5.  The applicants are:
1) Ms Leyla Isayevna Tsurova, who was born in 1973;
2) Mr Isa Beksultanovich Tsurov, who was born in 1948;
3) Mr Magomed Isayevich Tsurov, who was born in 1982; and
4) Ms Aminat Tarkhanovna Tsurova, who was born in 1949.
They live in the village of Voznesenovskaya, the Republic of Ingushetia. 6.  The second and fourth applicants are married. They are the parents of Mr Ibragim Isayevich Tsurov, born in 1970, and of the first and third applicants. 7.  On 26 April 2003 Ibragim Tsurov, an advocate admitted to the Bar of the Chechen Republic, was driving his VAZ-2110 car in the city of Grozny. He was accompanied by Mr A.S., Mr D.S. and Mr S.N., servicemen of military unit no. 98311. 8.  Several cars which had no registration numbers, including a VAZ-2107, a VAZ-2121 and a Volga with a flashing blue light, chased Ibragim Tsurov’s car and forced it to stop. A number of masked men got out of the vehicles, pointed their machine guns at Ibragim Tsurov and his passengers and ordered them to get out of the car and lie on the ground. 9.  Ibragim Tsurov produced a special pass issued by the commander of the United Group Alignment. The armed men hit him with a machine gun butt, put him into the boot of his car and drove away. 10.   On 26 April 2003 Ibragim Tsurov was driving the VAZ-211030 car with registration number B660PK15 from the village of Khankala, the Chechen Republic, to Vladikavkaz, the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania. There were three passengers in the car - Mr A.S., Mr D.S. and Mr S.N., servicemen of military unit no. 98311. At about 12.30 p.m. Ibragim Tsurov’s car was stopped by unidentified armed men wearing masks who were driving a VAZ-2107 and a VAZ-2121 cars without registration number plates. Using violence, they put Ibragim Tsurov into the boot of one of their cars and took him away to an unknown destination. They also stole his VAZ-211030 car. 11.  After Ibragim Tsurov’s abduction the applicants contacted various official bodies, both in person and in writing, trying to establish his whereabouts and fate. In particular, they applied to the prosecutors’ offices at different levels, the military commander’s office, the President of the Republic of Ingushetia, the Ministry of the Interior of the Chechen Republic, the Plenipotentiary Representative of the Russian President in the Southern Federal Circuit and the Russian State Duma. They were supported in their efforts by the SRJI. The complaints, even those signed by only one of the applicants, were lodged on behalf of the whole family. The applicants retained copies of some of these complaints and submitted them to the Court. The official bodies forwarded the majority of the complaints to the prosecutors’ offices for investigation. 12.  On 26 May 2003 the military prosecutor’s office of military unit no. 20102 (“the unit prosecutor’s office”) informed the first applicant that an inquiry had established that no military personnel had been implicated in Ibragim Tsurov’s abduction. 13.  On 18 June 2003 the prosecutor’s office of the city of Grozny (“the city prosecutor’s office”) instituted an investigation into Ibragim Tsurov’s disappearance and theft of his car under Article 126 § 2 (aggravated kidnapping) and Article 162 § 2 (aggravated robbery) of the Russian Criminal Code. The case file was given number 40086. 14.  On 30 June 2003 the city prosecutor’s office granted the first applicant victim status in case no. 40086. 15.  On 18 August 2003 the investigation in case no. 40086 was suspended for failure to identify the alleged perpetrators. 16.  On 28 August 2003 the prosecutor’s office of the Oktyabrskiy District of Grozny (“the district prosecutor’s office”) sent the first applicant a progress report on the investigation in case no. 40086. According to the report, the investigative authorities had sent requests concerning the fate of Ibragim Tsurov to the Federal Security Service (“FSB”) and the police, questioned the first applicant and witnesses to the kidnapping, collected references concerning Ibragim Tsurov’s character, given specific orders to the military prosecutor’s office of the United Group Alignment (“the UGA prosecutor’s office”) and the unit prosecutor’s office and initiated a search for Ibragim Tsurov’s car. 17.  In a letter of 30 August 2003 the Ministry of the Interior of the Chechen Republic informed the first applicant that an investigation into her brother’s kidnapping in case no. 40086 had been opened on an unspecified date. 18.  On 9 September 2003 the department of interior the Oktyabrskiy District (“ROVD”) informed the first applicant that an investigation of Ibragim Tsurov’s kidnapping had been commenced in case no. 40086 and that investigative measures were being taken to establish his whereabouts and identify those responsible. 19.  In a letter of 21 October 2003 the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic informed the first applicant that the investigation into Ibragim Tsurov’s kidnapping had been suspended and then resumed. 20.  On 24 October 2003 the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia informed the first applicant that the investigation in case no. 40086 was pending before the district prosecutor’s office and was being supervised by the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic. 21.  On 1 December 2003 the applicants requested the district prosecutor’s office to inform them of progress in the investigation. 22.  In a letter of 8 January 2004 the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic informed the SRJI that the investigation of Ibragim Tsurov’s disappearance was under way and that investigative measures were being taken to resolve the crime. 23.  On 18 January 2004 the Department of the FSB of the Republic of Ingushetia informed the second applicant that the FSB had no jurisdiction to investigate his son’s disappearance and that they had no information on Ibragim Tsurov’s whereabouts. 24.  On 12 February 2004 the district prosecutor’s office sent the first applicant a progress report on the investigation in case no. 40086. According to the report, the investigative authorities had sent requests concerning the fate of Ibragim Tsurov to the FSB and the police, questioned the first applicant and witnesses to the kidnapping, collected references concerning Ibragim Tsurov’s personality, given specific orders to the UGA prosecutor’s office and the unit prosecutor’s office and initiated a search for Ibragim Tsurov’s car. The first applicant was also informed that the investigative measures had not led to the identification of the alleged perpetrators and that the investigation had been suspended. 25.  On 1 June 2004 the applicants wrote to the district prosecutor’s office and the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic enquiring about progress in the investigation. On the same date the first applicant requested the investigative authorities to question Mr A.S. and Mr D.S. as witnesses and to search for Ibragim Tsurov’s car. 26.  On 29 June 2004 the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic informed the applicants that the investigation was pending. 27.  On 9 July 2004 the district prosecutor’s office endorsed a plan of investigative measures to be taken by 1 August 2004 in case no. 40086 envisaging searching for the VAZ‑2107, VAZ-2121 and Volga cars, questioning Mr D.S. and Ibragim Tsurov’s relatives and dispatching requests for information to various official bodies. 28.  On 12 July 2004 the district prosecutor’s office requested the commander of the United Group Alignment to explain why he had issued Iragim Tsurov with the special pass. 29.  On 23 July 2004 the first applicant requested information on progress in the search for her brother’s car from the ROVD. On the same date she requested from the district prosecutor’s office an update on the progress in the investigation in case no. 40086 and a copy of the decision to suspend the investigation. 30.  On 26 July 2004 the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Ingushetia informed the first applicant that Ibragim Tsurov had been wanted by the department of the interior of the Kirovskiy District of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania for aggravated extortion and therefore had been arrested by officers of the department of the interior of the town of Malgobek. It was stated that those officers’ actions had been lawful. The first applicant was invited to apply for further information to the department of the interior of Kirovskiy District. 31.  On 24 February 2005 the district prosecutor’s office informed the first applicant that there were no reasons to resume the investigation in case no. 40086. On 10 May 2005 the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic sent the first applicant a similar letter. 32.  On an unspecified date Ibragim Tsurov’s disappearance was reported to the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (“the Working Group”). The Working Group requested information on the matter from the Government. 33.  On 15 September 2005 the Government submitted to the Working Group their account of the circumstances of Ibragim Tsurov’s abduction. They mentioned that there had been three white cars at the scene of incident – a VAZ-2107, a VAZ-2121 and a Volga car with a flashing light. 34.  On 2 June 2003 the city prosecutor’s office received the first applicant’s request to take measures to search for her brother. 35.  On 7 June 2003 the city prosecutor’s office received Mr D.S.’s request to search for Ibragim Tsurov. 36.  On 18 June 2003, upon examination of Mr D.S.’s request, the city prosecutor’s office instituted an investigation into Ibragim Tsurov’s abduction and the theft of his car under Articles 126 § 2 and 162 § 2 of the Russian Criminal Code. The case file was assigned number 40086. 37.  On 20 June 2003 the city prosecutor’s office sent a request for an internal inquiry into Ibragim Tsurov’s kidnapping to the UGA prosecutor’s office. 38.  On 21 June 2003, upon examination of the first applicant’s request, the city prosecutor’s office instituted an investigation into Ibragim Tsurov’s kidnapping under Article 126 § 2 of the Russian Criminal Code. The case file was assigned number 40089. 39.  On 30 June 2003 the city prosecutor’s office granted the first applicant victim status and questioned her. She submitted that starting from the end of 2001 her brother had worked in military unit no. 20102 in Khankala and had had a special pass allowing him to move freely throughout the Chechen Republic. He had no enemies. On the day of his abduction he had had a large sum of money on him. The first applicant suggested that her brother could have possibly been kidnapped because of that money. She had no suspects in mind. 40.  On 30 June 2003 the city prosecutor’s office ordered the ROVD to put the VAZ-211030 car on the federal search list and to take measures aimed at establishing Ibragim Tsurov’s whereabouts and the identities of the perpetrators. 41.  On 1 July 2003 the city prosecutor’s office joined cases nos. 40086 and 40089 under number 40086. 42.  On 1 July 2003 the city prosecutor’s office questioned Ms M.Z., Ibragim Tsurov’s partner. She submitted that she had been living with Ibragim Tsurov since May 2002 and had known that he worked in the military prosecutor’s office in Khankala. She had seen him for the last time on 26 April 2003 before his departure to Vladikavkaz. Three days later she had gone to Khankala to search for her partner and had been told there that he was missing. A few days later she had learned that Ibragim Tsurov had been kidnapped. On the following day she had informed his relatives of the incident and visited a military prosecutor, who had told her of the circumstances of the kidnapping. 43.  On 22 July 2003 the ROVD informed the city prosecutor’s office that a search for Ibragim Tsurov was under way. 44.  On 18 August 2003 the city prosecutor’s office ordered operational and search bureau no. 2 of the Main Department of the Ministry of the Interior for the South Federal Circuit (“ORB-2”) to take investigative measures in order to find the kidnappers and to verify whether Ibragim Tsurov had been a member of illegal armed groups in 1999-2000. 45.  On an unspecified date Mr S.N. was questioned. He submitted that on 26 April 2003 Ibragim Tsurov, Mr D.S., Mr A.S. and himself had headed for Vladikavkaz in Ibragim Tsurov’s VAZ. While they were driving through Grozny their car was forced to stop by a white VAZ-2107 car without registration number plates. Several armed men in masks had got out of the VAZ-2107 and ordered Mr S.N. and his acquaintances to lie on the ground. Ibragim Tsurov had produced his documents and said that he was an employee of the military prosecutor’s office. An armed man had hit him on the head with a gun butt. Then the men had put Ibragim Tsurov into the boot of the VAZ-2107, taken his car and driven away in an unknown direction. 46.  Mr A.S. was also questioned and made a deposition identical to that of Mr S.N. 47.  On 18 August 2003 the city prosecutor’s office suspended the investigation in case no. 40086 for failure to identify those responsible and informed the first applicant accordingly. 48.  On 21 October 2003 the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic, acting on the first applicant’s request, quashed the decision of 18 August 2003 and resumed the investigation. 49.  On 28 October 2003 the district prosecutor’s office received the investigation file. 50.  On 29 October 2003 the district prosecutor’s office requested the ORB-2 to take investigative measures in order to find the missing person, his kidnappers and any witnesses to the incident. 51.  On 30 October 2003 the district prosecutor’s office ordered the unit prosecutor’s office to question Mr A.S. and Mr D.S for a second time. 52.  On 6 November 2003 the district prosecutor’s office requested information on Ibragim Tsurov from the bar of the Chechen Republic. 53.  On 24 November 2003 the district prosecutor’s office questioned Mr Ya.A., Ibragim Tsurov’s hierarchical superior at the Bar of the Chechen Republic. He submitted that Ibragim Tsurov’s clients in general had been satisfied with his work. He further stated that several months before the kidnapping Ibragim Tsurov had been severely beaten at his client’s house in the village of Staraya Sunzha; the beating had stopped once he had produced his documents. At some point Ibragim Tsurov had told Mr Ya.A. that he had almost found those who had beaten him and that they would soon be punished, but he had not mentioned whether those men were bandits or State servicemen. 54.  On 27 November 2003 the district prosecutor’s office requested from the unit prosecutor’s office access to files on criminal cases in which Ibragim Tsurov had represented the suspects. Later copies of the sentences delivered by military courts in respect of Ibragim Tsurov’s clients were included in the investigation file. 55.  On 28 November 2003 the district prosecutor’s office extended the term of preliminary investigation until 28 December 2003. 56.  On 22 December 2003 the district prosecutor’s office requested information on Ibragim Tsurov’s special pass from the headquarters in Khankala. They were told that Ibragim Tsurov had been issued with a special pass on 22 March 2002 at the request of the commander of the United Group Alignment for official requirements. 57.  On 28 December 2003 the investigation in case no. 40086 was suspended. 58.  On 29 December 2004 the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic quashed the decision of 28 December 2003 and resumed the investigation. 59.  On 6 May 2004 the unit prosecutor’s office informed the district prosecutor’s office that Ibragim Tsurov was not their employee, but was an advocate. 60.  On an unspecified date military unit no. 98311 informed the district prosecutor’s office that Mr A.S. had been sent on mission to another region and that Mr D.S. had resigned from the military service and had moved to Magnitogorsk. 61.  On 1 July 2004 the district prosecutor’s office requested a prosecutor’s office of Magnitogorsk to question Mr D.S. on the circumstances of Ibragim Tsurov’s kidnapping. 62.  On 23 July 2004 Mr D.S. was questioned. He submitted that on 26 April 2003 Ibragim Tsurov’s car had been stopped in Grozny by two white cars with tinted windows and without registration number plates – a VAZ-2107 and a VAZ-2121. Armed men in camouflage uniforms had got out of the white cars; Mr D.S. did not remember exactly how many of them there were. One of the armed men had ordered Mr D.S. to get out of the car and to lie on the ground. The armed men had put Ibragim Tsurov in the boot of his own car and driven away. Later Mr D.S. and his fellow servicemen had reported the incident to the authorities. 63.  On 17 July 2004 the district prosecutor’s office questioned Ms L.M., a relative of Ibragim Tsurov’s client residing in the village of Staraya Sunzha. She submitted that in February 2003 Ibragim Tsurov had stayed in her house overnight. At some point late at night unknown armed and masked men had burst into her house and beaten her grandson and Ibragim Tsurov. The latter had told them that he was an advocate. Then the armed men had left. 64.  On 22 July 2004 the district prosecutor’s office again questioned Mr Ya.A. who essentially repeated his earlier deposition. 65.  The district prosecutor’s office requested information on eventual arrest of Ibragim Tsurov from various law enforcement agencies of the Chechen Republic. The departments of the Ministry of Interior of the Chechen Republic and the Federal Security Service replied that they had no such information and that no special operations had been carried out in respect of Ibragim Tsurov. 66.  On 23 July 2004 the district prosecutor’s office granted the first applicant’s request for information on progress in the investigation. On the same date the first applicant informed the investigators that Ibragim Tsurov’s relatives had no new information concerning the kidnapping. 67.  On 12 July 2004 the district prosecutor’s office ordered the ROVD to ensure that Mr T.Ts., Ibragim Tsurov’s relative, visit them for an interview. The ROVD replied that it was impossible to establish Mr T.Ts.’ whereabouts. 68.  On 26 July 2004 the district prosecutor’s office requested the prosecutor’s office of the Malgobek District in the Republic of Ingushetia to question relatives of Ibragim Tsurov. 69.  On 29 July 2004 the district prosecutor’s office suspended the investigation in case no. 40086 for failure to identify the perpetrators and informed the first applicant accordingly. 70.  On 14 December 2004 the district prosecutor’s office quashed the decision of 29 July 2004 and resumed the investigation. 71.  On 23 December 2004 and 13 January 2005 the district prosecutor’s office sent to the prosecutor’s office of the Malgobek District requests analogous to that of 26 July 2004. 72.  On 14 January 2005 the district prosecutor’s office again suspended the investigation. 73.  On 26 April 2007 the district prosecutor’s office quashed the decision of 14 January 2005 and resumed the investigation in case no. 40086. 74.  The investigation failed to establish the whereabouts of Ibragim Tsurov. The investigating authorities sent requests for information to the competent State agencies and took other steps to have the crime resolved. The investigation found no evidence to prove involvement of law enforcement agencies in the crime. No special operations had been carried out in respect of Ibragim Tsurov by law enforcement agencies of the Chechen Republic. 75.  The Government further submitted that the progress of the investigation was being supervised by the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia. According to the Government, the first applicant had been duly informed of all decisions taken during the investigation. 76.  Despite specific requests by the Court the Government did not disclose any documents of criminal case no. 40086. Relying on the information obtained from the Prosecutor General’s Office, the Government stated that the investigation was in progress and that disclosure of the documents would be in violation of Article 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, since the file contained information of a military nature and personal data concerning the witnesses or other participants in the criminal proceedings. 77.  On 28 December 2003 the North Caucasus Department of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia instituted criminal proceedings against Ibragim Tsurov under Article 163 § 3 of the Russian Criminal Code (aggravated extortion) in case no. 18/204. The decision stated that in 1998 the suspect had assisted members of an illegal armed group who had kidnapped several persons, by negotiating ransoms with relatives of those kidnapped. On the same date a search warrant for Ibragim Tsurov was issued. 78.  On 14 February 2004 the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia ordered Ibragim Tsurov’s name to be put on the federal wanted list. 79.  On 14 February 2004 the department of the interior of the Kirovskiy District of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania opened a search file in respect of Ibragim Tsurov. 80.  According to the Government, the department of the interior of the Kirovskiy District of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania were taking investigative measures in relation to the criminal proceedings against Ibragim Tsurov. The latter’s whereabouts had not been established and a search for him was under way. 81.  The Government provided copies of the two decisions by the North Caucasus Department of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia dated 28 December 2003 and of the decision by the department of the interior of the Kirovskiy District of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania dated 14 February 2004.