ECtHR Judgment in Carter v. Russia: A Landmark Ruling on State Responsibility and Human Rights
Introduction
This article discusses the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) judgment in the case of Carter v. Russia, focusing on the Court’s findings on state responsibility and violation of human rights.
Case Background
The case involved the assassination of former KGB officer Alexander Litvinenko in 2006 in London, who was poisoned with polonium-210. The applicant, Maria Anna Carter, Litvinenko’s widow, alleged violations of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) by Russia.
ECtHR’s Findings
The ECtHR found a violation of Article 2 of the ECHR, both in its substantive and procedural aspects. The Court ruled that Russia was responsible for Litvinenko’s assassination and failed to effectively investigate his death.
Substantive and Procedural Violations
Substantively, the Court assessed Russia’s jurisdiction and control over the assassination, while procedurally, it examined the effectiveness of Russia’s investigation into the incident.
Significance of the Judgment
This judgment is significant for its examination of state responsibility in extraterritorial human rights violations and sets a precedent in international law regarding state-sponsored assassinations.
