CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 15 mars 2018

.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 } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s8F670191 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold }   Communicated on 15 March 2018   THIRD SECTION Application no. 54363/17 Grigor NARAYAN and others against Azerbaijan and two other applications (see list appended) STATEMENT OF FACTS A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix.   The applicants, who are Armenian nationals, are the parents and siblings of Mr Edgar Narayan, born in 1995, Mr Erik Abovyan, born in 1996, and Mr Shavarsh Melikyan, born in 1990, who were soldiers in the Armed Forces of the Republic of Armenia and were killed on 29 December 2016 while being on duty at the military position “Bitlis”, close to Chinari village in the Tavush region of Armenia. They are represented before the Court by Mr Artak Zeynalyan and Mr Ara Ghazaryan, Yerevan. The facts of the cases, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. In the morning of 29 December 2016 Mr Çingiz Gurbanov (see Salman   Gurbanov v. Armenia , application no. 7432/17), a soldier in the Azerbaijani Armed Forces, crossed the border into Armenian territory and advanced towards “Bitlis”. At around 8.30 a.m., Mr Narayan and Mr   Abovyan left the “Bitlis” trench shelter to go to the toilet and to collect water from some canisters. Both were unarmed. Shots were fired which, it was later discovered, killed Mr Narayan and Mr Abovyan. The other soldiers at the military position immediately ran in the direction of the sound of the shots. Shots were exchanged and a third Armenian soldier, Mr   Melikyan, was killed. Armenian reinforcements arrived and, after one hour of occasional crossfire, the shots from the other side stopped. The dead bodies of the three Armenian soldiers were found on the ground along with the corpse of Mr   Gurbanov. A rifle, additional magazines and spent cartridge cases were found next to Mr Gurbanov’s body. A criminal investigation was opened by the Chief Military Investigation Department of the Investigative Committee of Armenia on 29 December 2016. The investigator examined the site of the incident and drew up a report. Forensic medical examinations of the bodies of the three Armenian soldiers were initiated on 30 December 2016 and concluded with reports of 1, 25 and 3 March 2017, respectively. The medical reports stated that the three soldiers had died from gunshot wounds to the thorax and neck (Mr   Narayan), to the abdomen, thorax and right leg (Mr Abovyan) and to the head (Mr Melikyan). According to a report of 3 May 2017 on the forensic examination of the rifle carried by Mr Gurbanov, the fatal shots had been fired from that rifle. According to the applicants, Azerbaijan has recognised that its soldier, Mr Gurbanov, killed the Armenian soldiers. Nonetheless, it has not made any investigation of the circumstances of the killings; instead, the State has praised the acts, inter alia , by posthumously giving Mr Gurbanov the title of “National Hero of Azerbaijan” and by naming a street after him. COMPLAINTS 1.     The applicants complain under Article 2 of the Convention about the deaths of Mr Narayan, Mr Abovyan and Mr Melikyan. They argue that the three soldiers were unlawfully killed, since there was no armed conflict at the time and the soldiers did not pose any threat. Thus, their deaths did not result from a use of force which was “absolutely necessary”. Mr Gurbanov, a soldier in the Azerbaijani Armed Forces, crossed the border and initiated the shooting and acted as a State agent of Azerbaijan. The alleged violations thus come under the jurisdiction of Azerbaijan under Article 1. 2.     The applicants claim that there has also been a violation of the procedural obligations under Article 2 since Azerbaijan has failed to conduct an investigation into the killings by Mr Gurbanov. 3.     Under Article 14 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 2, they further complain that the killings constituted a hate crime and that both the killings and the lack of an investigation were a result of ethnic hatred towards the Armenian victims, allegedly a policy widely advocated by Azerbaijan. 4.     Finally, the applicants maintain that, in breach of Article 13 of the Convention, there is no remedy in Azerbaijan in respect of the alleged violations which could be accessible and effective for Armenians. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Do the facts of which the applicants complain fall under the jurisdiction of Azerbaijan?   2.     Have the applicants’ relatives’ right to life, ensured by Article 2 of the Convention, been violated in the present case? In particular, did their deaths result from a use of force which was absolutely necessary?   3.     Having regard to the procedural protection of the right to life (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 104, ECHR 2000-VII), was there an investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention?   4.     Do the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for their Convention complaints, within the meaning of Article 13 of the Convention? If so, have they exhausted this remedy, as required by Article   35 § 1 (see further Sargsyan v. Azerbaijan [GC], no. 40167/06, §§   115-120, ECHR 2015)?   5.     Have the applicants suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of their Convention rights due to ethnicity or nationality or on any other ground contrary to Article 14 of the Convention?   6.     Finally, the Government are requested to provide all relevant information and documents concerning the case, together with English translations of all national documents submitted.   Appendix   No. Application no. Lodged on Applicant Date of birth Place of residence Represented by   54363/17 29/06/2017 Grigor Narayan 18/04/1963 Yerevan Piruza Boyajyan 10/10/1972 Yerevan Marine Narayan 02/11/1991 Yerevan Armine Narayan 12/09/1993 Yerevan   Artak Zeynalyan   Ara Ghazaryan   54364/17 29/06/2017 Gagik Abovyan 22/06/1964 Stepanavan Ruzanna Zargaryan 08/04/1971 Stepanavan Armen Abovyan 09/09/1998 Stepanavan   Artak Zeynalyan   Ara Ghazaryan   54365/17 29/06/2017 Melikset Melikyan 28/04/1961 Ashotsk Ruzan Petrosyan 20/02/1959 Ashotsk Neli Melikyan 13/08/1991 Ashotsk   Artak Zeynalyan   Ara Ghazaryan