6.  The applicants are:
1) Ms Rabu Mutushovna Takhayeva, who was born in 1959;
2) Mr Khashim Nurdinovich Takhayev, who was born in 1952;
3) Ms Zaira Khashimovna Takhayeva, who was born in 1977;
4) Mr Islam Sultanovich Tumanov, who was born in 1998, and
5) Ms Razet Zayndiyevna Terkibayeva, who was born in 1934.
The applicants live in the village of Mesker-Yurt, in the Shalinskiy District of the Chechen Republic. 7.  The first and second applicants are married. They are the parents of Mr Ayub Khashidovich Takhayev, born in 1982, and the third applicant. The fourth applicant is the third applicant’s son and Ayub Takhayev’s nephew. The fifth applicant is Ayub Takhayev’s grandmother. 8.  On the night of 13 November 2002 the first, second, third and fourth applicants, Ayub Takhayev and his grandfather slept in their family home at 42 Shkolnaya Street, Mesker-Yurt. The house had a common courtyard with three other houses inhabited by the applicants’ relatives. The fifth applicant slept in one of those houses.
(a)  Abduction of Ayub Takhayev 9.  At about 2.40 a.m. on 13 November 2002 the first applicant heard a noise coming from the courtyard. She looked out of the window and saw about ten to fifteen men wearing camouflage uniforms. A group of about five men headed towards the applicants’ house and entered without identifying themselves. They were armed with machine guns and grenades. All but one of them wore masks. The unmasked man had Slavic features. The first applicant assumed that the men belonged to the Russian military. 10.  The servicemen ordered the second applicant to rise, took him into the corridor, forced him down onto the floor, tied his arms behind his back and hit him several times. In the meantime they locked Ayub Takhayev’s grandfather in one of the rooms. 11.  Then the men entered the room where Ayub Takhayev and the third applicant were sleeping and woke them up with torch lights. They shouted at Ayub Takhayev to get up and kicked him; then they took him to the kitchen and forced him down onto the floor. 12.  The intruders kept the first and third applicants locked in their rooms. When the first applicant tried to break through the door, one of the servicemen entered her room and pushed her in the chest so that she fell down. Then the servicemen locked the first, third and fourth applicants in one room. The women cried and begged them not to take Ayub Takhayev away. The fourth applicant was scared and cried. The servicemen ordered the third applicant to calm the child down and demanded the identity papers of the second applicant and Ayub Takhayev. The unmasked man with Slavic features shouted at the women and gave orders to the other men in Russian. The first applicant gave the men two internal passports; they took away the one belonging to Ayub Takhayev. 13.  As the servicemen were leaving, they ordered everyone to stay indoors, threatening to blow up the house, and took Ayub Takhayev with them. The second applicant enquired as to where his son would be taken, but received no answer. Instead he was told he should thank the armed men for not taking him as well. 14.  When the first and third applicants managed to open the locked door and leave their room, they ran out into the street and saw that the armed men had left. Then they went back inside and untied the second applicant. 15.  Early in the morning on 13 November 2002 the second applicant found tracks left by an armoured personnel carrier (“APC”) about 100 metres from his house. Some neighbours confirmed that they had seen an APC on the night of 13 November 2002.
(b)  The fifth applicant’s account 16.  On the night of 13 November 2002 the fifth applicant heard a noise outside and went out into the courtyard. Two men pointed machine guns at her and ordered her to stand still and keep quiet. She realised that the noise had been caused by the men’s attempts to break the door down. The armed men did not allow the fifth applicant to go back inside the house although it was cold outside and she was wearing only a nightgown. The fifth applicant heard the armed men speaking Russian without an accent. One of them stood behind the fifth applicant’s back with his machine gun pointed at her. After ten or fifteen minutes the armed men ordered the fifth applicant to go back inside the house. She did so and then watched through the window as the men ran out of the courtyard into the street.
(c)  Subsequent events 17.  At about 4 a.m. on 14 November 2002 the first and second applicants saw four APCs driving down their street. Then they heard screaming coming from their neighbours’ house. In the morning of 14 November 2002 the applicants learnt that two men, Mr V.M. and Mr Kh.M., had been taken away from their neighbours’ home by armed men in APCs. Mr V.M. and Mr Kh.M. went missing. 18.  At 6.15 a.m. on 15 November 2002 the fifth applicant saw four APCs arriving in Mesker-Yurt. Later the applicants found out that on that night another villager, Mr A.I., had been abducted. Mr A.I. went missing. 19.  At about 2.45 a.m. on 13 November 2002 unidentified persons armed with machine guns and wearing camouflage uniforms entered the house at 42 Shkolnaya Street, Mesker-Yurt, the Shali District, in the Chechen Republic, kidnapped Ayub Takhayev and took him away in an unknown direction. 20.  From 13 November 2002 onwards the applicants contacted, both in person and in writing, various official bodies. They described in detail the circumstances of their relative’s disappearance and asked for assistance in establishing his whereabouts and fate. In particular, they applied to the prosecutors’ offices at different levels, the military commander’s office of the Shali District, the Shali District Department of the Interior, the Russian State Duma, the Special Envoy of the Russian President in Chechnya for Rights and Freedoms, the Russian President’s Commission on Human Rights and the Administration of the Chechen Republic. Most of the complaints were filed by the first applicant, apparently 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. 21.  On the morning of 13 November 2002 the applicants wrote to the prosecutor’s office of the Shali District (“the district prosecutor’s office”). They complained about their relative’s abduction but did not challenge, as such, the intrusion into their home. 22.  On 21 November 2002 the district prosecutor’s office instituted an investigation into Ayub Takhayev’s disappearance under Article 126 § 2 of the Russian Criminal Code (aggravated kidnapping). The case file was given number 59259. 23.  On 22 November 2002 the first applicant requested the district prosecutor’s office to help her to establish her son’s whereabouts. 24.  On 23 November 2002 the first applicant was granted victim status in case no. 59259. 25.  On 29 December 2002 the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic forwarded the first applicant’s complaint to the district prosecutor’s office. 26.  On 21 January 2003 the investigation in case no. 59259 was suspended for failure to identify the alleged perpetrators. 27.  On 25 March 2003 the military prosecutor’s office of military unit no. 20116 informed the first applicant of the outcome of the inquiry conducted at her request. The inquiry had established that military personnel had not been implicated in Ayub Takhayev’s disappearance. 28.  On 8 April 2003 the first applicant wrote to the district prosecutor’s office and the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic enquiring about progress in the investigation into her son’s disappearance and requesting to be granted victim status. On 11 April 2003 the district prosecutor’s office acknowledged receipt of her letter but did not reply as to the substance. 29.  On 30 July 2003 the first applicant again wrote to the district prosecutor’s office repeating the request of 8 April 2003. 30.  On 15 August 2003 the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic ordered the district prosecutor’s office to rescind the decision of 21 January 2003 on suspension of the investigation and informed the first applicant that the investigation had been opened on 21 November 2002 and then suspended on 21 January 2003. 31.  On 20 August 2003 the South Federal Circuit Department of the Prosecutor General’s Office informed the first applicant that her complaint had been forwarded to the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic. 32.  On 22 August 2003 the district prosecutor’s office rescinded the decision of 21 January 2003 and resumed the proceedings in case no. 59259. 33.  In a letter of 25 August 2003 the district prosecutor’s office informed the first applicant that the investigation in case no. 59259 had been resumed and that the search for Ayub Takhayev was currently under way. They further stated that the investigating authorities had checked detention centres and had requested various law enforcement agencies to establish the identities of those responsible for the kidnapping and those in charge of the special operation conducted in Mesker-Yurt on 13 November 2002, but those requests had remained unanswered and had been repeated. The first applicant was also asked to ensure that witnesses of the kidnapping visit the district prosecutor’s office and make statements. 34.  On 18 September 2003 the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic informed the first applicant that the district prosecutor’s office had resumed the investigation on 22 August 2003. 35.  On 19 September 2003 the military prosecutor of the United Group Alignment informed the first applicant that there were no grounds to presume any kind of implication of Russian federal troops in her son’s kidnapping. 36.  On 21 February 2005 the first applicant requested the district prosecutor’s office to update her on progress in the investigation into her son’s kidnapping. 37.  On 14 April 2006 the district prosecutor’s office informed the first applicant that her complaint to the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic had been included in the case file and that the investigation had been suspended on 3 July 2005. 38.  On 31 May 2007 the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic informed the first applicant that Ayub Takhayev had been kidnapped by “unidentified men armed with machine guns and wearing camouflage uniforms who had arrived in APCs”. They also noted that the investigation in case no. 59259, suspended on 3 July 2005, had been resumed on 8 May 2007 and was under way. 39.  After the investigation resumed in May 2007, the investigators visited the applicants’ house and questioned the first, second, third and fifth applicants, as well as the applicants’ neighbours. According to the first applicant, it was the first time the investigators had visited the village of Mesker-Yurt since the summer of 2003. 40.  The investigation in case no. 59259 did not establish any involvement of special units of law enforcement and security forces in the kidnapping of Ayub Takhayev. 41.  The law enforcement agencies of the Chechen Republic did not institute any criminal proceedings against Ayub Takhayev. 42.  According to the district department of the interior and the military commander’s office, Ayub Takhayev was not arrested; none of the detachments of the military commander’s office had left their premises at the time of his abduction. 43.  The investigators sent requests for information to the Department of the Federal Security Service of the Chechen Republic and the military prosecutor’s office of the United Group Alignment. The information received in reply confirmed that Ayub Takhayev had not been arrested or charged with any crime. 44.  Requests for information were also sent to remand prisons in the Chechen Republic, the Stavropol Region and other adjacent regions of Russia. 45.  In numerous letters of recommendation Ayub Takhayev was described in a positive manner, which proved that the institution of criminal proceedings against him was improbable. 46.  Ayub Takhayev was not admitted to the Central Hospital of the Shali District. 47.  The investigation had not identified the perpetrators and was currently under way. Investigative measures aimed at resolving Ayub Takhayev’s kidnapping were being taken. 48.  Despite specific requests by the Court the Government did not disclose any documents from the investigation file in case no. 59259. 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.