CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 16 février 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 4 March 2024   FIFTH SECTION Applications nos. 28145/19 and 18122/22 Galyna Vasylivna ALYAPINA against Ukraine lodged on 17 May 2019 and 28 March 2022 respectively communicated on 16 February 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES The applications concern the death of the applicant’s son and subsequent investigation into those events. In October 2014 the body of the applicant’s son was discovered in a car with gunshot wounds. Later, the applicant’s son’s friends clarified that on the night before his death, four individuals wearing camouflage attire had stopped all of them, fired shots, injuring the applicant’s son, and then transported them to a location where a special Ukrainian volunteer battalion was stationed. On the next day the applicant’s son’s friends were released. On 23   October 2014 an investigation into the applicant’s son’s death was launched and it has been pending ever since. In 2019 the applicant filed a compensation claim for the death of her son against the State Treasury and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine, the latter, according to the applicant, being responsible for the battalion in question. On 7 May 2020 the court partly allowed her claim and awarded 250,000 Ukrainian hryvnas (at the material time around 6,140 euros) from the State of Ukraine in compensation for the lack of effective investigation. The applicant appealed, stating that the court had misinterpreted her claim, since she had sought compensation for the unlawful taking of life. The appellate court and the SC upheld the lower court’s judgment on 3 November 2020 and 29 September 2021, respectively.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1. Having regard to the procedural protection of the right to life (see paragraph   104 of Salman v.   Turkey [GC], no.   21986/93, ECHR 2000-VII), was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article   2 of the Convention?   2. Has the applicant’s son’s right to life, ensured by Article   2 of the Convention, been violated in the present case? Is the State responsible for the death of the applicant’s son (see Avşar v. Turkey , no. 25657/94, §§ 413-16, ECHR 2001‑VII)?