The European court of human rights ordered the Russian government to pay 12 million euros for three of the victims during the shooting, which staged in a Moscow supermarket in 2009, the head of the ATS “Tsaritsyno” major Denis Onkar. Russia was found guilty of violation of the right to life.
Payment needs to obtain Alain Dugal, Ilya Gerasimenko and Louise Salikhova, said the court’s decision.
“In the ECHR decision, we shall not stop. We will go to national courts to cancel the decision of the Tver court. The decision of the European court is a new circumstance, which allows you to cancel the decision of the national court”, – told RBC lawyer Alena, Dudal Irina Khrunova.
We are talking about the refusal to satisfy the demands of the injured, Dual on payment to her of compensation by the state for moral damages in the amount of one million rubles. The girl, who was injured scapula, had to finish his career skater. In the appeal to the ECHR, she claimed that the officer was trying to kill her service weapon, which was because in the police Department improperly valued personality Evsyukova and its potential danger.
“The court concluded that the state had not fulfilled its positive obligations under article 2 (European Convention on human rights) to take appropriate measures to protect the life of people under its jurisdiction. To guarantee a careful selection and control of government servants who are permitted to carry a firearm,” reads the court’s decision.
We will remind, Denis Yevsyukov, head of ATS “tsarina” in the rank of major of militia, on the night of April 27, 2009, while allegedly in a state of alcoholic intoxication and being dressed in a police jacket, shot from the gun driver podveska his car Sergey Evteeva and the cashier in the supermarket “Island” Elmira Turdaevu, and wounded several people – he fired even arrived at the emergency colleagues.
Alain Dugal was wounded in the neck and a fracture of the left scapula. Gerasimenko and Salikhova Onkar shot in the head. In the first case the bullet entered the ear and came out near his nose. Another shot caused the rupture of the spleen, penetrating wound to the liver and diaphragm. In the second case the bullet entered the left cheek and out the other side, shattering the lower jaw.
Psychological and psychiatric examination did not reveal Evsyukova mental disorders, however, revealed that in childhood he suffered a severe brain injury and was even exempted from the examination on medical grounds. This led to emotional instability, excitability, anxiety and behavioral disorders.
On 19 February 2010 the Moscow city court sentenced to life imprisonment Evsyukova which he is serving in a colony “the polar owl” in the village of Kharp in the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous district. He pleaded partially guilty. Major could not explain where he got the ammunition and the gun, and claimed he did not know yourself on the CCTV footage. He also could not explain his actions, but one of the interrogations, said that if he had a gun, the shooting would have brought him more pleasure.
The Moscow city court has recognized that when taking Evsyukova to work and the promotion of its service had violated the police act and departmental orders of the Ministry of interior. Also the court has satisfied requirements Gerasimenko and Salikhova about compensation Yevsyukov treatment costs of $ 19 and 27 thousand rubles and compensation for moral damages in the amount of 350 and 250 thousand, respectively. Subsequently it became clearthat Onkar is bankrupt – it has no money and is not expected.
The requirements of all three victims the state was rejected. However, as they pointed out in the appeal to the ECHR, the 52nd article of the Constitution says that the rights of victims of crime and abuse of power are protected by law, the state guarantees victims access to justice and compensation for damages, while article 53 States: “Everyone has the right to state compensation for damages caused by unlawful actions or inaction of state authorities or officials”.
Committed by a police officer a crime had the big public resonance, has led to a series of resignations and changes in the impending at the time the law “On police” – he withdrew the controversial rule on “presumption of legality” of the actions of the guards.