skip to content
News

ECHR Rules Against Georgia in Mukhtarli Case, Finds Violations of Article 3 and 5

On September 5, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) issued its judgment in the case of Mukhtarli v. Azerbaijan and Georgia, finding that Georgia had violated Articles 3 and 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights by failing to conduct an effective investigation into the abduction, ill-treatment and illegal transfer to Azerbaijan of journalist Afghan Mukhtarli. The Court ordered Georgia to pay EUR 10,000 for non-pecuniary damage and EUR 2,500 for costs and expenses.

Mukhtarli, an outspoken critic of the Azerbaijani Government, went missing from Tbilisi on May 29, 2017, only to resurface a day later in Baku custody. Amnesty International reported that the Azerbaijani journalist was “at risk of torture and other ill-treatment.” The journalist was sentenced to six years in prison in January 2018 on charges of illegal border crossing, smuggling money, and police disobedience. He was released from Azerbaijani prison in March 2020.

The ECHR found that Georgia failed to conduct an effective investigation into the case, despite it initiating the investigation on May 30, 2017, immediately after being informed of the abduction, under Article 143 Part 1 of the Criminal Code (the offense of unlawful deprivation of liberty). The Court found Georgia guilty of violating Articles 3 (prohibition of torture) and 5 (right to liberty and security) of the Convention, but found no violation of the substantive parts of those articles.

As regards Azerbaijan, the ECHR found a violation of Article 5(3) and Article 8 (respect for your private and family life). The Court ordered Azerbaijan to pay EUR 6,000 for non-pecuniary damage and EUR 2,500 for costs and expenses.

Notably, in their joint concurring opinion, Judges Šimáčková and Elósegui fully agreed with the Chamber’s findings, but expressed concern that the investigation in Georgia lacked independence due to political influence. They criticized the Chamber for not sufficiently addressing this issue, in particular the influence of high-level officials on the investigation and the credibility of the allegations against the applicant in Azerbaijan. They stressed that political statements should not influence the investigation or the judicial process and underlined that police officers are more susceptible to political pressure than judges, which could undermine the impartiality of the investigation.

Also Read:

This post is also available in: ქართული (Georgian) Русский (Russian)

მსგავსი/Related

Back to top button