Kirov Region prison colony
Amur Khakulov was found guilty of involvement in the attack on Nalchik in October 2005 (trial of the 58). He spent more than 10 years in remand prison No. 1 in Nalchik, waiting for trial and for the sentence to take effect. While still at the remand prison, he was found to be suffering from chronic kidney failure, chronic kidney disease and other illnesses at the end of 2014, but there was practically no treatment of serious illnesses at the remand prison. This prompted Khakulov’s wife to turn to lawyers at Russian Justice Initiative in August 2015. She said that Khakulov was not receiving qualified medical aid, or the prescribed medicines essential for his health.