Resolution of the ECHR of September 18, 2018 in the case of Stomatii v. The Republic of Moldova and the Russian Federation (application No. 69528/10).
The case successfully examined the complaint of the complainant living in the village of Verenkeu about a violation of Article 2 of the Convention in connection with the death of her son during military service on conscription and the lack of an effective investigation into the circumstances of his death. The case was a violation by the authorities of the Russian Federation of the requirements of Article 2 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The requirements of Article 2 of the Convention (the right to life) were not violated by the authorities of the Republic of Moldova.
In 2010, the applicant was assisted in the preparation of the application. Subsequently, the complaint was communicated to the Republic of Moldova and the Russian Federation.
In her application, the complainant, residing in the village of Varancau of the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova, who was the mother of Alexander Stomatis, born in 1990, complained, in particular, of a violation of Article 2 of the Convention in connection with the death of her son during conscription and the absence of effective investigation into the circumstances of his death.
On 14 June 2018, the European Court, by a majority of votes, on the complaint filed by the applicant, declared the complaint admissible on the merits of the Russian Federation and unanimously in respect of the Republic of Moldova. The European Court unanimously recognized that Article 2 of the Convention (the right to life) was not violated by the authorities of the Republic of Moldova. The European Court also ruled that there had been a violation by the authorities of the Russian Federation of the requirements of Article 2 of the Convention in its procedural aspect, and that there had been a violation by the authorities of the Russian Federation of the requirements of Article 2 of the Convention in the substantive aspect. The European Court also ruled that the Russian authorities should pay the applicant 50,000 euros in compensation for non-pecuniary damage and 3,000 euros in compensation for costs and expenses.
The dissenting opinion was expressed by the judge of the European Court of Human Rights D. Dedov (elected from the Russian Federation).