CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 21 février 2012

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } THIRD SECTION Application no. 65916/10 Anzor Chadidovich CHENTIEV and Ali Nurdinovich IBRAGIMOV against Slovakia lodged on 15 November 2010   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES     1.     In the light of the guarantees issued by the Russian Federation and having regard to the risk which the applicants allege to face, would their extradition be contrary to their rights under Article 3 of the Convention? In   particular, do the guarantees offered reliably protect the applicants from treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention given that the charges against them are based on statements allegedly extracted under torture?   2.     If extradited, would the applicants be at real risk of a flagrant denial of justice, contrary to Article 6 of the Convention, arising, in particular, from the use of evidence obtained by treatment contrary to Article 3 (see also the recapitulation of the relevant principles in Othman (Abu Qatada) v.   the United Kingdom, no. 8139/09, §§ 258-267, 17 January 2012)?   3.     Does the fact that proceedings concerning the applicants’ asylum requests are currently pending constitute a sufficient guarantee that they will not be extradited prior to the outcome of those proceedings and, as the case might be, any ensuing proceedings which the applicants may initiate before the Constitutional Court?