The European Court of Human Rights has passed one more judgment against Georgia.
In the case of Tsintsabadze vs Georgia (case # 35403/06), the ECHR concluded that the defendant state (Georgia) had breached Article II of the European Convention of Human Rights. This breech was due to the fact that an independent, impartial and effective investigation was not carried out on behalf of the death of Zurab Tsintsabadze, who was imprisoned in 2005.
The Georgian Young Lawyers Association (GYLA) and the European Human Rights Advocacy Center (EHRAC) represented the plaintiff at the ECHR.
The representatives of the GYLA said Zurab Tsintsabadze was sentenced to 3-years in prisonment and served his term in Khoni Jail # 9 beginning on July 6, 2005. On September 30, 2005 Tsintsabadze was found hung in the store-room of the jail. According to the investigation, Tsintsabadze committed suicide but the mother of the dead prisoner claimed that her son was killed for the so-called “collective money” in the jail.
The ECHR stated that although the investigation was immediately launched on behalf of Tsintsabadze’s death and many urgent measures were taken, serious shortcomings and mistakes were made during the investigative activities; so many circumstances remained unclear in Tsintsabadze’s case.
The investigation was carried out by the department which is subordinate to the penitentiary ministry. Therefore, the impartiality of the investigation procedures is suspicious.
Many mistakes were made during the investigation activities. The court underscored the following: “prison personnel, who should have been confused and astonished by the incident, took off the prisoner’s shoes, searched his pockets and removed such important evidence from the scene of the accident such as the chairs and rope made out of the duvet which Tsintsabadze had supposedly used to hang himself.”
According to independent Forensic Experts, aside from the strangulation trace, which was detected by the investigation experts, the corpse had other injuries on the neck. The injuries were caused by a blunt object; however the investigation executed unilaterally and relied only on the results of the investigation experts.
The love letter was assumed to be written to his former wife and was declared by the investigative team as the main reason for the suicide. However, the letter was dated a month later than Tsintsabadze’s actual death. In addition, the addressee was to a “Nino”, while Tsintsabadze’s former wife’s name was Maka.
Moreover, the letter was found in the mortuary a month later. The court stressed : “The validity of this proof cannot stand any criticism.” The investigation institutions did not consider the version of Tsintsabadze’s murder although the plaintiff always alleged that her son had problems regarding “collective money” and had asked family members to transfer money for that purpose. The investigation did not properly study the testimony of Tsintsabadze’s cell-mate who spoke about his debts and related problems with other influential prisoners.
The state of Georgia shall pay 15, 000 Euro to Zurab Tsintsabadze’s mother for emotional damages.
In the case of Tsintsabadze vs Georgia (case # 35403/06), the ECHR concluded that the defendant state (Georgia) had breached Article II of the European Convention of Human Rights. This breech was due to the fact that an independent, impartial and effective investigation was not carried out on behalf of the death of Zurab Tsintsabadze, who was imprisoned in 2005.
The Georgian Young Lawyers Association (GYLA) and the European Human Rights Advocacy Center (EHRAC) represented the plaintiff at the ECHR.
The representatives of the GYLA said Zurab Tsintsabadze was sentenced to 3-years in prisonment and served his term in Khoni Jail # 9 beginning on July 6, 2005. On September 30, 2005 Tsintsabadze was found hung in the store-room of the jail. According to the investigation, Tsintsabadze committed suicide but the mother of the dead prisoner claimed that her son was killed for the so-called “collective money” in the jail.
The ECHR stated that although the investigation was immediately launched on behalf of Tsintsabadze’s death and many urgent measures were taken, serious shortcomings and mistakes were made during the investigative activities; so many circumstances remained unclear in Tsintsabadze’s case.
The investigation was carried out by the department which is subordinate to the penitentiary ministry. Therefore, the impartiality of the investigation procedures is suspicious.
Many mistakes were made during the investigation activities. The court underscored the following: “prison personnel, who should have been confused and astonished by the incident, took off the prisoner’s shoes, searched his pockets and removed such important evidence from the scene of the accident such as the chairs and rope made out of the duvet which Tsintsabadze had supposedly used to hang himself.”
According to independent Forensic Experts, aside from the strangulation trace, which was detected by the investigation experts, the corpse had other injuries on the neck. The injuries were caused by a blunt object; however the investigation executed unilaterally and relied only on the results of the investigation experts.
The love letter was assumed to be written to his former wife and was declared by the investigative team as the main reason for the suicide. However, the letter was dated a month later than Tsintsabadze’s actual death. In addition, the addressee was to a “Nino”, while Tsintsabadze’s former wife’s name was Maka.
Moreover, the letter was found in the mortuary a month later. The court stressed : “The validity of this proof cannot stand any criticism.” The investigation institutions did not consider the version of Tsintsabadze’s murder although the plaintiff always alleged that her son had problems regarding “collective money” and had asked family members to transfer money for that purpose. The investigation did not properly study the testimony of Tsintsabadze’s cell-mate who spoke about his debts and related problems with other influential prisoners.
The state of Georgia shall pay 15, 000 Euro to Zurab Tsintsabadze’s mother for emotional damages.
Interpresnews
News
December 13, 2023
Ethnic minorities outside the peace dialogue
November 6, 2023
‘Peace’ agenda of political parties
Popular
Articles
February 13, 2024
Why are Ossetians affected by the conflict unable to regain Georgian citizenship and their property?
