CCPR/C/130/D/2866/2016
7.2
The Committee notes the author’s claim that Mr. Fiziyev died on 30 July 2011 as a
result of multiple injuries inflicted by officers of the State Committee for National Security,
after his arrest on the night of 29 July 2011. The State party claims that Mr. Fiziyev was
injured during apprehension, when he jumped from the roof, was caught by a service dog and
then beaten by officers K. and B. The Committee notes that the forensic medical
examinations performed on Mr. Fiziyev’s body, finalized in a forensic report dated 9
September 2011, indicated traumatic shock, numerous wounds, haemorrhages and several
broken ribs and bones as the cause of death, possibly caused by blunt solid objects. The same
forensic report indicated that any independent movement by Mr. Fiziyev would be impossible
with such injuries. The Committee notes that the State party does not contest the results of
the above-mentioned forensic report. However, the State party does not address, in that regard,
the author’s submission that her brother was seen walking to the State Committee facility on
his own, a fact that was confirmed by at least two eye witnesses and that seems incompatible
with the conclusion, as reflected in the forensic report that, under the circumstances, any
independent movement, including walking, would have been impossible for Mr. Fiziyev.
Neither does the State party explain why the author’s brother was taken to the State
Committee facility and interrogated there, if he had been injured to such an extent during
apprehension, without being urgently provided with medical assistance and without any
record taken by State Committee officers of his condition. The Committee refers to paragraph
25 of its general comment No. 36 (2018) on the right to life, according to which the States
parties have a heightened duty of care to take any necessary measures to protect the lives of
individuals deprived of their liberty by the State, since by depriving individuals of their
liberty, States parties assume the responsibility to care for their lives and bodily integrity.
7.3
In the present case, the State party refers to the results of the investigations according
to which Mr. Fiziyev’s injuries were inflicted during his apprehension. It then concludes that
the guilt of the two arresting officers could not be proven in domestic courts. It therefore
remains unclear from the State party’s observations how and by whom Mr. Fiziyev was so
badly injured. At the same time, the State party does not deny that the author’s brother died
in the custody of the State Committee for National Security from the injuries inflicted by
unidentified State officers and after having been interrogated by them. In that regard, the
Committee notes that the State party did not address the author’s claim that her brother’s
screams of pain were heard by at least two witnesses in the State Committee facility from the
time of his arrival, at approximately 12.20 a.m. on 30 July 2011, until later that morning. In
the light of the detailed information provided by the author and in absence of clear arguments
from the State party to rebut the author’s claims, the Committee accepts the author’s
allegations that her brother died in the State Committee facility from the injuries inflicted by
State officers. Accordingly, the Committee considers that the facts as submitted reveal a
violation of Mr. Fiziyev’s rights under articles 6 (1) and 7 of the Covenant.
7.4
The Committee notes the author’s claim that the torture and death of her brother have
not been properly investigated and that no one has been held responsible. The Committee
recalls its jurisprudence, according to which States parties, by arresting and detaining
individuals, take responsibility to care for their lives,2 and that criminal investigation and
subsequent prosecution are necessary remedies for violations of human rights, such as those
protected by article 6 of the Covenant.3 The Committee also recalls its general comments No.
31 and No. 36, in which it stated that, where investigations reveal violations of certain
Covenant rights, such as those protected under articles 6 and 7, States parties must ensure
that those responsible are brought to justice.4 Although the obligation to bring to justice those
2
3
4
Lantsova v. Russian Federation (CCPR/C/74/D/763/1997), para. 9.2; Boboev v. Tajikistan
(CCPR/C/120/D/2173/2012), para. 9.3; and Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 36
(2018) on the right to life, para. 25.
Sathasivam and Saraswathi v. Sri Lanka (CCPR/C/93/D/1436/2005), para. 6.4; Umetaliev and
Tashtanbekova v. Kyrgyzstan (CCPR/C/94/D/1275/2004), para. 9.2; and Boboev v. Tajikistan, para.
9.3. See also the Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death, para. 17.
Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 31 (2004) on the nature of the general legal
obligation imposed on States parties to the Covenant, para. 18; and Human Rights Committee,
general comment No. 36, para. 27.
5