CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 18 janvier 2017

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 18 January 2017   THIRD SECTION Application no. 9350/14 Umatgirey Alautdinovich KARTOYEV and Tanzila Tarkhanovna KARTOYEVA against Russia lodged on 25 December 2013 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicants argued that their son had been ill-treated and killed in detention either by inmates or prison guards. The applicants also complained about the authorities’ failure to carry out an effective investigation into the events. QUESTIONs tO THE PARTIES 1.     Have the applicants’ son’s rights, guaranteed by Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention, been violated in the present case? In particular, did his death result from ill-treatment by either inmates or prison guards?   2.     Was the investigation by the domestic authorities into the alleged ill ‑ treatment and death of the applicants’ son in breach of Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 104, ECHR   2000-VII; Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 131, ECHR   2000 ‑ IV)?