| Applicant name | OKSUZOGLU |
| Applicant type | Natural person |
| Number of applicants | 1 |
| Country | Ukraine |
| Application no. | 56669/18 |
| Date | 31/08/2023 |
| Judges | Lado Chanturia, President, Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, Mykola Gnatovskyy |
| Institution | Court |
| Type | Judgment |
| Outcome Art. 8 | Violation |
| Reason | Positive obligation |
| Type of privacy | Relational privacy |
| Keywords | Abduction child; virtually no action authorities |
| Facts of the case | Child is kidnapped, most likely by his biological farther, who lives separated from mother and child in Djibouti. |
| Analysis | Applicant invokes both Article 2 and 8 ECHR, but because there are no signs that the life or well-being of the child is at risk, the Court solely assesses the case in light of the latter provision. Under that provision, the applicant complained both that the authorities had allegedly failed to prevent and that they had failed to adequately respond to the kidnapping. Interestingly, the Court does not want to accept a positive obligation on Member States to prevent abduction, but holds that ‘even if’ that were a positive obligation, the applicant had not indicated to the authorities that the alleged risk of kidnapping was real and/or imminent so as to potentially require them to take certain measures to avoid it. That is why the ECtHR only focusses on the actions taken by the authorities subsequent to the event. On that point, the ECtHR simply holds that the authorities acknowledge that there were serious shortcomings in the official investigation, and that there is no indication that the criticism at the domestic level of the investigators’ failures and inactivity has led to any improvement in the investigation that has been ongoing with no identifiable progress for over seven years. Thus, a violation of the right to privacy is found. |
| Other Article violation? | No violation Article 2 ECHR |
| Damage awarded | (i) EUR 9,000 (nine thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage; (ii) EUR 2,000 (two thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant, in respect of legal costs incurred in the domestic proceedings and when lodging her application with the Court, to be paid directly into the bank account indicated by the applicant; (iii) EUR 1,000 (one thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant, in respect of legal costs incurred when preparing her observations in the proceedings before the Court, to be paid directly into the bank account indicated by Mr M. Tarakhkalo; |
| Documents | Judgment |