The file contains a memorandum dated 21 October 2001, from the Head of MPU to the Director of Operations, indicating that the file relating to the investigation of Victims and together with one other case relating to the events of 22 “A”, “B”, “C”, “D” “E”, June to the chief of the CCIU for further investigation on 1998, “was transferred Additional information, with names of possible witnesses was sent to CCIU at A last contact with CCIU at 26-09-00 learned that no new investigative leads were found and the case is no longer actively investigated”. In relation to Victim the file contains a Victim Identification Form dated 15 “C”, February 2002. The form recounts the events in relation to the abduction of Victims and “A”, “B” “C”. The file contains an Ante-Mortem Investigation Report dated 17 November 2004, which relates to the investigation of Victim It concludes that efforts were made to obtain “D”. ante-mortem details of Victim but that UNMIK Police were unable to interview any “E”, of the witnesses. Documents located in the file marked Victim “B” In relation to Victim the file contains a Victim Identification Form dated 26 “B”, September 2001. The file contains three sets of criminal charges submitted by the relatives of Victims and Mr F.G. “A”, “B” The file contains an interoffice memorandum dated 27 February 2008, from UNMIK Chief of Investigations War Crimes Unit to the DOJ, Criminal Division requesting a review of the case. Documents located in the file marked Victim “D” In relation to Victim the file contains an undated Victim Identification Form. “D”, The file marked Victim “E” No additional documentation relating to Victim was located in this file. “E” THE COMPLAINTS The complainants complain about alleged failure to to properly investigate UNMIK’s the abductions of and In this regard, the Panel deemed Victims “A”, “B”, “C”, “D” “E”. that the complainants invoke a violation of the procedural limb of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The Panel deems that the complainants also complain about the fear, mental pain and suffering caused to them by the situation surrounding the abductions. In this regard, the Panel considers that the complainant relies on Article 3 of the ECHR in its substantive part.
The file contains a memorandum dated 21 October 2001, from the Head of MPU to the Director of Operations, indicating that the file relating to the investigation of Victims “A”, “B”, “C”, “D” and “E”, together with one other case relating to the events of 22 June 1998, “was transferred to the chief of the CCIU for further investigation on Additional information, with names of possible witnesses was sent to CCIU at A last contact with CCIU at 26-09-00 learned that no new investigative leads were found and the case is no longer actively investigated”. In relation to Victim “C”, the file contains a Victim Identification Form dated 15 February 2002. The form recounts the events in relation to the abduction of Victims “A”, “B” and “C”. The file contains an Ante-Mortem Investigation Report dated 17 November 2004, which relates to the investigation of Victim “D”. It concludes that efforts were made to obtain ante-mortem details of Victim “E”, but that UNMIK Police were unable to interview any of the witnesses. Documents located in the file marked Victim “B” In relation to Victim “B”, the file contains a Victim Identification Form dated 26 September 2001. The file contains three sets of criminal charges submitted by the relatives of Victims “A”, “B” and Mr F.G. The file contains an interoffice memorandum dated 27 February 2008, from UNMIK Chief of Investigations War Crimes Unit to the DOJ, Criminal Division requesting a review of the case. Documents located in the file marked Victim “D” In relation to Victim “D”, the file contains an undated Victim Identification Form. The file marked Victim “E” No additional documentation relating to Victim “E” was located in this file. THE COMPLAINTS The complainants complain about UNMIK’s alleged failure to to properly investigate the abductions of Victims “A”, “B”, “C”, “D” and “E”. In this regard, the Panel deemed that the complainants invoke a violation of the procedural limb of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The Panel deems that the complainants also complain about the fear, mental pain and suffering caused to them by the situation surrounding the abductions. In this regard, the Panel considers that the complainant relies on Article 3 of the ECHR in its substantive part.
43-09%20Opinion%20Final%20310713.docx