Datasets:

---

jonathanli

/

echr

like 0

[ "The applicant , Mr PERSON , is a NORP national who was born in DATE and lives in GPE . ORG ( “ the Government ” ) were represented by Mr. PERSON , their Agent .", "On DATE the applicant instituted proceedings in ORG against the local welfare department challenging the refusal of the latter to increase his pension in accordance with the LAW and LAW .", "On DATE ORG rejected the applicant 's claim as unsubstantiated , stating , inter alia , that the applicant 's pension had been determined correctly .", "The applicant appealed against this decision , claiming that the first - instance court had failed to apply the relevant pension law and had disregarded LAW .", "On DATE ORG upheld the judgment of the first - instance court . In reply to the applicant 's argument about the applicability of LAW of the LAW instead of relevant pension law the court of appeal noted that the local welfare department had acted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the pension legislation , while the question of compliance of such legal provisions with the LAW fell within the competence of ORG rather than the ordinary courts .", "On DATE ORG rejected the applicant 's request for leave to appeal in cassation . The applicant did not ask any of the courts dealing with his case to suspend the proceedings in the case and take measures to bring the above issue of constitutionality before ORG .", "The relevant domestic law and practice are set out in the ORG 's judgment in the case of PERSON v. GPE ( no . CARDINAL , DATE ) and the decision in the case of ORG v. GPE ( no . CARDINAL , decision of CARDINAL DATE ) ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and is currently serving a life sentence in prison .", "On DATE the applicant was arrested on suspicion of having committed a series of murders .", "On DATE the investigation was completed and the applicant started to study the case file . During the pre - trial investigation and the examination of the case file the applicant was assisted by a legal - aid lawyer .", "On DATE the applicant and the lawyer finished examining the case file in full .", "On DATE ORG , acting as a first - instance court ( “ the first - instance court ” ) , found the applicant guilty of CARDINAL murders and other less serious crimes committed by him DATE and sentenced him to life imprisonment with confiscation of property . During the trial the applicant was represented by the lawyer .", "According to the applicant , following the judgment of DATE , he was not assisted by any lawyer despite his complaints to the first - instance court on this account .", "On DATE the applicant lodged with ORG a cassation appeal against the judgment of DATE .", "On DATE , in the course of preparation to the proceedings before ORG , the applicant requested the first - instance court to familiarise him with TIME of the hearings .", "On DATE the applicant started to examine the minutes of the hearings held by the first - instance court .", "On DATE the applicant submitted that he would continue examination of the minutes only after he had studied the case file CARDINAL more time . He therefore requested that the case file be provided to him for examination .", "On DATE the first - instance court , having regard to the applicant ’s statements , set a DATE period for him to examine the minutes of the hearings . Despite the fact that the applicant was invited on several occasions to continue studying TIME of the hearings , he refused to do so , insisting that he needed to examine the case file first .", "On DATE the first - instance court found that the applicant had refused to familiarise himself with TIME of the hearings for no valid reason and allowed no further time to do so . The applicant was then provided with the case file .", "On DATE the first - instance court found that , despite having been provided with the case file on several occasions , the applicant had examined CARDINAL volumes of the file . As the file consisted of CARDINAL volumes , the court concluded that the applicant ’s actions suggested that he had deliberately sought to draw out the time allowed for examining the case file . It set therefore a QUANTITY time - limit for him to complete his examination of the case file .", "During DATE the applicant was provided with the case file . He managed to examine CARDINAL volumes of the file .", "On DATE the first - instance court decided to allow no further time for the applicant to study the case file , as the relevant time - limit had expired .", "On DATE ORG held a hearing in the applicant ’s case . In his further submissions before ORG the applicant complained , inter alia , that there had been a lack of legal assistance and lack of time to study the case file .", "DATE ORG , in the presence of the prosecutor and the applicant , who had not been represented by a lawyer , found that the applicant ’s guilt had been well founded and dismissed the applicant ’s appeal in cassation as unsubstantiated .", "On DATE a local newspaper , Priazovskiy PERSON , reported that the police had arrested the applicant on suspicion of a number of murders . It read , in particular :", "“ But the most sensational is the fact that the arrestee turned out to be former police lieutenant of the criminal investigation department , PERSON . ... ”", "On DATE another newspaper , PERSON i ORG , reported on a press conference held by PERSON , the Head of ORG . According to the newspaper , with respect to the progress of the investigation of series of murders PERSON announced that the police had arrested “ a person who was reasonably suspected of having committed crimes with the use of a firearm ” and then emphasised that it would be inappropriate to divulge any other information about the investigation .", "On DATE PERSON provided a summary of another press conference given by PERSON on the subject of the applicant ’s arrest . The journalist reporting on the press conference referred to the detainee by his real name and provided some extracts from PERSON ’s speech . In particular , when opining as to who might have been the next victims of the detainee , PERSON was quoted as noting as follows :", "“ Those would be the police officers ... and others ... But in this respect we can only trust in the words of the criminal ... And I have doubts about many of his statements ... ”", "On DATE the same journalist reported in GPE that the first hearing in the applicant ’s case was to commence on DATE . He noted that the police had always insisted that the applicant had acted without any accomplices , while in the latest press release PERSON , the Head of ORG , expressed a different opinion . The journalist reported as follows :", "“ In DATE [ M. ] stated in the official press release that PERSON is just – quoting him word for word – ‘ CARDINAL member of a criminal group which committed a series of murders’ ... ” .", "The criminal proceedings against the applicant were further extensively reported on by the same journalist in a number of his publications , some of which contained pictures of the applicant .", "On DATE that journalist published an interview with the prosecutor , who commented on the procedural actions taken by the applicant after the judgment of the first - instance court .", "In his submissions before ORG the applicant complained that his right to be presumed innocent had been affected by multiple newspaper articles reporting on the proceedings in his case , specifying further that in some of the articles ORG officials had clearly indicated that he had committed the murders , despite the fact that the proceedings were pending .", "On DATE the first - instance court referred the case file to ORG , following which the applicant was refused permission by the officials of the detention facilities to send correspondence . The refusals were based on the fact that the written permit for the applicant ’s correspondence , issued by the first - instance court , was no longer valid , while a new one had not been issued by ORG , which had become responsible for his case . The authorities acted on the basis of CARDINAL of ORG ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) .", "On DATE and DATE the applicant lodged CARDINAL applications with ORG asking for such a permit to be issued , but to no avail . On DATE the applicant could still not dispatch any correspondence .", "The relevant provisions of the ORG read as follows :", "“ Participation of a defence lawyer in the inquiry , pre - trial investigations and trial by the first - instance court shall be compulsory :", "... ( CARDINAL ) from the moment of the person ’s arrest or when he or she is charged with a criminal offence carrying a penalty of life imprisonment ...", "The participation of a defence lawyer in the proceedings before the court of appeal shall be compulsory in cases as provided by the first paragraph of this Article if the appeal raises issues capable of worsening the position of the convicted or acquitted person . ”", "“ A defence lawyer shall be selected by a suspect , an accused , a defendant or a convicted person ...", "A defence lawyer shall be appointed [ by the authorities ] in the following cases :", "( CARDINAL ) when , in accordance with LAW CARDINAL and CARDINAL , the participation of the defence lawyer is compulsory but the suspect , accused or defendant does not wish to or can not appoint a defence lawyer ;", "( CARDINAL ) when a suspect , an accused or a defendant wishes to appoint a defence lawyer but can not do so for lack of means or other objective reason . ... ”", "Article CARDINAL of the ORG provides , inter alia , that the court of cassation shall review whether the challenged court decision is lawful and substantiated based on the case file and additionally submitted material . The scope of the review shall be limited by the arguments of the cassation appeal(s ) . The court shall be empowered to review the case beyond the arguments of the cassation appeal(s ) provided that this does not worsen the position of the convicted or acquitted person .", "Section CARDINAL of the LAW provides , inter alia , that a person held in custody may correspond with their relatives , other individuals and legal entities upon obtaining a written permit from the authority dealing with the criminal case against the detainee concerned ." ]

[ "6", "8" ]

[ "6-1", "6-2", "6-3", "8-1" ]

[ "6-3-c" ]

[]

[]

[]

[ "NORP The applicant company , Europapress holding d.o.o . , is a limited liability company incorporated under NORP law , which has its registered office in GPE .", "The applicant company was founded in DATE and is the biggest newspaper and magazine publishing company in GPE , which publishes CARDINAL DATE newspapers and CARDINAL magazines with an average DATE circulation of CARDINAL copies . Its most prominent DATE publication , the news magazine ORG , on DATE published an article headlined “ Minister PERSON pointed a handgun at journalist GPE ! ” , in which it reported on an incident that had allegedly occurred in the Government building on DATE and had involved Mr B.Š. , the then Minister of Finance and a deputy Prime Minister , and a journalist from the DATE newspaper ORG list , PERSON The article suggested that B.Š and PERSON had had a conversation on the staircase of the building and that PERSON , displeased with a recent article by GPE , had told her that she should be killed . It also reported that ORG had subsequently followed GPE to the press room , where he had allegedly taken a handgun from a security officer and pointed its barrel at GPE , saying that he would kill her , after which he had laughed loudly at his own joke . The article was published inside the magazine in the column “ Political Terminator ” . The circulation of FAC at the time was CARDINAL copies .", "The article in question reads as follows :", "Minister PERSON pointed a handgun at journalist GPE !", "“ Judging by the unusual scene made by ORG DATE in the press room of the ORG 's headquarters , journalists may be facing a qualitatively different expression of disapproval of texts which are not to the Deputy Prime Minister 's liking .", "Having published a critical text concerning the new budget entitled ' PERSON 's phenomenal numbers ' , PERSON , commentator at ORG , will remember her subsequent Government session for a very long time .", "ORG was waiting for her on the stairs of the building in FAC and , still trying to give his voice a somewhat relaxed tone , started claiming that it had not been all right , that it all reminded him of settling personal scores and the like , and at some point he allegedly blurted something like : ' You should be killed ! '", "Obviously irritated by GPE 's presence , he followed her to the press room , where , in addition to several other journalists , he found one of the security officers .", "And then ORG , cool as a cucumber [ ' mrtav - hladan ' ] , reaches for his [ the security officer 's ] belt , takes out the handgun and points its barrel at the dumbfounded journalist , saying : ' I will kill you now ! '", "He then started laughing uproariously at his own ' joke ' , whereas the [ other ] journalists forced a smile .", "GPE , however , did not find it funny at all . ”", "On DATE and CARDINAL DATE ORG list published the same information , as did another DATE newspaper , PERSON , on DATE .", "DATE after the incident GPE lodged a criminal complaint and brought an action in damages against ORG Both her criminal complaint and her action were dismissed on the ground that she was unable to prove that there had been a risk to her personal safety from a serious threat to her life .", "On DATE PERSON brought a civil action for defamation against the applicant company in ORG ( PERSON ) , seeking CARDINAL NORP kunas ( HRK ) as compensation for non - pecuniary damage . He argued that the published information had been untrue and that it had harmed his reputation as a public and political figure , in that the article had been published in a high - circulation DATE magazine , in which he had been depicted as an irresponsible and foolish person who was prone to bad and highly inappropriate jokes . The case was subsequently joined with CARDINAL other actions brought by PERSON on DATE against ORG list and PERSON .", "The applicant company maintained that the information published was true or based on facts which it had had valid reasons to believe were true . Furthermore , the incident was of public interest and the public was therefore entitled to know about it , while the journalist PERSON was a serious and trustworthy source of information . Despite several attempts , the ORG journalists had been unable to obtain any comment from ORG 's office DATE following the incident . Lastly , the applicant company claimed that the published article had been presented in such a way as to show that it had involved a joke rather than a serious threat .", "During the proceedings the court heard evidence from the eyewitnesses , namely the security officer PERSON , the journalist PERSON , a journalist from PERSON , PERSON , and a journalist from the State news agency ORG , ORG , who were all present in the press room when the alleged incident took place . The court also heard evidence from the plaintiff , the author of the article , PERSON , and the chief editor of ORG , PERSON At the applicant company 's request , the court also heard evidence from the ORG list journalist PERSON , who had been President of ORG at the time , and admitted a written statement from ORG , a journalist at the DATE magazine ORG ( although it refused to call her as a witness ) .", "At the hearing on DATE the court heard evidence from security officer PERSON The relevant part of his testimony reads as follows :", "“ I remember that at [ the time of ] the incident there was a meeting of the Government , on which occasion I was in the security team . After the meeting the chief of ... the cabinet told me to invite PERSON , indicating that he was in the press room . I went there and found [ him ] . As well as B.Š , there were some other persons present , PERSON and H.P .... Mr. PERSON was talking with a woman whom I did not know . I can not remember who that person was exactly . I addressed Mr PERSON and informed him that the Prime Minister was looking for him , to which he jokingly replied , asking whether I had come to apprehend him . I noticed that the atmosphere in the room was relaxed and that they were joking about something .", "I remained standing next to the exit , and on his way out PERSON passed next to me . Under his left arm he was holding documents , and with his right arm he [ inadvertently ] touched my right side , where my official handgun was [ kept ] .", "He said something when he touched it , something like ' these are the arguments ' .", "On that , I took out the handgun of my own initiative , emptied the magazine ... and took out the frame of the handgun . I then placed the handgun horizontally on my left hand . At that , PERSON , who was [ sitting ] ... on my left side and was writing , commented that we should not play with weapons . I replied that she had nothing to fear , that I had emptied the weapon and put the ammunition in my pocket . The plaintiff then commented : ' Please , put that away , because they will write that I have threatened a journalist ' .", "After that , Mrs. PERSON commented on the plaintiff 's statement and said ' I will publish that ' . Just as the plaintiff told me to put the handgun away ... , the journalist PERSON entered and said : ' Not PERSON , she is a good girl ' .", "After that Mr. PERSON left the room and PERSON continued to write her text . The only one who had my handgun in her hands was the journalist PERSON , with whom I went to the other corner of the room where we did not disturb anyone , because she was interested in weapons , given that she herself had a weapon . She has a museum piece and we talked about that .", "Apart from telling me to put away the handgun because it would be published that he had threatened to kill the journalist , I did not notice that the plaintiff and journalist PERSON spoke to each other in my presence . As I said , apart from the journalist PERSON , no one held my handgun in his or her hands . The newspaper reports that the plaintiff took the handgun from me are not true . ”", "At the hearing on DATE the court heard evidence from journalist PERSON The relevant part of her testimony reads as follows :", "GPE : “ On DATE ] a regular meeting of the Government was scheduled for DATE TIME . I am an accredited journalist and follow the work of the Government . While going to the room from which I follow the meetings on a monitor with my colleagues , I met the plaintiff and PERSON The plaintiff reacted brusquely , stating that he was dissatisfied with the article which I had published in ORG list in DATE , in which I had written about the budget and the ORG 's policy . The plaintiff stated ... that he had seen the article as a personal attack on him . When I asked him to give reasons , he did not do so , saying that the article had amounted to settling scores with him . I replied that this was probably his impression because his name had appeared in the headline and the article had been accompanied by his photo . At that the plaintiff told me that I was ' a killer with a baby face ' and that I should be killed . ...", "After I arrived at the press room ... I sat at a table to study the documents which were given to us before the [ Government ] meeting . ... As well as me , in the room there was PERSON , who was following something on the computer ... I was concentrating on the documents I was reading , and at some point I noticed that the plaintiff and a member of the security staff , whom I had seen before , were present in the room .", "I did not pay attention to their conversation until I heard , at some point , that the plaintiff was mentioning journalists , after which I looked up and saw the plaintiff holding a handgun in the palm of his hand , while the security officer was standing on the other side of the table , next to me .", "At this point , the ORG journalist PERSON , entered the room and said ' Not PERSON , she is good ' ; she took the handgun in her hands , saying that she had someone in her family who had a handgun like that and that she wanted to see it . ”", "The judge : “ Who was the plaintiff addressing when he said ' a killer with a baby face ' ?", "GPE : “ The plaintiff was facing me and we were in the small area near the staircase leading to the entry into the big foyer . ”", "The judge : “ From whom did PERSON take the handgun ? ”", "GPE : “ I can not say for certain , because it all happened relatively fast and I was shocked , since I saw it as a personal threat to me because I connected the incident which had taken place before I entered the press room and the threats made by the plaintiff with the fact of seeing the handgun in his hand .", "The plaintiff then left the room and the security officer and ORG , who was checking the handgun , remained . After that the Government meeting that we were to follow started . ”", "The judge : “ Did anyone in the room react to protect you , given that you took [ the incident ] as a personal threat ? ”", "GPE : “ I remember that the journalist PERSON said something ... I can not remember what she said ... ”", "The plaintiff 's representative : “ Did you and the plaintiff talk to each other in the press room ? ”", "GPE : “ Before the handgun was taken out we did not talk . After that , as far as I remember , I said that I would publish that . ”", "The plaintiff 's representative : “ Did the plaintiff address you in the press room in any way ? ”", "GPE : “ No . While I was reading the documents for the meeting I was not , as I stated , paying attention to what the security officer and the plaintiff were talking about . I do not know whether the plaintiff was addressing me because I was reacting to the word ' journalists ' when I looked up and saw the handgun in his hand . ”", "The plaintiff 's representative : “ Did the plaintiff or anyone else point the handgun at you ? ”", "GPE : “ I did not see that . ”", "The plaintiff 's representative : “ Did you publish anything concerning the incident ? ”", "GPE : “ I gave my comment after MPs asked a question about the incident and after the plaintiff gave his own account in the media of the events . ”", "The plaintiff 's representative : “ Why did not you react and report on the incident immediately ? ”", "PERSON : “ It happened on DATE and I ... did not want to react until I had calmed down . After DATE I decided to inform the editor of ORG list and the presidency of ORG of the incident . ”", "The plaintiff 's representative : “ Did you inform the ORG journalists of the incident ? ”", "GPE : “ I talked about the incident with my journalist colleagues in ORG , where the journalists who followed the work of the ORG were [ based ] . ”", "The plaintiff : “ In which hand was I holding the handgun ? ”", "PERSON : “ In your right hand . ”", "The plaintiff : “ Do you remember what was I holding in my left hand ? ”", "GPE : “ I am not certain whether you were holding anything in your left hand . ”", "The plaintiff : “ Was I pointing the handgun at someone ? ”", "GPE : “ I already said that I did not see that . ”", "The plaintiff : “ At that moment in the press room did I say : ' I will kill you now ! ' ? ”", "GPE : “ I do not remember that you addressed me at that moment . ”", "The plaintiff : “ Could you quote exactly what I said to you in the corridor ? ”", "GPE : “ You told me : ' You are a killer with a baby face and you should be killed ' . ”", "The respondent 's representative : “ Did you talk to the ORG journalist about the incident ? ”", "GPE : “ The ORG journalist was present when I discussed it with [ a ] colleague ... from my editorial board . ”", "The respondent 's representative : “ Did you consider the handgun in the plaintiff 's hand as a personal threat ? ”", "GPE : “ Yes . ”", "The respondent 's representative : “ Did you have any motive to invent the whole incident in order to harm the plaintiff ? ”", "GPE : “ No . I consider myself a serious and responsible person and so far I have not had any incidents of this sort . As regards my reporting on the work of the Government , I have written a lot and there have never been any denials or claims that I wrote something that was not true . ”", "The respondent 's representative : “ Did you talk about the incident with ORG ? ”", "GPE : “ No . I have to add that I talked to ORG only after the whole incident had been reported in ORG ] , because her name had been mentioned , and after [ she ] had talked to ORG president of the [ journalists ] association . After that ... PERSON and I met and on that occasion she practically confirmed my statement and said that she remembered seeing the handgun being pointed at me . ”", "The respondent 's representative : “ Did NORP state on that occasion that the handgun had been in the plaintiff 's hand ? ”", "GPE : “ Yes . ”", "At the hearing on DATE the court heard evidence from the journalist PERSON The relevant part of her testimony reads as follows :", "ORG : “ I was present during the incident ... in the press room . ... [ W]hen I entered the press room I saw that the plaintiff and PERSON were talking . I understood from the conversation that that the topic was the article PERSON had written ... From what I heard ... I did not consider that they were talking with raised voices . To the contrary , on that occasion I said to the plaintiff jokingly something like ' As long as you politicians and us journalists exist , there will always be situations where you will not be satisfied with what we write ' after which I said something like ' PERSON is a good girl ' . I had said that before the security officer took out the handgun . Then , as the Government meeting was approaching , the security officer came to look for the plaintiff , to which he jokingly replied : ' Did you come to apprehend me ? You have the power . ' When he was leaving the room he [ inadvertently ] touched the security officer and asked where his weapon was . The security officer took out the handgun and placed it on his palm , after which I told him that I had been taught that a weapon should always be pointed away from people . At that he said that I should not be afraid , because he had taken out the bullets . As far as I remember , the plaintiff [ then ] left the room , whereas I stayed with the security officer and asked about the handgun ... I am certain that when I entered the press room the plaintiff and PERSON were talking . I even asked them what was going on because from the first [ few ] sentences I could not understand what the conversation was about . Neither of them replied to my question but I understood what the conversation was about , namely the article that PERSON had written .", "While in the room , I did not hear the plaintiff saying anything that could sound like a threat to GPE The plaintiff did not take the handgun from the security officer at any moment .", "The plaintiff 's representative : “ Did the plaintiff at any moment call PERSON ' the killer with a baby face ' ? ”", "ORG : “ No . ”", "At the hearing on DATE the court heard evidence from the journalist PERSON The relevant part of her testimony reads as follows :", "ORG : “ I regularly follow Government meetings as a journalist for PERSON . On DATE , at the top of the staircase [ of the building ] where the Government meeting was held , I saw the plaintiff in the company of my colleagues .... I stopped and we started talking about computers , after which the plaintiff started talking about the article PERSON had published in ORG list . The plaintiff was angry on account of the article and ... said that GPE should be killed and that she was a killer with a baby face . After that I went to the press room .", "After I entered the room ... I sat in front of the computer and GPE subsequently entered ; we greeted each other , and I continued working . I noticed when the plaintiff entered the room but I did not notice when the security officer entered .... I heard raised voices . I was to the side of the plaintiff and PERSON , who was sitting at the table . I heard some rustling , so I turned toward them and saw that the plaintiff was searching the security officer . I continued working but again raised voices drew my attention . I can not say for certain whose voices these were . As far as I can say , I think the plaintiff and PERSON were talking . When I looked toward them I saw that the plaintiff was standing in front of GPE and was holding a handgun in his right hand , and his right hand was leaning on the palm of his left hand ... He said that journalists would be able to write that he had tried to kill PERSON Then ORG entered and said : ' Not PERSON , she is good . ' I got scared because I am afraid of weapons ; I turned away and when I looked again the handgun was in the hands of PERSON", "Then I noticed that ORG was talking to the security officer about the handgun , but I did not notice when the plaintiff left the room . PERSON then left the room and went to follow the Government meeting .", "I remember that ORG told the security guard that her grandfather had a handgun like that .", "After that we started following the meeting with other journalists .", "I asked GPE whether she would publish [ the incident ] in the newspapers and she said that she would not .... ”", "The plaintiff : “ Was GPE present when I said that she was a killer with a baby face ? ”", "PERSON : “ PERSON was not present at the time . ”", "The plaintiff : “ What were my exact words ? ”", "ORG : “ You said that , as for GPE , she should be killed , that she was a killer with a baby face . ”", "The plaintiff : “ Did you ever convey those words ... to GPE ? ”", "PERSON : “ I told [ her ] after the Government meeting was over . ”", "The plaintiff : “ Why did not you do so before the meeting ? ”", "ORG : “ I did not wish to talk about it with [ her ] , and I thought that you would say something to her yourself . When I saw the handgun I realised that the situation was serious and after the meeting I retold the conversation to [ her ] ”", "The plaintiff 's representative : “ Could you describe exactly how the plaintiff searched the security officer ? ”", "ORG : “ He was searching him on the upper part of his body , until the belt . After that I turned away and was working on the computer . ”", "The plaintiff 's representative : “ Did the plaintiff take the handgun from the security officer ? ”", "ORG : “ I do not know . ”", "The plaintiff 's representative : “ Did the plaintiff point the handgun at GPE ? ”", "ORG : “ He did not point the handgun at GPE I saw that the plaintiff 's right hand , in which he was holding the handgun , was bent , but I did not see whether he was holding his fingers on the trigger . ”", "The plaintiff : “ With how many hands was I searching the security guard ? Was I holding something in my hands ? ”", "ORG : “ You were using both hands . You were not holding anything in your hands .", "The plaintiff 's representative : “ Did you see where the handgun went from the plaintiff 's hands ? ”", "ORG : “ I did not see . But I turned my head away and said : ' Put that away . ' ”", "The plaintiff 's representative : “ Why did not you publish anything about the incident , given that you are a journalist ? ”", "ORG : “ I asked GPE , who did not wish it to be published . Out of journalistic solidarity I could not publish it . ”", "At the same hearing the court also heard evidence from the chief editor of ORG , PERSON The relevant part of his testimony reads as follows :", "PERSON : “ I found out about the incident ... from the colleague who follows the Government meetings and reports on them . The editor of the Terminator [ column in ORG ] checked with the people from the Government . As we received similar information from them ... , we decided to go ahead with the text that was published in the Terminator column in LOC .", "I did not personally verify anything , because that was the responsibility of the editors of specific columns in the newspaper . ”", "The plaintiff 's representative : “ Who were the people close to the Government with whom you checked the information published in ORG ? ”", "PERSON : “ It is not appropriate to discuss that , because if I reveal it now I will no longer have that source . ”", "The plaintiff 's representative : “ Did someone talk to the plaintiff about this matter ? ”", "PERSON : “ I do not know . I would have to ask the editor [ of the Terminator column ] . ”", "The respondent 's representative : “ What was meant by the part of the text in which it was indicated that the handgun was pointed at the dumbfounded journalist ? ”", "PERSON : “ It was figurative ; I do not think that the plaintiff literally pointed the handgun at GPE ”", "...", "The plaintiff : “ Why did not you consider it necessary to address me personally in order to verify the accuracy of the allegations concerning the handgun ? ”", "PERSON : “ Because the editors of specific columns bear the responsibility for those columns . ”", "The court then heard evidence from ORG as the plaintiff . The relevant part of his statement reads as follows :", "B.Š. : “ On DATE , while walking down the corridor to my room , I met the journalists GPE and PERSON , who usually followed Government meetings . On that occasion GPE asked me when the next Government press conference would take place , to which I replied : ' What is the point in deceiving the public ? ' . PERSON asked if I had in mind PERSON 's article . I replied that I had been hurt by GPE 's article , which implied that I was deceiving the public ... After that PERSON came , and we discussed her article in her presence . I said : “ I can understand that you do not like me but I can not understand that you are writing such things . ” I considered her a very responsible journalist , because she had previously published an interview with me , which was , in my opinion , very fair .", "At that point I saw minister PERSON who was coming to the Government meeting ... I said ' Here is the killer with a baby face ' , referring to minister M.", "After that I went to my office to pick up the documents for the Government meeting .", "...", "ORG then described the incident in the press room :", "“ ... Shortly afterwards , security officer PERSON , whom I knew , entered the room . ... [ He ] said that he had an order to take me to the Prime Minister , to which I replied asking if he had come to take me or apprehend me , whereupon he said that he did not mind , so long as he complied with his order . At that moment I patted him on his jacket on the right side and , since it was visible that he had a handgun in the inside pocket , I said : ' You have the power . ' PERSON ... took out the handgun , saying ' Here are the arguments . ' At that point I heard a female voice – I am not certain whether it was PERSON 's voice – saying : “ Do not play with weapons ! ” , at which I said : ' You should put that away , otherwise the newspapers will write about it . '", "I said that because we were among journalists . I never held the handgun in my hands . I had the documents for the meeting and in my right hand I had a cigarette . I had never put those documents away . It is not true that I was searching the security officer with both hands .", "After I said that to the security officer , GPE showed up and said : ' Just so that you know , I will publish that . ' I did not reply ... because I was not certain whether she was serious or was joking , and left the room .", "I was present when PERSON came and commented on the security officer 's handgun , saying something like : ' My grandfather has a better handgun . '", "...", "It was not until DATE that I was informed that ORG had published a text mentioning that I had threatened the journalist PERSON I simply failed to react ... out of naivety , because I expected that one of the journalists [ who had been ] present would write ... what had actually happened and state that the incident had not been the way it was described in ORG .", "...", "None of the authors of the texts that are the subject of these proceedings called me concerning the incident , in order to talk to me or get a statement from me . ”", "The judge : “ Did you address PERSON in the press room ? ”", "B.Š. : “ I did not address her . As I said , she addressed me first when she said that she would publish that . It is not true that I said that PERSON was a killer with a baby face and that she should be killed . “", "...", "The respondent 's representative : “ Why did you enter the press room ? ”", "B.Š. : “ I can not say for certain . I assume that I entered to tap [ the ashes ] off my cigarette or because I was talking to someone . “", "...", "The respondent 's representative : “ Did you see it as normal for the security officer to take out his handgun ? ”", "B.Š. : “ I felt uneasy . Especially with the journalists in the room . ”", "...", "The respondent 's representative : “ Do you remember what ORG said when she entered the room ? ”", "B.Š. : “ I do remember . ... The first words she said were : ' Not E.V. , she is good . '", "The respondent 's representative : “ Did you understand that these words were addressed to you ? ”", "B.Š. : “ At that moment I was not looking at ORG Given the phrase ' PERSON is good ' , those words could have been addressed to anyone in the press room . ”", "At the hearing on DATE the court heard evidence from the author of the article , the ORG journalist PERSON The relevant part of his testimony reads as follows :", "PERSON : “ I had obtained the information I wrote about in ORG from GPE on DATE after the incident – actually , I am not certain that it was DATE in the café at the ORG . PERSON was sitting with a colleague and I found them talking . She was excited . I asked her what was going on , after which she told me about the incident that had occurred in the ORG , when the plaintiff had addressed her on the staircase about the article she had written and had threatened to kill her . This is what she said . He had been verbally attacking her . He had continued to follow her to the press room and had continued with verbal attacks , even though , as GPE told me , he had been trying to do so jokingly . Among journalists the plaintiff is known for his specific sense of humour .", "When I speak of the plaintiff 's specific sense of humour , I mean that he is not willing to accept journalists ' criticism , and reacts vehemently to texts concerning him . For the most part , he reacted [ to PERSON 's text ] jokingly . PERSON then told me that during these verbal attacks the plaintiff had asked for a handgun from the security officer , saying ' Give me the handgun ! ' and pointed it at FAC while saying : ' What should I do now ? Should I kill her ? '", "I tried to check this information by contacting the plaintiff 's office . It was DATE , DATE on which the edition closes , and the deadlines were running out . I tried to reach the plaintiff a few times but did not succeed because , as his secretary told me , he was unavailable . ”", "...", "The judge : “ To whom did you pass the information ? ”", "PERSON : “ I can not remember with certainty but I think to PERSON , the editor of the Terminator column . ”", "The judge : “ Did you really believe , on the basis of ORG statement , that the plaintiff had threatened her or tried to kill her ? ”", "PERSON : “ Of course I did not , nor did PERSON say that . She described it as an inappropriate joke , and I understood it that way . Since she is a colleague whom I have known for DATE I accepted her statement as being true . The text was published in Terminator column precisely because it was a joke , otherwise it would have been published on the front page . ”", "The judge : “ Did you believe that the information was true because you got it from GPE ? ”", "PERSON : “ It is difficult for me to reply to that question . She is a person that I know well , who is almost my friend , and that is why I accepted the information . ”", "...", "At the same hearing the court also heard evidence from the ORG list journalist PERSON , who was the President of ORG at the time . The relevant part of her testimony reads as follows :", "J.V. : “ I got the information ... from GPE , and from [ my ] conversation with PERSON and GPE", "...", "As regards PERSON , she told me that on DATE she had met the plaintiff on the staircase of the ORG ... The plaintiff had reacted vehemently to the article she had written on the budget , and had said ... angrily that she was a killer with a baby face and should be killed . After that he had followed her to the press room ... , had taken a handgun from the security officer , and had pointed it at [ her ] . From the conversation with ORG I found out that [ she ] had entered the press room when the plaintiff was holding the handgun in his hand . According to ORG , it was a tense and uneasy situation so she took the handgun from the plaintiff 's hands in order to calm the situation and said that she had already seen such a handgun . ... When taking the handgun ORG said : ' Not E.V. , she is good . ' ”", "...", "The plaintiff 's representative : “ When did you talk to GPE and find out [ about the incident ] ? ”", "J.V. : “ DATE after the incident , DATE before [ the information ] was published in ORG . ”", "In her written statement the journalist GPE stated that she had heard that the security officer involved in the incident had been dismissed for allowing a third person to take his official handgun . Since she was unable to obtain either confirmation or denial of that information from the ORG or the Government , she decided to call ORG , who had witnessed the incident . The relevant part of GPE 's statement reads as follows :", "“ I called my colleague PERSON and told her what I wanted to know . She was unable to confirm the veracity of my information . On the contrary , she claimed that it was not correct and , in a TIME telephone conversation , told me the following :", "' Unbelievable ! Everybody is writing about the incident between GPE and GPE as if they were personally present . I wanted to tell you that you are the first journalist who has called me for information ... I was really the right person , since I saw what happened . I was standing next to GPE and GPE when they were discussing her recently published article on the Deputy Prime Minister [ i.e. PERSON ] . I did not have the impression that they were arguing . At CARDINAL point the Deputy Prime Minister PERSON took the handgun from the security officer in his hands and said rather jokingly : ' What should I do to her ? Should I kill her ? ' And that was all . None of us present understood it as a threat , nor did I think that something could happen to ... PERSON I was surprised that she published it at all in ORG list . ' ”", "On DATE ORG gave judgment , partially granting the plaintiff 's claim . It ordered the applicant company to pay MONEY ( HRK ) as compensation for non - pecuniary damage , together with the statutory default interest running from the adoption of the judgment until payment , and HRK CARDINAL in costs .", "In its reasoning , the court held that the published information had been untrue and that the applicant had not properly verified its accuracy . In particular , it found that ORG had not held the handgun in his hands during the described incident , since this had been confirmed by the testimonies of CARDINAL eyewitnesses , PERSON and ORG , and by PERSON himself . Although the CARDINAL remaining eyewitnesses , GPE and PERSON , testified that the handgun had indeed been in PERSON 's hands , the court did not find their testimonies convincing , on the ground that they differed . The relevant part of the judgment reads as follows :", "“ As to ... whether the plaintiff ... took the official handgun from the security officer in the press room and threatened GPE with it , the court ... heard evidence from the plaintiff ... and witnesses GPE , GPE , GPE and GPE", "The plaintiff and witnesses PERSON and ORG stated in their testimonies that the plaintiff had not had PERSON 's official handgun in his hands . Witness PERSON testified that , while reading the documents for the forthcoming session , she had at some point looked up and seen the plaintiff ... holding the handgun in the palm of his hand , after which the journalist PERSON had come in and had taken the handgun , saying ' Not PERSON , she is good ' . In reply to the question from whom [ ORG ] had taken the handgun , the plaintiff or PERSON , witness PERSON could not reply with certainty , explaining that it had all happened relatively quickly and that she had been shocked to see the handgun in the plaintiff 's hands , since she had seen this as a personal threat .", "Witness PERSON in her testimony also stated that ... she had seen the plaintiff searching the security officer PERSON , after which the plaintiff had held the handgun in the palm of his right hand , which he had been holding ... on the palm of his left hand . According to [ her ] testimony , the plaintiff was at that moment talking to GPE with a raised voice .", "The court does not accept the testimonies of GPE and PERSON , because they are not convincing . PERSON expressly stated that in the press room she had neither talked to the plaintiff nor had [ he ] addressed her , whereas witness PERSON stated that the plaintiff and PERSON had talked with raised voices .", "Witness PERSON said that the plaintiff had had the handgun on the palm of his right hand , whereas PERSON testified that he had been holding [ it ] with both hands , that is , that CARDINAL palm had been resting on the other . PERSON was unable to say from whom PERSON had taken the handgun , whereas ORG stated that she had taken it from the plaintiff 's hands .", "On the other hand , the testimonies of ORG and the plaintiff ... are in concordance ... From the testimony of the plaintiff and PERSON it follows that while in the press room the plaintiff was holding the documents for the forthcoming session under his left arm , so it was not possible that he was holding the handgun in his hand [ at the same time ] , as ... PERSON testified .", "This court does not accept the written statement ... by GPE or the testimony of PERSON , because they were not present during the incident and have no direct knowledge of it . It is to be noted that GPE 's written statement and the testimony of PERSON concerning PERSON 's testimony ... are completely contradictory and different , for which reason the court does not accept them as convincing .", "...", "Given that the plaintiff was acquitted by a final judgment in criminal proceedings on a charge of ... having told GPE on DATE ' you should be killed ' , and of having taken the handgun afterwards from the security officer PERSON and held it in his hand , and having regard to the testimonies of witnesses PERSON , PERSON and the plaintiff himself ... , and even GPE herself , this court finds that on the critical [ date ] the plaintiff did not threaten PERSON , nor did he say on the same occasion that ... she should be killed . For that reason the conditions set forth in section CARDINAL(CARDINAL)CARDINAL of the [ Public Information ] Act for exonerating the [ respondent ] from liability to pay damages are not met , in that the information causing the damage is not based on true facts . The court also establishes that the conditions for exculpation of the publisher DATE according to which the publisher is to be exonerated from liability if the information causing damage is based on facts which the author had reasonable grounds to believe were true and with regard to which it took all necessary measures to verify their accuracy – were not met either .", "In this respect the court ... heard evidence from witnesses ... PERSON and PERSON ...", "PERSON stated that he had not checked the accuracy of the published information , whereas PERSON , as the author of the article , ... stated that he had obtained the information from PERSON [ N.T. ] testified that he had contacted the plaintiff 's office in order to verify the information , but had been unable to reach the plaintiff , who was very busy , and that , given the source of the information , he had considered [ it ] accurate .", "...", "The court therefore finds that the [ respondent ] did not , as provided by section CARDINAL(CARDINAL)CARDINAL of the [ LAW , take all necessary measures to verify the accuracy of the information ... , for which reason the conditions for [ its ] exculpation [ were not met ] in the present case .", "...", "The court finds that by [ publishing ] the disputed text the [ respondent ] harmed the dignity , honour and reputation of the plaintiff , and that therefore there is a legal basis for [ awarding the ] compensation for non - pecuniary damage sought by the plaintiff .", "According to the information in the case file , it is established that the circulation of ORG is CARDINAL copies ...", "In deciding on the amount claimed by the plaintiff and the damages to be awarded ... for his mental pain , the court took into account the circulation of [ ORG ] , ... the way in which the article was worded , and ... the fact that the plaintiff is a public figure who must as such accept the fact that not all members of the public are favourable towards him , [ for which reason ] his reactions to negative reviews must be different from that of an ordinary person . ... [ G]iven that ORG first wrote on the incident ... of CARDINAL DATE in a manner which , in the view of this court , harmed the plaintiff 's dignity , reputation and honour , the court awards [ him ] CARDINAL [ NORP ] kunas together with the statutory default interest from the adoption of the judgment until payment , as just satisfaction for the damage sustained ... The remainder of the plaintiff 's claim , in the amount of CARDINAL [ NORP ] kunas , is dismissed as unfounded . ”", "NORP On appeal , on DATE ORG ( Županijski sud u GPE ) upheld the first - instance judgment but reduced the amount of damages payable to ORG to HRK CARDINAL,CARDINAL and the costs to HRK CARDINAL,CARDINAL .", "The applicant company then lodged an appeal on points of law ( revizija ) against the second - instance judgment . On DATE ORG ( PERSON ) dismissed the applicant company 's appeal on points of law , endorsing the reasons given by the lower courts in their judgments .", "Finally , on DATE ORG ( Ustavni sud PERSON ) dismissed the applicant company 's subsequent constitutional complaint , finding no violation of its constitutional right to freedom of expression . The relevant part of the decision reads as follows :", "ORG found that the complainants ' constitutional rights guaranteed by LAW had not been breached by the impugned judgments .", "Constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression of thoughts , which includes the freedom of the press , is not absolute but is subject to restrictions prescribed by LAW or statute .", "Those restrictions stem , in respect of the media , from the ... LAW ...", "Having regard to the findings of the [ lower ] courts that the complainant harmed the plaintiff 's dignity , reputation and honour by publishing incorrect information and that he is ordered by the impugned judgments to compensate the plaintiff for the damage caused thereby , the complainant 's reliance on Article CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) is unfounded .", "As regards the provisions of LAW , according to which the exercise of freedom of expression carries with it duties and responsibilities and may be subject to restrictions , ORG notes the following :", "Freedom of expression represents one of the important foundations of every democratic society . Its protection is of special significance where the press is concerned because the latter 's task is , inter alia , to publish information of public importance . However , the freedom to publish information in the press is circumscribed by the protection of the dignity and reputation of other persons . It is therefore important to determine the conditions under which the ORG authorities may take measures which could impinge on the activity of the press in cases of legitimate public interest .", "Freedom of expression of thoughts concerns not only the publication and expression of information with positive connotations , but also the publication of information which may resonate negatively in the public . However , freedom of the press is not absolute , but is subject to certain restrictions , even in respect of press articles which concern information of public interest . These duties and responsibilities come into play also when , as in the present case , the reputation of a ORG official is harmed . It is precisely because of these duties and responsibilities of those who exercise their right to freedom of expression that the press , when imparting information of public interest , is bound to act in good faith in order to provide trustworthy information in accordance with the ethics of journalism .", "In assessing whether freedom of expression has been breached it is necessary to view each individual case in the light of all the circumstances , including the content of the impugned statements , as well as the context in which they were made . In particular , it is necessary to establish whether the measures taken in order to restrict freedom of expression are proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued by that restriction . The protection of a ORG official from harassment must however respect the right and the interest of the press to free reporting and allow it to impart freely information of public interest .", "The article for which the [ complainant ] was ordered to pay damages to the victim is , by its content , of such a nature that it constituted an attack on the victim as a public figure , in particular on his reputation , and it certainly influenced public confidence in him , given his function as Deputy Prime Minister of the Government of GPE at the time . ORG , in this particular case , and on the basis of the findings of the [ lower ] courts , finds that the impugned article contained allegations on the behaviour of another individual ( public figure ) , which harmed [ his ] reputation ...", "It has to be noted that the impugned allegations were based on the statement of CARDINAL individual and were not completely arbitrary in nature . Namely , even if a public figure was involved , the complainant was required to verify the accuracy of the information before its publication . This is especially so because the impugned allegations related to a specific incident . The [ lower ] courts found that the [ complainant ] , in publishing information which could have harmed the dignity , honour and reputation of another person , had not taken all necessary measures in order to verify its accuracy .", "Given that the [ complainant ] in this case did not satisfy its duty to verify the information before publication , as ... it was required to do , and given that the information harmed the reputation and honour of another person , ORG considers that the measures restricting the [ complainant 's ] freedom of expression were necessary and justified .", "As regards the compensation for non - pecuniary damage awarded for harming the reputation of another person , the Constitutional Court emphasizes that the courts have discretion in assessing the amount of compensation for mental pain sustained by the victim , having regard to the circumstances of each case . However , a judicial decision on the amount of such compensation may also breach the principle of proportionality between the intensity of the interference by the courts with freedom of expression and the importance of the interest pursued by the restriction of that freedom .", "The Constitutional Court finds that the measure taken to protect the reputation of another person , that is , the award of damages in the above - mentioned amount , is proportional to the intensity of the breach of that person 's reputation , and to the intensity of the interference by the courts with the freedom of expression caused by that measure . Given that the complainant as a publishing house did not comply in its activities with the provisions of the [ LAW ] , ORG considers that the article tarnished the reputation of another person and undermined the public confidence in that person as a ORG official .", "Therefore , it is established that the measure taken in this case to restrict the freedom of the press is , taken as a whole , proportional to achieving the legitimate aim – the protection of the reputation of another person , and that the impugned judicial decisions did not lead to a restriction of the complainant 's rights or freedoms , contrary to LAW .", "ORG decision was served on the applicant company 's representative on DATE .", "The relevant part of LAW ORG , ORG nos . DATE , CARDINAL , CARDINAL/CARDINAL ( consolidated text ) , CARDINAL , DATE ( consolidated text ) , CARDINAL and DATE ( consolidated text ) , PERSON ( corrigendum ) ) provides as follows :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) Rights and freedoms may be restricted only by law in order to protect the rights and freedoms of others , the legal order , public morals or health .", "( CARDINAL ) Every restriction of the rights and freedoms should be proportional to the nature of the necessity for the restriction in each individual case .", "“ ( CARDINAL ) Freedom of thought and expression shall be guaranteed .", "( CARDINAL ) Freedom of expression shall include in particular the freedom of the press and other media , freedom of speech and public expression , and free establishment of all media institutions .", "( CARDINAL ) Censorship shall be forbidden . Journalists shall have the right to freedom of reporting and access to information .", "( CARDINAL ) The right to correction shall be guaranteed to anyone whose rights guaranteed by the LAW or a statute were breached by public information . ”", "Sections CARDINAL and CARDINAL of LAW ( Zakon o obveznim odnosima , ORG of ORG nos . CARDINAL , DATE and DATE , and ORG no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL with subsequent amendments DATE “ the DATE LAW ” ) provided , inter alia , that anyone who has suffered mental anguish as a consequence of an injury to his or her honour or reputation may , depending on its duration and intensity , sue for damages before the civil courts and , in addition , request other forms of redress “ which may be capable ” of affording adequate non - pecuniary satisfaction .", "The relevant part of LAW ( Zakon o javnom priopćavanju , ORG nos . CARDINAL , DATE ( corrigendum ) , CARDINAL ( amendments ) and CARDINAL ( consolidated text ) ) , as in force at the material time , provided :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) A publisher who causes damage to another person by publishing certain information in the media shall be obliged to compensate it .", "...", "( CARDINAL ) Non - pecuniary damage shall be compensated by correcting false information , by publishing a correction of the information and an apology , and by payment of just satisfaction for sustained pain and anguish , if their duration and intensity so justify , in accordance with the general provisions of civil law .", "( CARDINAL ) Non - pecuniary damage shall be compensated by a publisher who , through information about personal or family life , or by any other information published in the media , violated another person 's privacy , dignity , reputation , honour or any other constitutionally or statutorily protected right . ”", "“ The publisher shall not be liable in damages :", "...", "if the information causing the damage is based on :", "ORG - true facts , or", "- facts which the author had reasonable grounds to believe were true and undertook all necessary measures to verify their veracity , provided there existed a legitimate public interest in publishing such information and the author acted in good faith ,", "... ”", "The relevant part of LAW ( NORP časti hrvatskih novinara , of DATE , applicable at the material time , reads as follows :", "“ A journalist is bound to publish true , balanced and verified information . He or she shall indicate persons or institutions from which he or she obtained data , information or statement . He or she has a right not to disclose the source of information , but for published information bears moral , material and criminal responsibility . ”" ]

[]

[]

[]

[ "10" ]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE , GPE .", "On DATE the applicant and his wife attended a dinner organised by their neighbours . An argument broke out between the applicant and his neighbour . They left the room and began struggling in the kitchen . Subsequently , they stopped the tussle and the applicant returned home . Apparently , TIME , when the neighbour was on his way to a church , the applicant assaulted him and beat him unconscious .", "On DATE the applicant was arrested on charges of aggravated assault and placed in the FAC ( Rejonowy Areszt Śledczy ) .", "On DATE the applicant ’s wife gave a statement to the police . She stated that she had attended the dinner , but she had not known anything about the struggle in which her husband had taken part , as she had stayed in the room with the other women . She had found out about it only after her husband had been arrested by the police .", "On DATE the applicant ’s wife confirmed her previous statement .", "The applicant ’s wife applied for permission to visit the applicant in prison . On an unknown date ORG ( Prokurator Rejonowy ) refused her request .", "On DATE the applicant applied for permission to be visited by his wife . On DATE ORG refused this request . The prosecutor held that on account of the fact that the applicant ’s wife had been called as a witness by the prosecution no such permission could be granted .", "Meanwhile , on DATE the applicant ’s wife again gave a statement to the police . Having been duly informed of her rights , she refused to testify against her husband in the case .", "On DATE the prosecutor allowed the applicant ’s wife to visit the applicant in prison .", "On DATE the applicant ’s wife visited him in prison . However , they could communicate during the visit only by internal phone and she was not allowed to bring their DATE son .", "On DATE the applicant requested the ORG to allow his wife to visit him . On DATE he lodged a complaint with ORG against the decision to refuse his wife permission to visit him .", "On DATE the ORG ( PERSON ) informed the applicant that he should not be allowed to have any personal contact with his wife as she was a witness in the proceedings against him . However , the court stressed that the applicant could be visited by adults who were not witnesses in his case and by his DATE son . The court further noted that the next hearing was set for DATE . If the applicant ’s wife testified on that date she would be allowed to visit him in prison .", "On DATE the applicant asked ORG to indicate a person who could accompany his son to the detention centre . The court in reply informed the applicant that he should indicate such a person . As the applicant failed to do so , his son did not visit him in prison .", "On DATE the President of ORG informed the applicant that his wife was not allowed to visit him in the detention centre since she had testified twice in the investigative stage of the proceedings and those testimonies were relevant to the offences with which the applicant had been charged . The date of the hearing in the applicant ’s case had been set for DATE and his wife ought to have testified on that date . However , a request by the applicant ’s lawyer for an expert psychiatrist ’s report caused an adjournment of the trial until DATE . The president further noted that until the applicant ’s wife testified in the trial the court had the right to refuse her requests to visit the applicant , in order to secure the proper conduct of the proceedings .", "The applicant ’s wife failed to appear at the hearing held on DATE before ORG and in consequence she was fined .", "The applicant ’s wife subsequently applied again for permission to visit him in prison .", "During the hearing held on DATE the applicant ’s wife refused to testify in the proceedings against her husband .", "The applicant submitted that his wife was allowed to visit him in prison DATE .", "On DATE the applicant was convicted as charged and sentenced to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment . The court extended the applicant ’s detention until the judgment became final .", "On DATE the applicant and his wife were deprived of their parental rights in respect of their son PERSON The child was placed in a care institution . The court held that the applicant was in prison and the mother was a regular abuser of alcohol . The court further pointed out that on DATE the mother had left her son unattended in the street , which had considerably endangered her child ’s security .", "On DATE ORG upheld the applicant ’s conviction .", "Pursuant to LAW a detainee is allowed to receive visitors , provided that he obtained permission from the investigating prosecutor ( at the investigative stage ) or from the trial court ( once the trial has begun ) .", "The relevant extracts from the Recommendation read as follows :", "“ Part II Conditions of imprisonment", "Contact with the outside world", "CARDINAL Prisoners shall be allowed to communicate as often as possible by letter , telephone or other forms of communication with their families , other persons and representatives of outside organisations and to receive visits from these persons .", "CARDINAL Communication and visits may be subject to restrictions and monitoring necessary for the requirements of continuing criminal investigations , maintenance of good order , safety and security , prevention of criminal offences and protection of victims of crime , but such restrictions , including specific restrictions ordered by a judicial authority , shall nevertheless allow an acceptable minimum level of contact .", "CARDINAL National law shall specify national and international bodies and officials with whom communication by prisoners shall not be restricted .", "CARDINAL The arrangements for visits shall be such as to allow prisoners to maintain and develop family relationships in as normal a manner as possible .", "CARDINAL.CARDINAL Prison authorities shall assist prisoners in maintaining adequate contact with the outside world and provide them with the appropriate welfare support to do so . ”" ]

[ "8" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE . At the date the application was lodged , he was living in GPE .", "On DATE the applicant was arrested .", "On DATE ORG , after hearing representations from the applicant , ordered his detention on remand . The applicant was assisted from this point on by counsel . ORG found that there was a strong suspicion that the applicant had evaded taxes on CARDINAL occasions DATE and DATE . He had been working as a self - employed commercial agent for several firms in GPE since DATE and been running a telephone service since DATE . In DATE the company ORG GPE had paid him commission amounting to CARDINAL,CARDINAL.CARDINAL Deutschmarks ( DEM ) . The court found that , according to the documents before it at that date , the applicant was suspected of having evaded turnover taxes of MONEY ( ORG ) , income taxes of EUR CARDINAL,CARDINAL and trade taxes of ORG CARDINAL .", "ORG noted that the applicant , who had availed himself of the right to remain silent , was strongly suspected of tax evasion on the basis of the business records that had been seized when his home was searched . He had to be placed in pre - trial detention because of a danger of collusion ( GPE ) ( see section CARDINAL § CARDINAL no . CARDINAL of LAW paragraph CARDINAL below ) . The documents seized were incomplete . There was therefore a risk that the applicant , if released , might destroy the missing documents or conceal further business transactions and accounts .", "On DATE the applicant , represented by counsel , lodged a motion for review of his detention order ( GPE ) with ORG . His counsel also requested access to the case files . He argued that he had a right to inspect the files in order to examine all the facts and evidence on which the arrest warrant and , in particular , the strong suspicion that an offence had been committed were based and that domestic law prohibited the court from considering facts and evidence to which defence counsel had been refused access pursuant to section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) .", "On DATE ORG informed the applicant ’s counsel that he was being refused access to the case files pursuant to section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW as access would jeopardise the purpose of the investigation . It added , however , that the public prosecutor in charge of the case was prepared to inform counsel orally about the facts and evidence . The applicant ’s counsel did not take up that offer .", "On DATE the ORG heard representations from the applicant and his defence counsel . The applicant argued that there was no risk of collusion or of his absconding . Should the court nevertheless consider that he might abscond if released he was ready to comply with any conditions imposed by the court , such as handing over his identity papers . The applicant ’s counsel complained that he had still not had access to the case files .", "By an order of DATE , ORG , which had before it the case files of the proceedings , upheld the arrest warrant . It found that there was still a risk that , if released , the applicant would tamper with factual evidence or interfere with witnesses . The applicant had so far tried to conceal his true place of residence and other personal details from the authorities and had acted with the intent to mislead which ,", "Following the applicant ’s appeal , which was lodged on CARDINAL DATE and was followed up by detailed reasons on CARDINAL DATE , ORG informed the applicant in a letter dated DATE that it considered that the risk of his absconding could serve as a ground for his continued detention . As to his counsel ’s request for access to the case files , it stated that he should be informed orally about the content of the files in the first instance .", "In a letter dated DATE , the applicant contested that view . He claimed , in particular , that in his case mere oral information about the content of the case files would not be sufficient .", "On DATE , after hearing representations from ORG and considering the case files , ORG dismissed the applicant ’s appeal against ORG decision dated DATE . It found that there was a strong suspicion that the applicant had evaded income , turnover and trade taxes . Furthermore , there was a danger of his absconding within the meaning of section CARDINAL § CARDINAL no . CARDINAL of LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) , as the applicant had connections in foreign countries and faced a heavy sentence .", "In view of defence counsel ’s refusal to accept the offer made by ORG to explain the content of the case files orally , ORG found that it was impossible to assess whether the information given in this manner would be sufficient . At the present stage of the proceedings , counsel for the defence could not , however , claim to be entitled to unlimited access to the complete case files .", "ORG decision was served on the applicant ’s counsel on DATE .", "On DATE the applicant , represented by counsel , lodged a further appeal against the detention order . He again claimed that he had a constitutional right to be given access to the facts and evidence on which the detention order was based .", "On DATE ORG decided , without giving further reasons , not to amend its decision of CARDINAL DATE . On DATE ORG , which had the case files , drafted a report which was sent to ORG with the files DATE .", "On DATE ORG , in its submissions to ORG , stated that it was not prepared to give the applicant access to the case files . It argued that it was sufficient for the applicant to be notified of the overview of ORG on the amount of his income and amount of the taxes evaded in DATE in question . The submissions and the case files reached ORG on DATE .", "On DATE the applicant sent further observations to ORG .", "On DATE the applicant , who had been sent the submissions of ORG on DATE , contested its arguments . He stated that the overview was merely a conclusion of ORG the merits of which he could not examine without having access to the documents and records on which it was based .", "On DATE ORG , on the applicant ’s further appeal , quashed ORG decision dated CARDINAL DATE and ORG decision dated DATE upholding the applicant ’s detention , and remitted the case to ORG .", "ORG , which had the investigation files before it , found that the detention order issued by ORG on DATE did not comply with the legal requirements . Therefore , the decisions taken in the judicial review proceedings by ORG on DATE and by ORG on DATE ( but not the detention order of DATE itself ) had to be quashed . Pursuant to section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) , the facts leading to a strong suspicion that the accused had committed a particular offence and the reasons for detention had to be set out in the detention order . In order to comply with the constitutional rights to be heard and to a fair trial , the facts and evidence on which the suspicion and the reasons for the defendant ’s detention on remand were based had to be described in sufficient detail to enable the accused to comment on them and defend himself effectively .", "ORG noted that , in its decisions on the applicant ’s detention , ORG had , however , merely stated that the applicant was strongly suspected of tax evasion “ on the basis of the business records seized when his home was searched ” . It should , at minimum , have summarised the results of the evaluation of those records in order to enable the accused to oppose the decision on detention by making his own submissions or presenting evidence . This defect had not been remedied in the course of the subsequent decisions on the applicant ’s continued detention . As counsel for the defence had also been refused access to the case files under section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW , these defects amounted to a denial of the right of the accused to be heard .", "ORG declined to take its own decision on the applicant ’s detention itself pursuant to section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) or to quash the detention order of DATE , which it considered to be defective in law ( rechtsfehlerhaft ) , but not void ( unwirksam ) . It stated that it would only quash the detention order if it was obvious that there was no strong suspicion that the accused had committed an offence and that there were no reasons for the arrest . It was for ORG to inform the accused of the reasons on which the suspicion of his having committed an offence were based and to hear representations from him on that issue . Should ORG persist , in the interest of its investigations , in not informing the accused of the reasons , the detention order would have to be quashed .", "As a consequence , the applicant remained in custody .", "On DATE ORG requested ORG to issue a fresh amended detention order against the applicant .", "On DATE the ORG again heard representations from the applicant , his defence counsel , ORG and an official in charge of investigations at ORG on the applicant ’s motion for judicial review of the detention order . The applicant ’s counsel was given copies of CARDINAL pages of the voluminous case files containing an overview by ORG of the amounts of income and taxes evaded by the applicant DATE . Relying on the applicant ’s rights to be heard and to a fair trial , the applicant ’s counsel complained that he had not been granted access to the case files before the hearing .", "NORP ORG then issued a fresh detention order against the applicant . It stated that there was a strong suspicion that the applicant had evaded taxes on CARDINAL occasions DATE and DATE . Listing in detail the applicant ’s income from his various activities as a self - employed commercial agent and the amounts of tax payable , ORG found that there was a strong suspicion that he had evaded turnover taxes of ORG , income taxes of DEM CARDINAL,CARDINAL , solidarity taxes of ORG and trade taxes of DEM CARDINAL,CARDINAL . It based its suspicion on documents whose content was explained by a tax official present at the hearing , witness statements of the owners of the firms the applicant was working for , the applicant ’s contracts of employment and the wage slips and commission statements that had been issued by the firms .", "ORG further found that there was a risk of the applicant ’s absconding , which was a ground for detention under LAW CARDINAL § CARDINAL no . CARDINAL of LAW . He faced a lengthy prison sentence which could no longer be suspended on probation , had not notified the authorities of his place of residence for DATE and had claimed that he was living in the GPE .", "By an order of DATE , ORG decided to suspend the execution of the arrest warrant on condition that the applicant , who in the meantime had complied with his duty to inform the authorities of his address , informed the court of every change of address , complied with all summonses issued by the court , ORG and the police , and reported to the police CARDINAL times a week . It suspended the execution of the order to release the applicant at the request of ORG , which had immediately lodged an appeal .", "On DATE , after hearing representations from the applicant and ORG , ORG dismissed the applicant ’s appeal against the detention order . It likewise dismissed the appeal lodged by ORG against the decision to suspend the execution of the detention order on the additional conditions that the applicant hand over his identity papers to ORG and deposit DEM CARDINAL as security .", "Having deposited the security , the applicant was released from prison on DATE .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a further appeal against ORG decision , complaining that his counsel had still not been granted access to the case files .", "By a letter dated DATE , ORG granted the applicant ’s counsel access to the case files . It stated that it had intended to send the files to him at an earlier date . However , this had not been possible as the files had been at ORG and had only recently been returned to ORG . The applicant ’s counsel received the files for inspection on CARDINAL DATE . The applicant withdrew his further appeal on CARDINAL DATE .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a complaint with ORG against the decision of ORG dated DATE and the detention order issued by ORG on DATE . In his submission , his rights to liberty , to be heard in court and to be informed promptly by a judge of the reasons for his detention on remand as well as his rights to be heard within a reasonable time and to a fair trial as guaranteed by LAW had been violated . He argued in particular that his right to liberty , the deprivation of which was only constitutional if it was in accordance with the law , had been breached by his illegal detention on the basis of a void detention order . The complete refusal to allow his defence counsel access to the case files pursuant to section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW had violated his right to be heard in court as guaranteed by LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) and his right to liberty under LAW of LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . The impugned decisions disregarded both the case - law of ORG and the ORG ’s case - law as laid down in its judgments of CARDINAL DATE in the cases of PERSON , PERSON and GPE . ORG refusal to quash the detention order and to take a decision itself and its decision to remit the case to ORG instead had also breached his right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time .", "On DATE and DATE the applicant extended his constitutional complaint to include the decisions of ORG dated DATE and the decision of ORG dated DATE .", "On DATE ORG , without giving further reasons , declined to consider the applicant ’s constitutional complaint against the detention orders issued by ORG on DATE and DATE , the decision of ORG dated DATE and the decision of ORG dated DATE .", "NORP On DATE the ORG convicted the applicant on CARDINAL counts of tax evasion and sentenced him to a total of DATE and CARDINAL months’ imprisonment suspended on probation . The court found that the applicant , who had confessed to the offences , had evaded turnover taxes of DEM CARDINAL , income taxes of ORG and trade taxes of CARDINAL .", "Sections CARDINAL et seq . of LAW ( Strafprozessordnung ) concern detention on remand . Pursuant to section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of the Code , a defendant may be detained on remand if there is a strong suspicion that he has committed a criminal offence and if there are grounds for arresting him . Grounds for arrest will exist where certain facts warrant the conclusion that there is a risk of his absconding ( section CARDINAL § CARDINAL no . CARDINAL ) or of collusion ( section CARDINAL § CARDINAL no . CARDINAL ) .", "According to section CARDINAL § § CARDINAL and CARDINAL of LAW , detention on remand is ordered by a judge in a written arrest warrant . The arrest warrant names the accused , the offence of which he is strongly suspected , including the time and place of its commission , and the grounds for the arrest . Moreover , the facts establishing the grounds for the strong suspicion that an offence has been committed and for the arrest must be set out in the arrest warrant unless national security would thereby be endangered .", "Under section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW , remand prisoners may ask at any time for judicial review ( GPE ) of the decision to issue an arrest warrant or for the warrant to be suspended . They may lodge an appeal under section CARDINAL of LAW ( Haftbeschwerde ) against a decision ordering their ( continued ) detention and a further appeal ( PERSON ) against ORG decision on the appeal ( section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW ) . If the appeal court considers the appeal against the ( continued ) detention to be well - founded , it will take a decision on the merits at the same time ( section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW ) . However , according to the domestic courts’ case - law , a detention order which does not comply with the duty to set out the grounds for suspecting the accused of an offence is not void , but merely defective in law . If , in such a case , the prosecution also refused access to the case file , the defective reasoning amounts to a refusal to hear representations from the defendant . In these circumstances , the court of appeal – by way of an exception to section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of the Code of Criminal Procedure – may remit the case to the district court ( see ORG , no . CARDINAL GPE CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of DATE , PERSON ) DATE , pp . CARDINAL ; compare also ORG , no . CARDINAL Ws CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of CARDINAL DATE , StV DATE , pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL , to which ORG referred in the present case ) .", "Section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that defence counsel is entitled to consult the files which have been or will be presented to the trial court , and to inspect the exhibits . Paragraph CARDINAL of this provision allows access to part or all of the files or to the exhibits to be refused until the preliminary investigation has ended if it might otherwise be at risk . At no stage of the proceedings may defence counsel be refused access to records concerning the examination of the accused , acts in the judicial investigation at which defence counsel was or should have been allowed to be present or expert reports ( section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of the said Code ) . Pending the termination of the preliminary investigation , it is for ORG to decide whether to grant access to the files or not ; thereafter it is for the president of the trial court ( section CARDINAL § CARDINAL ) . An accused who is in detention is entitled to seek judicial review of a decision of ORG to refuse access to the files ( ibid . ) .", "According to LAW every person involved in proceedings before a court is entitled to be heard by that court ( PERSON auf rechtliches PERSON ) .", "Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW provides that every person provisionally detained on suspicion of having committed a criminal offence must be brought before a judge DATE following his arrest ; the judge must inform him of the reasons for the arrest , hear representations from him and give him an opportunity to raise objections . The judge must then , without delay , either issue a written arrest warrant setting out the grounds therefor or order the detainee ’s release ." ]

[ "5" ]

[ "5-4" ]

[]

[ "5" ]

[ "5-1" ]

[]

[ "The applicants , PERSON ( “ the first applicant ” ) and her CARDINAL children , are NORP nationals who were born in DATE , DATE , DATE and DATE respectively and live in GPE .", "CARDINAL .", "The first applicant entered GPE on DATE on a valid visit visa , accompanied by her CARDINAL eldest children . The first applicant remained in GPE following the expiry of her visa and did not come to the attention of the authorities until she claimed asylum in DATE .", "NORP The basis of her claim was that she had married in DATE and , when her eldest daughter was born in DATE , her husband ’s family had raised the idea of having both her and the first applicant herself circumcised . Both the applicant and her husband had been averse to the idea . However , the applicant and her husband had separated when she was pregnant with her son , who was born in DATE , and their marriage ended definitively in DATE . Her third child , a girl born in GPE in DATE , was the result of a brief reconciliation with her husband . The applicant claimed to fear that , without the support of her husband , she would not be able to withstand his family ’s pressure to have her CARDINAL daughters , and herself , circumcised .", "Her asylum claim was refused on DATE . The Secretary of ORG noted that the applicant was no longer in contact with her husband or his family . The applicant had remained in GPE following her first daughter ’s birth , and even after separating from her husband , indicating that she did not genuinely fear her in - laws . Her last noted address had been in GPE , which was not where her in - laws lived . It was therefore believed that she could return to that city or relocate elsewhere in GPE and thus avoid her ex - husband ’s family , who would not be aware of her return , given their lack of contact . Furthermore , the background evidence indicated that the NORP authorities were taking steps to combat female genital mutilation ( “ ORG ” ) and had successfully outlawed the practice in several states . There were a number of women ’s non - governmental organisations that could offer support to the first applicant . It was therefore considered that there was a sufficiency of protection available to her . She also had family , including CARDINAL brothers , living in GPE and would therefore have a support network . Her claim was certified as clearly unfounded , meaning that she could not appeal against the refusal of asylum from within GPE .", "The first applicant was advised by her legal representatives that any application for judicial review of the decision to certify her claim had a very poor chance of succeeding , as her claim was weak . Since her case was publicly funded , her representatives could not bring such an application on her behalf given that there was no reasonable prospect of success . As a result of the withdrawal of publicly funded legal assistance , the first applicant did not seek judicial review of the certification of her asylum claim as clearly unfounded .", "Directions were set for the applicants’ removal on CARDINAL DATE . On DATE , the applicants sought an interim measure from this ORG in order to prevent their removal . On DATE , the Acting President of the Fourth Section , to which the case had been allocated , indicated to the Government of GPE that the applicants should not be removed until further notice . Upon further consideration of the case , the LAW DATE lifted the interim measure previously indicated . The applicants notified the ORG on DATE that , notwithstanding the lifting of the interim measure under Rule CARDINAL , they wished to continue with their complaints under the Convention .", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of the Nationality , Immigration and Asylum Act DATE , as amended by ORG , etc ) Act DATE , provides that , where a person has made an asylum or human rights claim and the Secretary of ORG has certified that that claim is clearly unfounded , the person may not bring an appeal whilst still in GPE . A claim will be certified as clearly unfounded only where , taking the claim at its highest , on any legitimate view it could not succeed .", "The only means by which a person can challenge the certification of their claim under section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) is by judicial review . The test that will be applied by the courts is whether , based on the material before the Secretary of ORG , there is a realistic prospect that an Immigration Judge , applying the rule of anxious scrutiny , would uphold an appeal ( see R ( on the application of ORG ) v. Secretary of ORG for ORG [ DATE ] EWCA Civ CARDINAL , paragraphs CARDINAL ) ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "In DATE the applicant was injured in a work - related accident . In DATE she sued ORG for disability benefits alleging that her current disability had resulted from that incident .", "On DATE ORG rejected the applicant 's claims . ORG examined , among other evidence , a decision by ORG of LOC , which indicated that the applicant 's disability had been caused by the injury she sustained in DATE .", "The applicant lodged an appeal with ORG . The appeal hearing was scheduled for DATE . According to the Government , the ORG dispatched summonses to the parties , including the applicant and her representative , informing them of the date and time of the appeal hearing . According to the applicant , she did not receive the summons .", "On DATE ORG examined the appeal and rejected it . The applicant and the representative of ORG were absent but the prosecutor intervened in the proceedings on behalf of ORG and addressed the court . ORG did not examine the question whether the applicant or her representative had been duly summonsed and , if they had not , whether the examination of the appeal should have been adjourned .", "The Code of Civil Procedure ( in force as of DATE ) provides that parties to the proceedings are to be summonsed to a court by registered mail with a confirmation of receipt , by a phone call or a telegram , by fax or by any other means which will secure delivery of the summons to the addressee . Summonses must be served on the parties in such a way that they have enough time to prepare their case and appear at the hearing ( Article CARDINAL ) .", "Summonses are to be sent by mail or by a court courier . The time when a summons is served on the addressee is to be recorded on a document which must be returned to the court by courier or by any other method used by the postal service . A judge may request a party to the proceedings to transmit a summons to another party . In that case , that person should bring to the court an acknowledgment of receipt ( Article CARDINAL ) .", "A summons is to be served on a person against his or her signature , on its copy , which is to be returned to the court ( Article CARDINAL ) .", "A civil case is to be heard in a court session with mandatory notification of all parties of the place and time of the court session ( LAW ) .", "If a party to the case fails to appear at the hearing and there is no evidence that the party has been duly summonsed , the hearing is to be adjourned ( Article CARDINAL ) ." ]

[ "6" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "On DATE the first applicant , born in DATE , was arrested on account of his purported connection with the criminal world and possession of drugs , offences prosecuted respectively by Articles CARDINAL ) § CARDINAL and CARDINAL § CARDINAL ( a ) of LAW . On DATE the ORG ordered his detention pending trial . He was subsequently placed in GPE no . CARDINAL prison .", "On DATE the first applicant appealed against the detention order of DATE , complaining , inter alia , that the pre - trial detention was an unjustifiably severe and unnecessary measure , given the poor conditions in the prison and his critical state of health . In support , he submitted medical documents , dated CARDINAL DATE and DATE , which diagnosed him with pulmonary fibro - cavernous tuberculosis and confirmed that he was a registered patient at a civil tuberculosis hospital , ORG , in GPE .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the first applicant ’s appeal of CARDINAL DATE . In reply to the medical complaint , the appellate court stated that “ the submitted medical documents show only the diagnosis ; no other medical documents about [ the first applicant ’s ] current state of health , or the type and stage of his disease have been made available ... ” . The appellate court did , however , inform the prison authorities that the first applicant should be provided with appropriate conditions of detention and medical care in prison .", "The applicant ’s state of health drastically deteriorated during DATE of his detention in GPE no . CARDINAL prison . Notably , he started having acute respiratory difficulties and , with his joints painfully swollen , became unable to move around without assistance . Following ORG intervention , the applicant was transferred on DATE to ORG of ORG ( “ the old prison hospital ” ) .", "After DATE in the old prison hospital , the first applicant was transferred back to PERSON no . CARDINAL prison on DATE , where his state of health deteriorated further . Consequently , on DATE the authorities returned him to the old prison hospital , where he was initially placed in the intensive care unit .", "On DATE the ORG convicted the first applicant of the offences with which he had been charged . He was sentenced to DATE in prison .", "By letters of CARDINAL and DATE , ORG acknowledged that , following a medical examination conducted by its ORG ( “ the NFO ” ) DATE and DATE , the first applicant had been diagnosed with an open form of multidrug - resistant fibro - cavernous ( or disseminated ) tuberculosis , in the phase of infiltration and decomposition ; he was haemorrhaging from the lungs . In addition , the examination results showed that the first applicant had been infected with viral hepatitis C and suffered from a number of serious cardiac and neurosensory disorders . The above - mentioned letters further stated that , since DATE , the first applicant had been receiving conventional , firstline anti - tuberculosis medication under the ORG programme ( Directly Observed Treatment , Short - course – the treatment strategy for the detection and cure of ORG recommended by ORG , see paragraph CARDINAL below ) .", "On DATE ORG upheld the first applicant ’s conviction of DATE . His cassation appeal was rejected as inadmissible by ORG on DATE .", "DATE and DATE , medical experts from the NFO conducted an additional examination of the first applicant . Their conclusions ( “ the medical conclusions of CARDINAL September-CARDINAL DATE ” ) confirmed the previous diagnosis as regards his cardiac problems and tuberculosis . Concerning the latter disease , the experts added that the first applicant should be considered as a gravely ill patient who needed special treatment in a tuberculosis hospital .", "On DATE the first applicant , referring to all the available medical documents about the critical phase of his tuberculosis , including the medical conclusions of CARDINAL September-CARDINAL DATE , requested the suspension of the outstanding part of his prison sentence on the basis of the Order of DATE of the Minister of Health ( “ the Order of DATE ” ) . He complained , under ORG and CARDINAL of the Convention , that he was not provided with effective anti - tuberculosis drugs in prison , and that , consequently , there was a real risk to his life .", "On DATE the Tbilisi ORG examined the first applicant ’s request of DATE at an oral hearing . Amongst others , the court heard one of the medical experts who had issued the conclusions of QUANTITY September-CARDINAL DATE . The expert confirmed the accuracy of those conclusions , namely that the first applicant required treatment in a specialised hospital with particular drugs of second - line family ( “ SLDs ” ) to which his tuberculosis had not yet developed a resistance and which were not available in the prison system . The expert suggested that the first applicant ’s condition would only deteriorate in prison , given the lack of the necessary drugs there . The expert confirmed that , according to LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) , the applicant ’s type of tuberculosis could serve as a basis for release from serving a sentence .", "The Tbilisi City Court also heard a representative of the prison authorities , who stated that a more comprehensive system of multidrug resistant forms of tuberculosis treatment , ORG , would soon be introduced in NORP prisons , and that the first applicant would be entitled to benefit from it . He was unable to specify the approximate dates of the introduction of that programme . The representative further stated that the first applicant had already been provided with permanent medical supervision in prison , and that the authorities would transfer him to a specialised hospital if his condition deteriorated .", "During the hearing of DATE , the first applicant ’s representative submitted a handwritten letter of his client dated DATE informing the ORG of his inability to attend the hearing in person owing to his state of health . His counsel also submitted a medical opinion of PERSON , the doctor who was treating the applicant in prison , dated DATE , which confirmed the first applicant ’s diagnosis at that time and stated that all the previous attempts to treat him in prison with the medication available through the already introduced ORG programme had proved unsuccessful . The doctor confirmed that the comprehensive ORG programme was planned to be introduced in the near future .", "On DATE , DATE , the ORG delivered a decision dismissing the first applicant ’s request for the suspension of his sentence as manifestly ill - founded . The court reasoned that no recent medical document about his current state of health had been made available .", "On DATE the first applicant lodged an appeal against the decision of DATE , denouncing ORG failure to endorse the medical opinion of DATE as proof of his current medical condition . He reiterated his fears that , without proper medical treatment in prison , the violation of his right under LAW would persist and , in the worst scenario , could lead to his death , in violation of LAW .", "In the course of the appellate proceedings the first applicant made a request for an additional medical examination , so that all possible doubts about his state of health at that time could be dissipated . ORG granted that request on DATE , ordering the prison authorities , and in particular the NFO , to examine the first applicant with the aim of establishing the nature and gravity of his diseases and obtaining recommendations on appropriate treatment for him .", "In a reply dated DATE , the NFO implicitly refused to enforce the court order of DATE , stating that the first applicant ’s state of health had already been assessed DATE and DATE , and that , prior to assessing the need for an additional examination , ORG should first hear the relevant medical experts .", "On DATE the first applicant began a hunger strike to protest against the non - enforcement of the court order of DATE . In particular , and in line with that order , he requested a transfer to a specialised medical setting for diagnostic examinations , and denounced the fact that , despite his very critical condition , he was detained in a closed , “ cellar - type ” establishment . On DATE , the head of the old prison hospital issued an order putting the medical staff on alert for the duration of the applicant ’s hunger strike . As disclosed by his medical file , the applicant was advised by doctors on a DATE basis throughout the entire duration of his hunger strike ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) about the damage his self - harming conduct could cause to his health .", "On DATE representatives from ORG visited the first applicant in the old prison hospital . As disclosed by TIME of their visit , they found him in a critical condition – with his swollen joints , he remained bedridden , was vomiting purulent blood , and so on . The representatives also noted that only his family had been providing the applicant with such SLDs as cycloserin , p - aminosalicylic acid ( “ PAS ” ) .", "On DATE ORG expressed its concern about the first applicant ’s aggravated state of health and invited the prison authorities to ensure his appropriate treatment .", "On DATE , pursuant to the court order of DATE , the NFO started the first applicant ’s medical examination , which ended on DATE . Its results ( “ the medical recommendations of CARDINAL October-CARDINAL DATE ” ) fully confirmed the previously diagnosed grave form of tuberculosis , showed that the disease had deteriorated since the previous examination and recommended that the applicant be treated with SLDs in a hospital specialised in tuberculosis treatment .", "In the meantime , on DATE , the first applicant terminated his hunger - strike as the court order of DATE had been enforced . On DATE his advocate enquired of the head of the old prison hospital whether or not the prison was able to provide the applicant with SLDs ( such as cycloserin and ORG ) . The reply was negative .", "On DATE the first applicant was transferred to the newly opened medical wing of GPE no . CARDINAL prison ( “ the new prison hospital ” ) . He was visited there on DATE by representatives of ORG , who witnessed that , although he was in a newly refurbished room , he was not being provided with the necessary SLDs and diet , or allowed to receive food parcels from his family , and the hospital staff would not change his bed - linen regularly even though he was sweating profusely .", "On DATE the first applicant started another hunger strike in protest against the failure to follow the medical recommendations of CARDINAL October-CARDINAL DATE . In particular , he requested that the prison authorities either provide him with the SLDs or transfer him to a specialised hospital . The new prison hospital was put on alert . As disclosed by the applicant ’s medical file , he was reminded by the doctors on a DATE basis , throughout the entire duration of his strike ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) , how deleterious his refusal to take meals was for his state of health . The applicant also refused blood transfusions during that period .", "On DATE ORG examined the first applicant ’s appeal against the decision of DATE at an oral hearing . The court heard one of the medical experts who had issued the medical recommendations of CARDINAL October-CARDINAL DATE . The expert confirmed the gravity of the applicant ’s condition and stated that his anti - tuberculosis treatment had been unsuccessful owing to the lack of the necessary drugs in prison . The expert added that the applicant required a special diet and the exposure to fresh air , suggesting that there were some chances of successful treatment of his type of tuberculosis outside of prison . The appellate court also heard a representative of the prison authorities , who submitted an opinion of PERSON , the doctor who was treating the applicant in prison , dated DATE . According to that opinion , the applicant had been provided with a combination of unspecified SLDs since DATE against which his tuberculosis maintained sensitivity . The examination of various parties during the hearing further disclosed the fact that it was the applicant ’s family who had procured those SLDs from GPE .", "In a decision of DATE , relying on the medical opinion of DATE ORG dismissed the first applicant ’s appeal against the decision of DATE as being unfounded .", "On DATE the first applicant terminated his hunger strike .", "As disclosed by his medical file , from DATE the applicant refused to take ORG and cycloserin , the SLDs procured by his family , in protest against the prison administration ’s failure to provide him with a diet necessary for his condition . On DATE ORG complained about that problem to the prison authorities .", "On DATE , DATE , following a drastic deterioration in his condition , the first applicant was placed in the intensive therapy unit of the new prison hospital . Nevertheless , his condition continued to deteriorate and he died at TIME on DATE .", "On DATE the first applicant requested , under Rule CARDINAL of ORG , that the Government be indicated to transfer him to a specialised tuberculosis hospital , to arrange for his medical examination and treatment and to suspend his sentence pending treatment .", "On DATE the President of the ORG partly granted the above - mentioned request , indicating to the ORG that the first applicant should be placed in a specialised medical establishment capable of dispensing appropriate anti - tuberculosis treatment . That measure was imposed until further notice . In so far as the case file , as it stood at the material time , did not disclose that ORG decision of DATE ordering the applicant ’s medical examination had already been enforced ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) , the President indicated to the Government to ensure that it was enforced . The Government were further invited to report on the implementation of the indicated medical measures by DATE .", "By a letter of DATE , the ORG submitted to the ORG the medical recommendations of CARDINAL October-CARDINAL DATE in support of the fact that the court decision of DATE had duly been enforced .", "As to the first applicant ’s transfer to a specialised tuberculosis hospital , the ORG stated that such a measure was not necessary for the following reasons . First , the applicant had already been transferred , on DATE , to the new prison hospital , the medical services of which were comparable if not superior to those of a civil tuberculosis hospital . Secondly , even if the applicant were allowed to be treated at an outside tuberculosis hospital , such treatment would in any event be limited to ORG , to which programme he had already had access in prison .", "The Government further stated that the shortage of SLDs was a general pharmaceutical problem on a nationwide scale , which could in no way be imputed to the prison only . They promised that as soon as ofloxacin , ORG and cycloserin , the drugs capable of fighting the first applicant ’s tuberculosis , appeared in the country ’s pharmaceutical network , they would immediately be dispensed to him . In the meantime , the authorities allowed the applicant ’s family to provide him with those drugs in prison .", "In a letter of CARDINAL DATE , addressed to the Minister of ORG , ORG expressed his deep concern about the failure to transfer the first applicant to a specialised tuberculosis hospital , contrary to the interim measure indicated by ORG on DATE ; the Minister was urged to ensure the immediate enforcement of that measure .", "Pursuant to section QUANTITY b ) and CARDINAL of LAW , a convict could be released from detention on account of his or her grave and/or incurable illness . The list of such grave / incurable illnesses was to be prepared by ORG .", "On DATE the Minister of Health issued an Order ( Order no . CARDINAL ) on the basis of section CARDINAL of LAW , which established that destructive forms of pulmonary tuberculosis ( fibrocavernous , milliary or cirrhotic ) as well as poly or multidrug resistant tuberculosis are grounds for requesting early release .", "Pursuant to LAW ( a ) of the ORG , a court could suspend a prison sentence in view of the convict ’s grave state of health , if his or her illness impeded the proper execution of the sentence , pending the convict ’s full or partial recovery .", "Article CARDINAL of the ORG provided for a possibility of early release by a court on account of the convict ’s grave or incurable illness , which fact was to be established by a qualified medical opinion .", "The relevant excerpts from the above - mentioned ORG , bearing on the problem of tuberculosis in NORP prisons , read :", "“ Health - care services", "DATE . Despite the goodwill and commitment of health - care staff at the penitentiary establishments visited , the provision of health care to prisoners remained problematic , due to the shortage of staff , facilities and resources . The delegation heard a number of complaints from prisoners at all the establishments visited concerning delays in access to a doctor , the inadequate quality of care ... and difficulties with access to outside specialists and hospital facilities .", "The delegation noted that the supply and range of medication available at the establishments visited had considerably improved in DATE . Nevertheless , a number of prisoners complained that they depended on their families for the acquisition of most of the necessary medication .", "As to the equipment available at the establishments visited , it was generally limited to a stethoscope and an apparatus for measuring blood pressure ; there were no facilities for taking X - rays or basic blood tests . This made the screening for transmissible diseases , including the detection of cases of tuberculosis unfeasible ...", "The ORG is concerned that the progress observed during the second periodic visit in the area of combating tuberculosis is jeopardised by the steep increase in the prison population and the ensuing problem of prison overcrowding . Despite the efforts of the ICRC , it was no longer possible to screen all new arrivals at Prison No . CARDINAL in GPE . Further , in the absence of routine medical examination upon arrival and the necessary laboratory equipment , no systematic screening for tuberculosis was performed at Prison No . CARDINAL in GPE , Prison No . CARDINAL in FAC CARDINAL in GPE or ORG establishment No . CARDINAL in GPE . ...", "[ R]ecommendations", "- the NORP authorities to take steps to ensure that all newly arrived prisoners are seen by a health - care staff member within TIME of their arrival . The medical examination on admission should be comprehensive , including appropriate screening for transmissible diseases ( paragraph CARDINAL ) ; ...", "- the NORP authorities to persevere in their efforts to combat tuberculosis in the prison system , through systematic screening and treatment of prisoners in accordance with the ORG method for tuberculosis control ( paragraph CARDINAL ) . ”", "The relevant excerpts from the above - mentioned ORG , bearing on the problem of tuberculosis in NORP prisons , read :", "“ CARDINAL . GPE ’s imprisonment rate is very high by international standards and , as noted in the report on the visit in DATE , can not be convincingly explained away by a high crime rate . If no steps are taken to limit the number of persons sent to prison , all attempts to improve conditions of detention will inevitably founder . ...", "Health care", "The spread of tuberculosis in the prison system remains a major challenge for the NORP authorities . The progress made over DATE , with the important assistance of ORG ( ICRC ) , has been jeopardised by the increase in the inmate population and the ensuing problem of prison overcrowding .", "The delegation was concerned to note that , in the absence of routine medical examination upon arrival , no systematic screening for tuberculosis was performed ... TB case finding was based on a passive method ( which essentially means waiting for prisoners with symptoms of ORG to present themselves to clinical staff for diagnosis ) ....", "The Medical establishment for prisoners in GPE ( PERSON ) , located within the perimeter of the LAW penitentiary complex , represents a great improvement on FAC visited by the ORG in DATE and DATE . The delegation gained a globally positive impression of this new facility , inaugurated at DATE but in fact functioning fully only for DATE . With an official capacity of CARDINAL beds , the establishment was accommodating CARDINAL sick prisoners at the time of the visit . All the patients were men .", "There were CARDINAL wards : surgery , psychiatry , infectious diseases , internal medicine and intensive care / reanimation . Further , there was an admissions unit , an X - ray unit , a dental office , a laboratory , rooms for endoscopy and physiotherapy , and a pharmacy .", "The diagnostic equipment was modern and functional , and the establishment offered an adequate range of hospital treatments for prisoners . It was also possible to transfer sick prisoners to other hospital facilities for diagnostic treatments which were not available at the Medical establishment ( an average of CARDINAL transfers per week ) ....", "[ R]ecommendations", "- ensure that prisoners in need of diagnostic examination and/or hospital treatment are promptly transferred to appropriate medical facilities ... ;", "- further steps to be taken to ensure the supply of appropriate medication in sufficient quantities to all establishments ... ;", "- urgent measures to be taken to ensure that all newly arrived prisoners ... are seen by a health - care staff member within TIME of their arrival . The medical examination on admission should be comprehensive , including appropriate screening for transmissible diseases and injuries ( paragraph CARDINAL ) ;", "- the NORP authorities to persevere in their efforts to combat tuberculosis in the prison system , through systematic screening and treatment of prisoners in accordance with the ORG method for tuberculosis control . In this context , steps to be taken to ensure that prisoners diagnosed as ORG - positive are promptly transferred to a hospital facility for treatment and that inmates with whom such prisoners have been in contact are screened for ORG ( paragraph CARDINAL ) . ”", "The relevant excerpts from the above - mentioned Report read :", "“ Tuberculosis nevertheless remains a serious problem in the NORP prison system . The spread of multi - drug resistant forms of tuberculosis remains a real threat , particularly in prisons , where lack of proper hygiene , lack of adequate medical facilities , insufficient medical staff , and , in particular , overcrowding , leave detainees more vulnerable to becoming infected with this highly contagious disease . Tuberculosis isolation facilities also become overcrowded and overburdened as the prison population increases ; as a result , existing facilities may not be sufficient to isolate all tuberculosis patients from the general prison population . The growth of a tuberculosis epidemic in the prison system also places society at a real risk of an epidemic , as the disease can be readily transmitted from detainees to prison employees and to family members and others once detainees are released . Some experts also believe that there is a serious risk of an increase in coinciding HIV and tuberculosis epidemics in the region ....", "Recommendations", "... Convicted persons who are seriously ill , in the final stages of terminal illness , or have diseases that require consistent and high - level treatment must be adequately monitored in detention . As conditions of detention risk exposing such vulnerable persons to inhuman and degrading situations , imprisonment should be used strictly as a last resort ; efforts should be made to release such persons who are currently detained and alternative sanctions should be imposed whenever possible ....", "Conduct , without fail , systematic screening for tuberculosis of prisoners entering all facilities ...", "Ensure that the internationally - recommended tuberculosis control strategy , directly observed therapy , short course ( DOTS ) , is undertaken effectively by providing a regular supply of anti - tuberculosis drugs in sufficient quantities to all facilities and by training medical personnel in issuing ORG .", "Provide nutrition and material conditions that are conducive to the improvement of tuberculosis patients’ health . ”", "The relevant excerpts from the above - mentioned report read :", "“ Tuberculosis", "The high prevalence of tuberculosis in prisons is not something new , and constitutes one of the serious problems [ facing ] the penitentiary system worldwide . In spite of a series of projects implemented within the NORP penitentiary system in coordination with ORG , the problem of tuberculosis has ... worsened , far less been resolved . This is shown by the especially high number of persons who deceased with tuberculosis in DATE . In our view , CARDINAL reason for this worsened situation is ineffective implementation of standard antituberculosis measures within the NORP reality , with no regard to local specificities and without having assessed and analyzed the risk of a spread in GPE .", "Medical personnel require in - depth preparation . Individual short - term training is not sufficient to resolve the problem , since the medical personnel are either unaware of or unable to use basic skills and knowledge of GPE - infection management , given their very low medical autonomy and independence in taking decisions ...", "Tuberculosis is currently the most widespread disease within the penitentiary system ’s establishments in GPE . In addition , as in DATE , in DATE tuberculosis remained the number - one cause of death ... in prisons . Monitoring has revealed a high frequency of multi - resistant forms of tuberculosis .", "Extra - pulmonary forms of GPE are not a rarity either , and their spectrum has significantly expanded so as to include [ other ] diseases , starting with GPE pleurisy and ending with neuro - tuberculosis , which damages almost all internal organs . In our view , such a trend is a direct result of inadequate management of GPE infection within the penitentiary system .", "Although a great number of penitentiary establishments do carry out screening for GPE , and identify and include infected prisoners in relevant programmes , such measures are not effective enough , especially against the background that systemic and specific reasons for the spread of the disease have remained unresolved for DATE .", "Newly - built penitentiary establishments are not planned with a view to due consideration of lighting and aeration systems , which are crucial components in preventing the spread of tuberculosis . The infection is spread by inhaling air containing airborne parcels of mycobacterium tuberculosis , coughed out by a person infected with tuberculosis . Mycobacterium survives TIME in the air and depends on the actual environment . Infection occurs , as a rule , in a closed space ( room ) that is not properly aerated . It should also be mentioned that direct sunbeams can quickly kill the mycobacterium tuberculosis , which is not possible in a closed space ...", "We have discovered through monitoring that a total of CARDINAL persons suffering from tuberculosis were identified by screening and further tests conducted in the establishments of the NORP penitentiary system . Of these , CARDINAL persons were involved in the ORG program . CARDINAL persons were diagnosed with the multi - resistant form of tuberculosis , of whom QUANTITY persons were involved in the GPE programme ...", "Death rate in the penitentiary system of GPE", "ORG has been studying the death rate in NORP penitentiary establishments for DATE . CARDINAL prisoners died in DATE . CARDINAL prisoners die DATE on average ... Based on various sources , including the results of the monitoring , ORG has found that CARDINAL prisoners ( CARDINAL woman and CARDINAL men ) died in GPE in DATE ...", "As for the spread of tuberculosis and its effect on the [ ORG ] death rate , it should be noted that tuberculosis was found in CARDINAL of the CARDINAL deceased patients . As in DATE , tuberculosis remains a major cause of death within NORP penitentiaries . CARDINAL of the prisoners ( PERCENT ) who died in DATE had lung tuberculosis . The increase in the proportion of prisoners infected with tuberculosis in the total number of deceased prisoners has become a recurrent trend .", "An increase in the number of extra - pulmonary forms of tuberculosis in DATE should be regarded as being directly caused by inadequate management of the tuberculosis infection . PERCENT of the deceased prisoners were infected with the multiresistant form of tuberculosis . Also , PERCENT of the deceased prisoners had pneumonia ( PERCENT of those who died from tuberculosis ) . Among the causes death in patients infected with tuberculosis , hemorrhagic shock and acute anemia were the direct cause of death in a number of cases . These , in their turn , were caused by bleeding from GPE lungs . Instances of pulmonary bleeding of varying intensities are described in CARDINAL forensic medical reports .", "It should be mentioned that even ORG does not offer GPE - surgery services . Hence , such patients are , in fact , destined to die . TB infection is often contracted at the same time as virus hepatitis and human immunodeficiency virus ...", "The index of prisoners who died from the multi - resistant form of tuberculosis was higher in DATE than in DATE . For this reason , we think it is necessary to enquire into details of how the ORG programme is progressing and to include the country ’s leading specialists and institutions in future planning . ORG errors are also frequent in the management of tuberculosis . ”", "In DATE ORG ( “ the WHO ” ) developed a global strategy for treatment of ordinary tuberculosis , which was called ORG ( Directly Observed Treatment , Short - course ) . In DATE the ORG extended the initial ORG programme to include the treatment of multidrug resistant forms of tuberculosis . To facilitate the implementation of this new , extended programme , which was subsequently called ORG , the ORG published in DATE Guidelines for ORG . The relevant excerpts from these Guidelines read as follows :", "“ FOREWORD", "CARDINAL of the world ’s population is infected by LAW tuberculosis . Worldwide in DATE there were CARDINAL new cases of tuberculosis with CARDINAL deaths . M. tuberculosis kills more people than any other single infectious agent . Deaths from tuberculosis comprise PERCENT of all avoidable deaths in developing countries . PERCENT of tuberculosis cases and PERCENT of tuberculosis deaths are in developing countries ; PERCENT of these cases are in the economically productive age group ( DATE ) .", "As a consequence , the world is facing a much more serious situation as we approach DATE than in DATE . Due to demographic factors , socio - economic trends , neglected tuberculosis control in many countries , and in addition , the HIV epidemic , there are many more smear - positive pulmonary tuberculosis cases , often undiagnosed and/or untreated . When tuberculosis cases are treated , poor drug prescription and poor case management are creating more tuberculosis patients excreting resistant tubercle bacilli .", "In DATE , ORG adopted Resolution WHO CARDINAL , recognizing “ effective case management as the central intervention for tuberculosis control ” , and recommending the strengthening of national tuberculosis programmes by introducing short course chemotherapy and improving the treatment management system .", "Since DATE , the WHO Global Tuberculosis Programme has developed a new strategy , to meet the needs of global tuberculosis control . “ DOTS ” is the brand name of the WHO recommended tuberculosis control strategy . ...", "The issue of the treatment of those pulmonary tuberculosis patients who remain sputum smear - positive following fully supervised WHO retreatment regimen should be considered . Although these cases represent a small minority of tuberculosis patients , they constitute an ongoing problem for programme managers .", "Due to the lack of financial resources , many countries can not provide the range of the expensive second - line drugs which might give some hope of cure to these patients . However , more economically prosperous countries might wish to do so , especially if they have inherited a significant number of patients with multi drug resistant ( ORG ) tuberculosis from a period when treatment was unorganized and chaotic . Many countries also lack information about the correct use of second - line drugs .", "The WHO Tuberculosis Control Workshop held in GPE , DATE , discussed this issue and recommended that a country prepared to go to this expense should only provide these second - line drugs for a specialised unit ( or units in large countries ) , in close connection with a laboratory able to carry out cultures and reliable susceptibility tests of LAW tuberculosis to the drugs .", "The WHO Global Tuberculosis Programme has prepared these “ Guidelines for ORG ” , to meet the need for clear advice on this issue . ...", "TIME HOW IS MDR TUBERCULOSIS PRODUCED ?", "As with other forms of drug resistance , the phenomenon of MDR tuberculosis is entirely man - made .", "Drug resistant bacilli are the consequence of human error in any of the following :", "prescription of chemotherapy ;", "management of drug supply ;", "case management ;", "process of drug delivery to the patient .", "The most common medical errors leading to the selection of resistant bacilli are the following :", "( a ) the prescription of inadequate chemotherapy to the multibacillary pulmonary tuberculosis cases ( e.g. CARDINAL drugs during the initial phase of treatment in a new smear - positive patient with bacilli initially resistant to isoniazid ) ;", "( b ) the addition of CARDINAL extra drug in the case of failure , and repeating the addition of a further drug when the patient relapses after what amounts to monotherapy .", "The most common errors observed in the management of drug supply are the following :", "( a ) the difficulty experienced by poor patients in obtaining all the drugs that they need ( due to lack of financial resources or social insurance ) ;", "( b ) frequent or prolonged shortages of antituberculosis drugs ( due to poor management and/or financial constraints in developing countries ) ;", "( c ) use of drugs ( or drug combinations ) of unproven bioavailability .", "The following also have the effect of multiplying the risk of successive monotherapies and selection of resistant bacilli :", "( a ) the patient ’s lack of knowledge ( due to a lack of information or due to inadequate explanation before starting treatment ) ;", "( b ) poor case - management ( when the treatment is not directly observed , especially during the initial phase ) . ...", "CARDINAL ORG UNIT", "Treatment of patients with MDR tuberculosis ( especially those with resistance to rifampicin and isoniazid ) may have to involve “ second line ” reserve drugs . These are drugs other than the “ standard ” essential antituberculosis drugs , i.e. rifampicin ( R ) , isoniazid ( H ) , streptomycin ( S ) , ethambutol ( E ) , pyrazinamide ( Z ) , thioacetazone ( T ) . These reserve drugs are much more expensive , less effective and have many more side effects than standard drugs . They should only be made available to a specialised unit and not in the free market . It is the responsibility of national health authorities to establish strong pharmaceutical regulations to limit the use of second - line reserve drugs in order to prevent the emergence of incurable tuberculosis .", "CARDINAL DESIGNING AN APPROPRIATE REGIMEN", "Designing an appropriate regimen for the individual patient needs experience and skill . It includes allocating the time and patience to define precisely the following :", "( a ) which regimen(s ) the patient had previously received ;", "( b ) whether the patient took all the drugs in each regimen prescribed and for how long ;", "( c ) to find out what happened bacteriologically , in terms of sputum positivity ( at least by direct smear , if possible also by culture and susceptibility tests ) during and after the administration of each regimen . Clinical and radiological progress or deterioration is much less reliable but may be used as a check on the bacteriological results .", "CARDINAL RELIABLE SUSCEPTIBILITY TESTING", "The specialised unit must have the services of a laboratory able to carry out culture and reliable tests for drug resistance ( to the essential drugs and also to second - line drugs ) .", "The quality of the susceptibility tests carried out in this laboratory should be regularly checked by another reference laboratory at national or supranational level .", "CARDINAL RELIABLE DRUG SUPPLIES", "The unit must also be guaranteed reliable supplies of the expensive “ second line ” reserve drugs , so as to ensure that any treatment undertaken for an individual patient can be successfully completed ." ]

[ "2", "34" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "On DATE , while travelling with his family to GPE , the applicant was stopped in LOC by officers of the road police . The police discovered that the applicant 's car had been brought into GPE on DATE and that customs had authorised its circulation on NORP territory for DATE only . On DATE the ORG seized the applicant 's car as the object of a breach of customs regulations .", "On DATE ORG opened a case against the applicant for failure to take the vehicle out of the customs territory of GPE within the established time - limit , this being an administrative offence under LAW .", "On DATE an expert identified the applicant 's car as a ORG CARDINAL having a depreciated value of MONEY ( RUR ) .", "On DATE the customs authorities found the applicant guilty of a breach of Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW and imposed a fine equal to the car 's value . The fine was payable within DATE of receipt of the decision or , if an appeal was lodged , within DATE of the final decision on the appeal .", "On DATE ORG rejected the applicant 's appeal against the decision of DATE . An appeal to a court lay against such a refusal .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal with ORG of GPE . According to the applicant , ORG confirmed that on DATE a copy of the complaint had been delivered to ORG .", "On DATE the customs office forwarded the decision of DATE to the bailiffs ' service for enforcement through the sale of the car . The applicant was not informed of this .", "On DATE the bailiff commissioned a private company to organise the sale of the car .", "After several reductions of the sale price , on DATE the car was sold for RUR CARDINAL,CARDINAL .", "On DATE the ORG heard the appeal . It found that the existence of a breach was not disputed by the parties and that the decision imposing the fine had not become time - barred . The court dismissed the complaint .", "On DATE ORG upheld , on the applicant 's appeal , the judgment of DATE .", "The applicant complained to a prosecutor 's office that the sale of his car had been unlawful as it was effected at the time when his appeal against the customs office 's decision was pending .", "On DATE the NORP transport prosecutor 's office sent a letter to the head of ORG . A deputy prosecutor determined that the decision of DATE had been enforced in breach of LAW . Having received , on DATE , a copy of the applicant 's appeal to a court , ORG had not forwarded that information to the bailiff or suspended the enforcement proceedings . The deputy prosecutor recommended that similar violations be avoided in the future , yet in the applicant 's case he refused to take action because “ the ORG interests had not been harmed ” .", "The applicant complained to a court about the bailiff 's acts . He submitted , in particular , that he had not been notified of the opening of the enforcement proceedings or informed about the reduction of the sale price and that the car had been sold outside the DATE time - limit .", "On DATE the ORG of the GPE Region gave judgment . It found that the representative of the PERSON bailiffs ' service could not show that the applicant had been notified of the enforcement proceedings and price reduction . Nor could he explain what actions had been undertaken by the bailiff to identify the applicant 's sources of income or other property and why the car had not been offered to the creditor upon expiry of the DATE time - limit but instead had been sold DATE . The court noted that the enforcement file contained the report on the impossibility of enforcement dated DATE , but the documents on which the act had been founded were missing . The court made a declaratory judgment that the enforcement procedure had been carried out in breach of LAW .", "The applicant also lodged a complaint against ORG . He submitted , in particular , that the office had failed to suspend the enforcement proceedings pending the outcome of his complaint to a court .", "On DATE the ORG of LOC dismissed the complaint . As regards the allegedly premature transfer of the car to the bailiffs , the court held as follows :", "“ The car taken from [ the applicant ] was a piece of evidence that , pursuant to LAW , was to be kept until the time - limit for lodging an appeal against the decision of the customs office ... had expired or until a higher customs office or a district / town court had given a decision ... The car was handed over for sale to the court bailiffs after the higher customs office had replied to [ the applicant 's ] complaint ; [ the applicant ] did not show that , before the handover of the car had been effected , he had informed ORG of his having lodged a complaint with a court ; an acknowledgement - of - receipt coupon on p. CARDINAL of the case file is not evidence of appropriate notification because [ the text of ] the notification is missing ... ”", "On CARDINAL DATE ORG , on the applicant 's appeal , upheld the judgment of DATE .", "The applicant sued ORG of ORG , the authority in charge of court bailiffs , for pecuniary and non - pecuniary damage caused by the court bailiff .", "On DATE a Justice of the Peace of the CARDINALth ORG of the Zyuzino District of GPE granted the applicant 's claims in part . He determined that the applicant 's car had been billed for sale on DATE and that the price had been reduced on DATE , DATE , CARDINAL DATE and DATE . On DATE it had been sold for RUR CARDINAL,CARDINAL . The court found that , in breach of the requirement of LAW , the applicant had not been informed of the enforcement proceedings , the bailiff had not attempted to identify his other assets or money , the creditor had not been offered to keep the car or to contest the sale price of the car . The court noted the decision of the LAW prosecutor 's office of DATE whereby criminal proceedings against the court bailiff were discontinued . The decision established that the bailiff might have been guilty of professional negligence ( LAW ) , but prosecution was time - barred . The court ruled that there was a causal link between the bailiff 's unlawful actions and the pecuniary damage caused to the applicant , and ordered ORG , as the bailiff 's employer , to reimburse ORG CARDINAL to the applicant ( the difference between the car 's valuation and sale price ) and to pay ORG CARDINAL in respect of non - pecuniary damage , RUR CARDINAL for legal costs and also to bear court fees .", "On DATE the ORG of GPE quashed , on an appeal from ORG , the judgment of CARDINAL DATE . The court held that the applicant had failed to prove that the bailiff 's actions had caused him pecuniary or non - pecuniary damage and the violations committed by the bailiff had been of “ a procedural nature ” .", "The Customs Code , as in force at the material time , provides in relevant part as follows .", "A breach of customs regulations is punishable by , in particular , forfeiture of the goods or vehicles that were the object of the offence , or payment of a fine equal to their value ( LAW and CARDINAL ) .", "Physical evidence includes the goods and vehicles that were the objects of a violation of the customs regulations . Such evidence is kept in the warehouse until the time - limit for lodging an appeal has expired or the appeal has been decided upon by the higher customs office or a court ( Article CARDINAL ) .", "The goods and vehicles that were the object of a violation of the customs regulations will be seized . If the person who is found liable for a violation of customs regulations has no permanent residence in GPE , his goods , money or vehicle may be seized as security for payment of the fine ( LAW ) .", "The order on payment of a fine may be enforced by the customs office after the time - limit for lodging an appeal has expired ( Article CARDINAL ) . The lodging of an appeal shall suspend enforcement ( Article CARDINAL ) . The fine is payable within DATE after the final decision refusing the appeal against the order was issued . If the fine has not been paid within this time - limit , it may be recovered from the goods charged as security for the payment or from the person 's other assets or income ( Article CARDINAL ) .", "LAW provides in relevant part as follows .", "A copy of the decision on the opening of enforcement proceedings must be sent to the debtor within DATE of issue ( section CARDINAL § CARDINAL ) . The creditor and the debtor are the parties to the enforcement proceedings ( section CARDINAL § CARDINAL ) .", "Recovery may be made out of the debtor 's property if the debtor does not have sufficient cash funds in NORP roubles or foreign currency ( section CARDINAL ) .", "Property subject to a charge may be sold within DATE of the charge order . If the property has not been sold within DATE , the creditor will have the right to keep the property . If the creditor refuses , the property is returned to the debtor and the writ of enforcement to the creditor ( section DATE ) ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "PERSON ( “ the first applicant ” ) was born in DATE and lives in GPE . He is the son - in - law of Mr Ovcharov ( “ the second applicant ” ) who was born in DATE and lives in PERSON .", "DATE the second applicant was the head of a farm cooperative .", "On DATE the farm cooperative , represented by the second applicant , acquired a tractor ( “ the first tractor ” ) at an auction organised by another cooperative .", "On DATE the first applicant acquired a similar , cheaper tractor ( “ the second tractor ” ) at a second auction organised by the same cooperative . Immediately after the auction the first applicant , assisted by the second applicant , took possession of a tractor . However , they apparently took the first tractor .", "The farm cooperative took possession of the second tractor on DATE .", "On DATE an invoice was issued to the first applicant for the purchase of the second tractor . Subsequently , the first applicant requested the seller to reissue the sales invoice so that it indicated that he had in fact acquired the first tractor .", "Sometime around DATE the farm cooperative discovered that it had a different tractor from the one it had purchased . Soon thereafter it complained to the authorities of the alleged fraud perpetrated by the applicants .", "On DATE a preliminary investigation was opened against the applicants .", "On DATE the applicants were charged with fraud and malfeasance . The charges against the first applicant were amended on DATE to include the offence of using a falsified document to obtain another 's chattel with the aim of misappropriating it .", "On DATE the GPE district prosecutor 's office entered an indictment against the applicants with ORG for malfeasance fraud and use of a falsified document .", "DATE and DATE ORG conducted QUANTITY hearings . During this period the judge in charge of the proceedings was changed on QUANTITY occasions for undisclosed reasons . At the hearing on DATE the ORG established that there had been procedural violations at the stage of the preliminary investigation , discontinued the proceedings and remitted the case to the investigation authorities .", "The preliminary investigation against the applicants continued and there were no significant developments until DATE .", "On DATE and DATE the applicants filed separate requests with ORG under the procedure envisaged in the new Article CARDINALa of the Code of Criminal Procedure ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) and petitioned the court to order the termination of the preliminary investigation against them .", "In decisions of DATE and DATE ORG referred the case to the NORP regional prosecutor 's office either to discontinue the preliminary investigation or to enter indictments against the applicants . In its decision of CARDINAL DATE the court established that no investigative procedures whatsoever had been undertaken since DATE , when ORG had remitted the case to the investigation authorities .", "Following a delay by the prosecutor 's office to rule on the matter , the applicants lodged their requests again on DATE .", "NORP In a decision of DATE the regional prosecutor 's office discontinued the preliminary investigation against the applicants because the time - limit for prosecution under the statute of limitations for the offences had expired .", "On DATE the applicants appealed against the decision of the prosecutor 's office and claimed that the grounds for terminating the preliminary investigation should be the lack of evidence of an offence and not the expiry of the time - limit for prosecution under the statute of limitations .", "In a decision of CARDINAL DATE ORG upheld the decision to discontinue the preliminary investigation against the applicants and found that they could not seek to amend the grounds for its termination . The court reasoned that if the applicants had wanted to have the criminal proceedings terminated because of the lack of evidence that they had perpetrated an offence then they should have requested that the proceedings continue in spite of the expiry of the time - limit under the statute of limitations , which they had not done .", "On DATE the police seized the first tractor from the first applicant and impounded it as physical evidence in the pending criminal proceedings .", "The seizure and impounding of the first tractor was upheld on appeal by the district and regional prosecutor 's offices and by ORG on unspecified dates .", "The first tractor was held in storage at a police compound until it was delivered to the farm cooperative on an unspecified date before DATE .", "On DATE the district prosecutor 's office ordered the farm cooperative to deliver the second tractor to the second applicant , which it did not do .", "The applicants asserted that in the course of the preliminary investigation against them the authorities also seized a hunting rifle from each of them and held them as physical evidence . However , it is unclear when and how these actions were undertaken .", "In so far as can be ascertained from the documents presented , the second applicant voluntarily handed over a hunting rifle to the police on DATE , which was returned to him on DATE .", "Paragraphs CARDINAL , CARDINAL and CARDINAL of LAW ( DATE ) provided as follows :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) Physical evidence must be carefully examined , described in detail in the respective record , and photographed , if possible .", "( CARDINAL ) Physical evidence shall be attached to the case file while at the same time measures shall be taken not to spoil or alter the evidence .", "...", "( CARDINAL ) Physical evidence which , because of its size or other reasons , can not be attached to the case file , must be sealed , if possible , and deposited for safekeeping at the places indicated by the respective authority . ”", "Paragraphs CARDINAL and CARDINAL of Article CARDINAL of the Code , as in force at the relevant time and until DATE , provided as follows :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) Physical evidence shall be held until the termination of the criminal proceedings .", "( CARDINAL ) ORG which have been collected as physical evidence can be returned to their owners before the termination of criminal proceedings only as long as this will not hinder the establishment of the facts in the case . ”", "Article CARDINAL paragraph QUANTITY of the Code was amended on DATE to clarify that it was within the powers of the prosecutor 's office to rule on requests for the return of chattels held as physical evidence . In addition , a right of appeal to a court was introduced against refusals by the prosecutor 's office to return such chattels ( LAW paragraph CARDINAL of LAW as in force after DATE ) .", "ORG If a dispute over ownership requiring adjudication by the civil courts arose in respect of items held as physical evidence , the authorities were obliged to keep those items safe until the relevant judgment became final ( LAW ) .", "By an amendment of DATE the new Article CARDINALa introduced the possibility for an accused person to request to have his case examined by a court if the preliminary investigation had not been completed within the statutory time - limit ( DATE in investigations concerning serious crimes and DATE in all other investigations ) . In such instances the courts would remit the case to the prosecutor 's office with instructions to either enter an indictment against the accused within DATE or discontinue the criminal proceedings . If the prosecutor 's office failed to take action , the courts would then terminate the criminal proceedings themselves .", "Section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) of the ORG and ORG of DATE ( the “ ORG ” : title changed in DATE ) , as in force at the relevant time , provided as follows :", "“ The ORG shall be liable for damage caused to [ private persons ] from unlawful acts , actions or inactions of its apparatus and officials [ in the exercise ] of administrative duties . ”", "Section CARDINAL of the ORG provides as follows :", "“ The ORG shall be liable for damage caused to [ private ] persons by the [ apparatus ] of ... the investigation authorities , the prosecution authorities , the court ... for an unlawful :", "NORP detention ... ;", "NORP charge for an offence , if the person has been acquitted or the opened criminal proceedings have been terminated because the act was not perpetrated by the person [ in question ] or the act is not an offence ... ;", "NORP sentence ... ;", "NORP ... forced medical treatment ... ;", "NORP ... imposition of administrative sanctions ... ;", "enforcement of an imposed sentence in excess of the determined period ... ”", "Compensation awarded under the LAW comprises all pecuniary and non - pecuniary damage which is the direct and proximate result of the illegal act of omission ( section CARDINAL ) . The person aggrieved has to lodge an “ action ... against the [ entity ] ... whose illegal orders , actions , or omissions have caused the alleged damage ” ( section CARDINAL ) . Compensation for damage arising from instances falling under section CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the LAW can only be sought under LAW and not under the general rules of tort ( section CARDINAL § CARDINAL ) .", "The practice of the NORP courts in the application of the LAW has been very restrictive .", "In particular , the domestic courts have ruled that liability for damage stemming from instances within the scope of LAW are to be examined only under LAW and not under the general rules of tort ( решение № DATE от CARDINAL.III.CARDINAL г. по гр.д. № MONEY г. , ORG , IV г.о. ) .", "Similarly , liability of the investigation and prosecution authorities may arise only in respect of the exhaustively listed instances under section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) of the LAW and not under the general rules of tort ( решение № ORG от DATE г. по гр.д. № CARDINAL г. , PERSON and PERSON решение № CARDINAL от CARDINAL г. по т. гр. д. № CARDINAL г. , ORG на ВКС ) . In particular , the investigation authorities and the prosecutor 's office are not liable for their actions in instances , such as in the present case , where criminal proceedings have been discontinued because the time - limit for prosecution under the statute of limitations expired after the criminal proceedings had been opened ( PERSON решение № CARDINAL от CARDINAL г. по т. гр. д. № CARDINAL/CARDINAL г. , ORG на ВКС ) . No reported cases have been identified of successful claims for damage stemming from actions by the investigation or prosecution authorities which fall outside the list in section QUANTITY of the Act .", "Lastly , liability under LAW may only arise for unlawful actions , but not for unlawful inactions by the investigation authorities , the prosecution authorities and the courts ( решение № CARDINAL от CARDINAL.IV.CARDINAL г. по гр. д. № CARDINAL г. ) .", "The Obligations and Contracts Act provides in section CARDINAL that a person who has suffered damage can seek redress by bringing a civil action against the person who has , through his fault , caused the damage . Under section CARDINAL the claim for damage is extinguished on expiry of a DATE prescription period ." ]

[ "13", "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE , GPE .", "NORP In DATE the girlfriend of the applicant ’s son wished to leave GPE with the applicant ’s DATE grandson and return to live in GPE following her separation from the applicant ’s son . In order to try and force her son and his girlfriend to reconcile their differences , and in the hope that her grandson would not return to GPE , the applicant disappeared with her grandson at TIME on DATE without the GPE permission . The police were called and the child was returned unharmed on TIME of DATE .", "The applicant was subsequently arrested for child abduction . At a police interview on DATE , in the presence of her solicitor , the applicant confirmed that she had been aware at the time that she took her grandson that her conduct amounted to child abduction .", "NORP By letter dated DATE ORG recorded his decision that the public interest did not require the initiation of criminal proceedings against the applicant and that no such proceedings should therefore be brought . Instead , he indicated that a caution should be administered .", "The applicant received a caution for child abduction which was formally administered on DATE .", "On DATE , in reply to a query from the applicant , the police advised her that her caution would remain on record for DATE , and so would be held on record until DATE .", "On DATE the applicant was offered employment as a ORG within ORG ( “ the Trust ” ) through ORG ( “ PERSON ” ) , subject to vetting . She was asked to disclose details of prior convictions and cautions . She accordingly disclosed details of the incident of DATE and her subsequent caution on the form provided , and consented to a criminal record check . PERSON contacted ORG of ORG ( “ ORG ” ) to verify the details disclosed . The existence of the caution was duly verified .", "NORP On DATE PERSON withdrew the offer of employment , indicating that it had taken into account the verification by ORG of the caution for child abduction .", "The applicant subsequently sought to challenge her acceptance of the caution in DATE by letter to ORG . In an undated letter , ORG replied to her in the following terms :", "“ ... in a case where someone agrees to be cautioned by the police for a particular offence , by doing so they are accepting that they were guilty of the offence in the first place . This information is printed on the caution form , which you signed on DATE .", "Regrettably there is no way to change that . The case can not be brought back to a court because the whole idea of the caution was to keep it out of court in the first instance .", "I should also point out that the information given to PERSON and which he relayed to you in DATE , about the weeding date for an adult caution , was correct at that time but there has since been a policy change . Normally an adult caution will be weeded after DATE , provided the defendant has not been convicted of any further offences . However following the murder of the schoolgirls in LOC and the subsequent ORG the weeding policy was changed in relation to all cases where the injured party is a child . The current policy is that all convictions and cautions , where the injured party is a child , are kept on the record system for life . ”", "NORP The letter concluded :", "“ I fully appreciate that the offence in your case was not the normal type of offence and that the child did not suffer any harm and that it was never your intention that he should suffer any harm . The offence code under which the offence comes for computing purposes classes the offence as ‘ child abduction’ ( by other person ) . Which means a person other than a parent of the child .", "... Perhaps you would be good enough to contact me ... in order that we might discuss the matter and perhaps find some means of ameliorating the consequences of the information given above . ”", "NORP By letter dated DATE to the applicant ’s solicitor , ORG confirmed that in signing the caution form the applicant had accepted guilt for the offence in question and that nothing could be done to change the criminal record . The applicant ’s solicitor subsequently informed her that there did not appear to be any action which she could take in relation to the removal of the caution .", "NORP By letter dated DATE Detective Superintendent PERSON of ORG confirmed that he would not delete the caution from police records . However he proposed , with the applicant ’s agreement , to add a comment to the effect that the incident was domestically related and that in any vetting context the applicant should be approached for an explanation .", "In DATE ORG ( “ the ORG ” ) refused an application for legal aid , made by the applicant ’s solicitor , to review the ORG ’s decision not to employ the applicant . The solicitor informed the applicant that she could appeal the ORG ’s decision at a cost of GBP CARDINAL for representation by counsel , but the applicant could not afford to instigate legal proceedings without public funding .", "In DATE the applicant was interviewed for a position as a Family Support Worker . The interview letter advised that the position was a regulated CARDINAL under LAW ) Order DATE and she was asked to complete a consent form and bring it to the interview .", "On DATE the applicant was informed that her application for the position was unsuccessful . No reasons were provided .", "At the relevant time the purpose of a formal caution was set out in Police Force Order no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL issued by ORG , namely :", "“ ( a ) to deal quickly and simply with less serious offenders ;", "( b ) to divert offenders in the public interest from appearance in the criminal courts ; and", "( c ) to reduce the likelihood of re - offending . ”", "The Order further noted :", "“ ... a formal caution is not a form of sentence ...", "( a ) A formal caution is nonetheless a serious matter . It is recorded by police ; it may be relevant in relation to future decisions as to prosecution , and it may be cited in any subsequent criminal prosecutions . Properly used , caution is an effective form of disposal .", "... ”", "Article PERSON ) of the Police and Criminal Evidence ( GPE ) Order DATE ( as subsequently amended ) provides that :", "“ ... the Secretary of ORG may by regulations make provision for recording in police records convictions for such offences as are specified in the regulations . ”", "The regulations made by the Secretary of ORG under this provision are ORG DATE . These regulations identify the relevant convictions as being those for offences punishable by imprisonment , as well as a number of additional specified offences . The regulations do not make any reference to cautions .", "According to the Government , the recording of cautions in GPE takes place under the police ’s common law powers to retain and use information for police purposes . That power is subject to the provisions of LAW ( see generally paragraphs CARDINAL - CARDINAL below ) .", "According to the ORG , the policy and practice of ORG in GPE ( “ GPE ” ) at the time of the issue of the applicant ’s caution in DATE was to delete cautions from the individual ’s criminal record after DATE .", "NORP However , following publication of ORG in DATE ( see paragraphs CARDINAL - CARDINAL below ) , the ORG changed its practice so as to retain information on adult cautions for the rest of a person ’s life .", "ORG The chief constable of ORG is a member of ORG and GPE and GPE ( “ ACPO ” ) .", "Pursuant to LAW DATE ( “ the DATE LAW ” ) , in cases of conviction for an offence that carried the possibility of imprisonment , a record of the conviction had to be retained for DATE . Exceptions to this included cases where the conviction was for an offence against a child or young person , where the record was to be retained until the offender was DATE , subject to a minimum CARDINAL-year retention period ; and cases involving rape , where the record was to be retained for the life of the offender .", "Records of cautions ( assuming there were no other convictions or further cautions ) were to be retained for a DATE period .", "NORP The CARDINAL ACPO Code was updated in DATE and subsequently replaced by another code of practice in DATE . Neither instrument substantially altered the provisions regarding retention of data relating to cautions .", "Following the murders of CARDINAL young girls in DATE by a caretaker employed at a local school , a review of GPE police forces was announced by the Home Secretary . An inquiry was set up , to be conducted by Sir PERSON .", "ORG ( “ the PERSON report ” ) was published in DATE . It reviewed current practice as regards retention of data on convictions and cautions and concluded ( at paragraph CARDINAL ) that “ there were a number of problems with the review , retention or deletion of records . ” The report recommended that :", "“ A Code of Practice should be produced covering record creation , review , retention , deletion and information sharing . This should be made under LAW DATE and needs to be clear , concise and practical . It should supersede existing guidance . ”", "In DATE the Secretary of ORG adopted a Code of Practice on ORG ( “ DATE Code of Practice ” ) . The Code applies directly to police forces in GPE and GPE and is available for adoption by other police forces . The Government did not clarify whether the LAW has been adopted by the ORG .", "Paragraph CARDINAL.CARDINAL.CARDINAL of the PERSON explains that police forces have a duty to obtain and use a wide variety of information , including personal information . The LAW clarifies that responsibility for the management and use of information lies with the chief officer of the police force . It recognises the existing legislative framework for the management of information relating to data protection and human rights set out in LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL - CARDINAL below ) .", "The Code sets out a number of key principles including , inter alia , the duty to obtain and manage information ; the importance of recording information considered necessary for a police purpose ; and the need to review information and consider whether its retention remains justified , in accordance with any guidance issued .", "In DATE ACPO published Guidance on the Management of Police Information . This Guidance was applied by the ORG . A second edition was published in DATE ( “ the MOPI Guidance ” ) , and is also applied by the ORG .", "Chapter CARDINAL of the MOPI Guidance deals with review , retention and disposal of police information not contained on ORG ( “ LAW ) . The ORG is the system for recording conviction data in GPE and GPE ; the FAC system is used in GPE . The MOPI Guidance notes at the outset that :", "“ CARDINAL.CARDINAL.CARDINAL ... Public authorities , including police forces , must act in a way that complies with LAW ( ECHR ) and LAW DATE . In relation to record retention this requires a proportionate approach to the personal information held about individuals . The decision to retain personal records should be proportionate to the person ’s risk of offending , and the risk of harm they pose to others and the community . A higher proportionality test should be met in order to retain records about relatively minor offending . ”", "The MOPI Guidance also refers to the need to comply with the principles of LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL - CARDINAL below ) .", "The MOPI Guidance sets out the framework for decision - making in respect of retention of police information . It provides that records should be kept for a minimum period of DATE , beyond which time there is a requirement to review whether retention of the information remains necessary for a policing purpose . Relevant questions are whether there is evidence of a capacity to inflict serious harm , whether there are concerns relating to children or vulnerable adults , whether the behaviour involved a breach of trust , whether there is evidence of links or associations which might increase the risk of harm , whether there are concerns as to substance misuse and whether there are concerns that an individual ’s mental state might increase the risk . In any review , the MOPI Guidance notes that there is a presumption in favour of retention of police information provided that it is not excessive , is necessary for a policing purpose , is adequate for that purpose and is up to date .", "The MOPI Guidance also contains a review schedule based on the seriousness of offences . Under the review schedule , information is divided into CARDINAL categories . Group CARDINAL is called “ Certain Public Protection Matters ” , which includes information relating to individuals who have been convicted , acquitted , charged , arrested , questioned or implicated in relation to murder or a serious offence as specified in LAW DATE ( or historical offences that would be charged as such if committed DATE ) . Such information should only be disposed of if it is found to be entirely inaccurate or no longer necessary for policing purposes . The MOPI Guidance continues :", "“ Forces must retain all information relating to certain public protection matters until such time as a subject is deemed to have reached DATE ( this should be calculated using the subject ’s date of birth ) . There is still a requirement , however , to review this information regularly to ensure that it is adequate and up to date . This must be done DATE ...", "Due to the seriousness of this group , no distinction is made between the type or classification of information that can be retained for DATE ; information retained under this grouping can include intelligence of any grading .", "There may be extreme cases where the retention of records relating to certain public protection matters would be disproportionately injurious to the individual they are recorded against . For example , an individual arrested on suspicion of murder for a death that is subsequently found to have been the result of natural causes , or an entirely malicious accusation that has been proven as such , would both generate records that can only be adequate and up to date if they reflect what actually happened . Particular care must be exercised in disclosing any such records to avoid unnecessary damage to the person who is the subject of the record . ”", "The other categories are “ Other Sexual , Violent or Serious Offences ( Group CARDINAL ) , in respect of which information should be retained for as long as the offender or suspected offender continues to be assessed as posing a risk of harm ; “ All Other Offences ” ( Group CARDINAL ) , in respect of which police forces may choose to use a system of time - based , automatic disposal if it is considered that the risk of disposal is outweighed by the administrative burden of reviewing the information or the cost of retaining it ; and “ Miscellaneous ” ( Group CARDINAL ) , which covers a variety of other cases and entails different guidance on retention in each one .", "LAW on ORG ( “ the ACPO Guidelines ” ) came into effect on DATE . The ORG form part of the guidance issued under LAW and are applied by ORG .", "The ACPO Guidelines explain that :", "“ CARDINAL.CARDINAL The Retention Guidelines are based on a format of restricting access to ORG data , rather than the deletion of that data . The restriction of access is achieved by setting strict time periods after which the relevant event histories will ‘ step ORG and only be open to inspection by the police . Following the ‘ step ORG other users of ORG will be unaware of the existence of such records , save for those occasions where the individual is the subject of an Enhanced Check under ORG vetting process ... ”", "They continue :", "“ CARDINAL.CARDINAL ... the PERSON records will now contain ‘ Event Histories’ to reflect the fact that the subject may have been Convicted ( including cautions , reprimands and warnings ) , dealt with by the issue of a Penalty Notice for Disorder , Acquitted , or dealt with as a ‘ PERSON [ a person who has been arrested for a recordable offence under LAW DATE but in respect of whom no further action was taken ] . ”", "The general principle set out in paragraph CARDINAL of ORG is that when a nominal record is created or updated on the ORG by virtue of an individual being convicted , receiving a LAW , being acquitted or being a CJ Arrestee , the record will contain the relevant personal data together with details of the offence which resulted in the creation of the record . The record will be retained on ORG until that person is deemed to have attained DATE .", "Paragraph CARDINAL of ORG clarifies that chief officers are the “ data controllers ” ( within the meaning of LAW DATE see paragraphs CARDINAL - CARDINAL below ) of all ORG records , including DNA and fingerprints associated with the entry , created by their forces and that they have the discretion in exceptional circumstances to authorise the deletion of any such data . LAW of the ACPO Guidelines outlines the procedure to be followed in deciding whether a particular case will be regarded as “ exceptional ” and states :", "“ Exceptional cases by definition will be rare . They might include cases where the original arrest or sampling was found to be unlawful . Additionally , where it is established beyond reasonable doubt that no offence existed , that might , having regard to all the circumstances , be viewed as an exceptional circumstance . ”", "According to the Government , from the date on which the caution was administered to the applicant until DATE , requests for disclosure of criminal record data in GPE were made on a consensual basis . Disclosure took place in accordance with well - established common law powers of the police for police purposes only .", "Part V of LAW ( “ the DATE LAW ) now sets out the legislative framework for the disclosure of criminal record information in GPE . The relevant provisions entered into force in GPE on DATE .", "Section CARDINALA deals with criminal record certificates ( “ CRCs ” ) . Section ORG ) defines a ORG as follows :", "“ A criminal record certificate is a certificate which–", "( a ) gives the prescribed details of every relevant matter relating to the applicant which is recorded in central records , or", "( b ) states that there is no such matter . ”", "... ”", "Section CARDINAL ) defines “ central records ” as such records of convictions and cautions held for the use of police forces generally as may be prescribed . In GPE , the relevant records are prescribed in LAW ( Criminal Record ) ( Disclosure ) Regulations ( GPE ) DATE as information in any form relating to : convictions held in the criminal history database of FAC ; and convictions and cautions on a names index held by ORG for the use of police forces generally . The term “ relevant matter ” is defined in section CARDINAL ) of LAW as including “ spent ” convictions and cautions ( see paragraphs QUANTITY below ) . Pursuant to section CARDINAL ) of LAW DATE , the reference to a “ caution ” in section CARDINALA is to be construed as including warnings and reprimands .", "NORP The Secretary of ORG must issue a ORG to any individual who makes an application in the prescribed manner and form and pays the prescribed fee . The application must be countersigned by a registered person and accompanied by a statement by the registered person that the certificate is required for the purposes of an exempted question . Section CARDINAL ) defines “ exempted question ” as follows : in respect of a conviction , a question which the Secretary of ORG has by order excluded from the provisions on “ spent ” convictions under LAW or the DATE Order ; and in respect of a caution , a question which the Secretary of ORG has by order excluded from the provisions on “ spent ” cautions under LAW ; as noted above there is no corresponding provision in GPE . In respect of GPE , the Secretary of ORG subsequently made an order excluding the provisions on “ spent ” convictions in relation to questions directed , inter alia , at assessing the suitability of persons to work with children and vulnerable adults .", "Section CARDINALB deals with enhanced criminal record certificates ( “ ECRCs ” ) . As with a ORG , the Secretary of ORG must issue an ORG to any individual who makes an application in the prescribed manner and form and pays the prescribed fee . The application must be countersigned by a registered person and accompanied by a statement by the registered person that the certificate is required for the purposes of an exempted question asked for a “ prescribed purpose ” .", "The “ prescribed purposes ” are defined in LAW ( ORG ) ( Disclosure ) Regulations ( Northern Ireland ) DATE as amended and include the purposes of considering the applicant ’s suitability to engage in any activity which is regulated activity relating to children or vulnerable adults , as defined in legislation .", "Section CARDINALB(CARDINAL ) provides :", "“ An enhanced criminal record certificate is a certificate which–", "( a ) gives the prescribed details of every relevant matter relating to the applicant which is recorded in central records and any information provided in accordance with subsection ( CARDINAL ) , or", "( b ) states that there is no such matter or information . ”", "Section CARDINALB(CARDINAL ) provides that before issuing an ORG the Secretary of ORG must request the chief officer of every relevant police force to provide any information which , in the chief officer ’s opinion , might be relevant for the “ prescribed purpose ” and ought to be included in the certificate .", "Pursuant to section CARDINALB(CARDINAL ) , the Secretary of ORG must also request the chief officer of every relevant police force to provide any information which , in the chief officer ’s opinion , might be relevant for the “ prescribed purpose ” , ought not to be included in the certificate in the interests of the prevention or detection of crime but can , without harming those interests , be disclosed to the registered person .", "NORP The Secretary of ORG must send to the registered person who countersigned the application a copy of the enhanced criminal record certificate , and any information provided in accordance with subsection ( CARDINAL ) .", "The MOPI Guidance explains the circumstances in which police information will be disclosed :", "“ CARDINAL . ... LAW creates a statutory scheme for the disclosure of criminal records and police information on potential employees to prospective employers . The ORG is responsible for the scheme and for ensuring that employers have sufficient information to make a judgment on the suitability of a potential employee to work with children or vulnerable adults . ”", "The Guidance further refers to the possibility of sharing information under common law powers . In such cases , a policing purpose must be established and the decision to disclose data must strike a balance between the risk posed and the need for confidentiality of data under LAW and LAW .", "As noted above , the ACPO Guidelines work on the basis of restricting access to police information rather than deleting data . Recordable offences are split into categories “ A ” , “ B ” and “ C ” depending on the seriousness of the offence , with category A being the most serious offences . These categories mirror ORG , CARDINAL and CARDINAL set out in FAC . The LAW set strict time periods after which relevant data will “ step down ” and only be open to inspection by the police . The aim is to ensure that following step down , other users of the ORG will be unaware of the existence of the relevant records , save in cases of requests for criminal record checks . For example , the ORG state , at paragraph CARDINAL , that :", "“ CARDINAL In the case of an adult who is dealt with by way of a caution in respect of an offence listed in category ‘ DATE , the conviction history will ‘ step PERSON after a clear period of DATE , and thereafter only be open to inspection by the police . ”", "Pursuant to legislation , those convicted of certain offences may become “ rehabilitated ” after a certain period of time has elapsed . The relevant legislation in GPE and GPE is ORG “ the DATE LAW ) . The legislation which applies in GPE is the Rehabilitation of Offenders ( GPE ) DATE ( “ the DATE LAW ) .", "Pursuant to the DATE Order , any person who has been convicted of an offence capable of rehabilitation and has not committed any other offence during the rehabilitation period is to be treated as rehabilitated at the end of the rehabilitation period .", "The effect of rehabilitation is that the person is treated for all purposes in law as a person who has not committed , or been charged with , prosecuted for or convicted of the offence in question , i.e. the conviction is considered “ spent ” . If asked about previous convictions , a person is to treat the question as not relating to spent convictions and may frame his answer accordingly ; he is not to be liable or prejudiced for his failure to acknowledge or disclose a spent conviction . Spent convictions are not a proper ground for dismissing or excluding a person from employment . However , the Secretary of ORG is empowered to provide for exclusions , modifications or exemptions from the provisions on the effect of rehabilitation .", "The DATE Order makes no reference to cautions . However , LAW ( which does not apply in GPE ) contains a Schedule introduced in DATE which provides protection for spent cautions . According to Schedule CARDINAL , a caution is to be considered a spent caution at the time that it is given . The effects of rehabilitation in respect of a caution are the same as those described above which apply to a conviction . As with convictions , the Secretary of ORG may , by order , provide for exclusions or exemptions .", "LAW ( “ the DPA DATE ” ) was adopted on DATE . The main provisions of the LAW entered into force on DATE .", "The Act stipulates that the processing of personal data is subject to CARDINAL data protection principles listed in Schedule CARDINAL .", "Pursuant to section CARDINAL of the DPA DATE , “ personal data ” includes data which relate to a living individual who can be identified from those data . LAW defines “ sensitive personal data ” as personal data consisting , inter alia , of information as to the commission or alleged commission by him of any offence , or any proceedings for any offence committed or alleged to have been committed by him , the disposal of such proceedings or the sentence of any court in such proceedings .", "DATE . Under the first principle personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully and , in particular shall not be processed unless ( a ) CARDINAL of the conditions in Schedule CARDINAL is met ; and ( b ) in case of sensitive personal data , CARDINAL of the conditions in Schedule CARDINAL is also met . Schedule CARDINAL contains a detailed list of conditions , including that the processing of any personal data is necessary for the administration of justice or for the exercise of any other functions of a public nature exercised in the public interest by any person ( paragraphs CARDINAL(a ) and ( d ) ) . Schedule CARDINAL contains a more detailed list of conditions , including that the processing is necessary for the purposes of performing an obligation imposed by law on the data controller in connection with employment ( paragraph CARDINAL ) , the processing is necessary for the purpose of , or in connection with , any legal proceedings or is otherwise necessary for the purposes of establishing , exercising or defending legal rights ( paragraph CARDINAL ) , or is necessary for the administration of justice or for the exercise of any functions conferred on any person by or under an enactment ( paragraph CARDINAL ) . LAW provides a qualified exemption from the first data protection principle in the case of personal data processed , inter alia , for the prevention or detection of crime .", "The third principle provides that personal data shall be adequate , relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose or purposes for which they are processed .", "The fifth principle stipulates that personal data processed for any purpose shall not be kept for longer than is necessary for that purpose .", "The Information Commissioner created pursuant to the LAW has an independent duty to promote the following of good practice by data controllers and has power under section CARDINAL of the LAW to make orders ( “ enforcement notices ” ) in this respect . Section CARDINAL of the LAW makes it a criminal offence not to comply with an enforcement notice . LAW gives data controllers the right to appeal against an enforcement notice to ORG , if an enforcement notice raises a point of law . LAW sets out a right to claim damages in the domestic courts in respect of contraventions of the LAW .", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW DATE ( “ LAW ” ) provides as follows :", "“ So far as it is possible to do so , primary legislation and subordinate legislation must be read and given effect in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights . ”", "Section CARDINAL of the LAW provides :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) Subsection ( CARDINAL ) applies in any proceedings in which a court determines whether a provision of primary legislation is compatible with a Convention right .", "( CARDINAL ) NORP If the court is satisfied that the provision is incompatible with a Convention right , it may make a declaration of that incompatibility .", "... ”", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of the LAW provides that it is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a LAW right . Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) clarifies that :", "“ Subsection ( CARDINAL ) does not apply to an act if–", "( a ) as the result of CARDINAL or more provisions of primary legislation , the authority could not have acted differently ; or", "( b ) in the case of CARDINAL or more provisions of , or made under , primary legislation which can not be read or given effect in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights , the authority was acting so as to give effect to or enforce those provisions . ”", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) provides that a person who claims that a public authority has acted in a way made unlawful by section DATE ) may bring proceedings against the authority .", "DATE . Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of the Act permits a court to make a damages award in relation to any act of a public authority which the court finds to be unlawful .", "In R ( X ) , ORG considered the compatibility with LAW disclosure of additional information under the predecessor of section CARDINALB(CARDINAL ) of LAW in the context of an enhanced criminal records check . The appellant had applied for a job as a social worker and had no previous convictions . He had been charged with indecent exposure , but the proceedings were discontinued when the alleged victim failed to identify him . The social work agency which was dealing with his job application applied for an ORG . The chief constable , as he was required to do , issued an ORG . It contained details of the allegations of indecent exposure under the heading “ other relevant information ” .", "Lord PERSON noted at the outset that while it was accepted by both parties that the information included in the ORG might offend against LAW , it was not suggested that the legislation itself contravened that Article . He explained :", "“ CARDINAL . ... No doubt this is because disclosure of the information contained in the certificate would be ‘ in accordance with the law’ and ‘ necessary in a democratic FAC , in the interests of public safety and for the prevention of crime and for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others . This country must , through its legislature , be entitled to enable information to be available to prospective employers , where the nature of the employment means that particular care should be taken to ensure that those who are working with the appropriate categories of persons can be relied on to do so , without those in their care coming to harm if they are under DATE or vulnerable adults . ”", "On the question of the balance between competing interests , Lord PERSON indicated ( at paragraph CARDINAL ) that :", "“ Having regard to the language of section CARDINAL [ the predecessor of section CARDINALB ] , the Chief Constable was under a duty to disclose if the information might be relevant , unless there was some good reason for not making such a disclosure . ”", "He continued ( at paragraph CARDINAL ) :", "“ This was obviously required by ORG because it was important ( for the protection of children and vulnerable adults ) that the information should be disclosed even if it only might be true . If it might be true , the person who was proposing to employ the claimant should be entitled to take it into account before the decision was made as to whether or not to employ the claimant . This was the policy of the legislation in order to serve a pressing social need . In my judgment it imposes too heavy an obligation on the Chief Constable to require him to give an opportunity for a person to make representations prior to the Chief Constable performing his statutory duty of disclosure . ”", "On the application of LAW , assuming that it was engaged , he noted ( at paragraph CARDINAL ) :", "“ ... [ H]ow can the Chief Constable ’s decision to disclose be challenged under article CARDINAL ? As already indicated , the Chief Constable starts off with the advantage that his statutory role is not in conflict with article CARDINAL , because the statute meets the requirements of article CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) . It follows also , that as long as the Chief Constable was entitled to form the opinion that the information disclosed might be relevant , then absent any untoward circumstance which is not present here , it is difficult to see that there can be any reason why the information that ‘ might be ORG , ought not to be included in the certificate . I accept that it is possible that there could be cases where the information should not be included in the certificate because it is disproportionate to do so ; the information might be as to some trifling matter ; it may be that the evidence made it so unlikely that the information was correct , that it again would be disproportionate to disclose it . These were not , in my judgment , the situations on the facts before the Chief Constable . ”", "The case of R ( R ) concerned the issue of a “ reprimand or warning ” to a young person for alleged offences of indecent assault . Unlike the issue of a caution , the issue of a reprimand or warning did not require the person ’s consent . However , like a caution , the issue of a reprimand / warning required the individual to admit to the offence . The issue of the reprimand / warning in the case had given rise to an obligation that the young offender in question be subject to registration pursuant to LAW . The claimant alleged that the reprimand had violated LAW because it had been issued without his consent and the consequences of its issue , including the need to register on LAW , had not been properly identified to him .", "ORG unanimously rejected the claim . Lord PERSON of NORP doubted whether LAW had been engaged at all , but even assuming that it was , he concluded that it had ceased to apply once the decision had been made not to prosecute the claimant . He noted that there was little case - law from this ORG as to the meaning of “ determination ” of criminal charges and expressed the view that the determination of a criminal charge , to be properly so regarded , must expose the subject of the charge to the possibility of punishment , whether in the event punishment was imposed or not . He considered therefore that a process which could only culminate in measures of a preventative , curative , rehabilitative or welfare - promoting kind would not ordinarily involve the determination of a criminal charge . He accordingly concluded that neither the warning of the claimant nor the decision to warn him involved the determination of a criminal charge against him . Had they done so , Lord PERSON noted , it was acknowledged by the police force that there had been no valid waiver by him of his fair trial right .", "The claimant challenged the inclusion under section CARDINAL ) of LAW of other information provided by the chief constable on an ECRC regarding alleged offences of which he had been found not guilty .", "The High Court upheld the challenge and quashed the decision on the basis that the decision - maker had not taken reasonable steps to ascertain whether the allegations that had been made had been true and why the claimant had been acquitted . On the facts of the case it was clear that ORG had acquitted the claimant because it took the view that he was innocent in the full sense of the word . ORG observed :", "“ I stress , however , that this decision is very specific to the facts of this case . I do not suggest for TIME that allegations should not be disclosed in an ORG simply because the alleged offender has been acquitted . The circumstances surrounding the acquittal are all important . There will be instances where an alleged offender is acquitted but only because the Magistrates ( or Jury ) entertain a reasonable doubt about the alleged offender ’s guilt . The tribunal of fact may harbour substantial doubts . In such circumstances , however , it might well be perfectly reasonable and rational for a Chief Constable to conclude that the alleged offender might have committed the alleged offence ... ”", "ORG considered a claim by an individual aggrieved by the disclosure in an ECRC of CARDINAL allegations of sexual abuse of autistic persons in his care , where he had been interviewed by the police about one of the allegations but no charges were pursued .", "The judge conducted a detailed analysis of the allegations and concluded :", "It follows that in my judgment the decision to disclose the CARDINAL allegations was lawful ... I recognise how painful such disclosure must be for the claimant , and how damaging its consequences may be . It seems to me , however , that all this follows inevitably from the terms of the legislation and is fully in line with the legislative policy as explained by Lord PERSON in R ( X ) v Chief Constable of GPE . In relation to employment with children or vulnerable adults , it is information of which an employer should be aware . It is then for the employer to decide whether the employment of the person concerned involves an unacceptable risk .", "I am troubled by the fact that the claimant ’s new employer in this case apparently operated a blanket policy of insisting on a ‘ ORG certificate , so that the disclosure of the CARDINAL allegations led inevitably to the claimant ’s dismissal on the transfer of his employment to that employer on a reorganisation at work . The legislation imposes a relatively low threshold for disclosure in the certificate in order to enable an employer to make a properly informed decision . But it is important that employers understand how low that threshold is and the responsibility that it places in practice upon them . A properly informed decision requires consideration not only of the information disclosed in the certificate but also of any additional information or explanation that the employee may provide . The operation of a blanket policy of insisting on a ‘ ORG certificate leaves no room for taking into account what the employee may have to say . That is a matter of particular concern if it leads to the dismissal of an existing employee or of someone whose employment is transferred to the employer on a reorganisation . On the basis of the limited material available to the court , I confess to some surprise that the claimant was advised in this case that he had no reasonable prospect of success in a claim for unfair dismissal resulting from the application of such a policy ... ”", "The question for examination by ORG in its judgment handed down on DATE was whether certain principles of LAW , namely principle CARDINAL ( personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully ) , principle CARDINAL ( personal data shall be adequate relevant and not excessive ) and principle CARDINAL ( personal data shall not be kept for longer than necessary ) , required the police to delete certain old convictions from the ORG . Lord Justice PERSON noted at the outset :", "“ CARDINAL . ... The complaint in each case follows the disclosure of the convictions pursuant to a request by the ... CRB ... or , in CARDINAL case , a request by CARDINAL of the individuals herself , and it is important to emphasise at the outset that the complaint about retention flows in reality not from the retention itself but from the fact that , if retained , disclosure may follow . In respect of each of those convictions ORG ( the IT ) has upheld the view of the Information Commissioner ( the IC ) that they should be deleted . However the ramifications are far wider than these CARDINAL cases since , if these convictions must be deleted and if the police are to treat people consistently , the application of any viable system of weeding would probably lead to the deletion of CARDINAL convictions . ”", "He clarified the effect of the “ stepping down ” policy on disclosure in the context of criminal records checks , noting :", "“ CARDINAL . ... [ I]t seems that both the Police and the IT understood that the result of stepping down would be that in certain circumstances the ORG would not have access to ‘ stepped ORG convictions when preparing ‘ standard disclosure certificates’ ( as opposed to ‘ enhanced disclosure certificates’ ) under Part V of LAW . It is now accepted that that is not accurate . Under Part V of LAW ‘ stepped ORG convictions are required to be revealed even on ‘ standard disclosure certificates’ , and thus although ‘ stepping ORG prevents disclosure in many circumstances to persons other than the police , it does not prevent disclosure by the police in many others including the circumstances under which disclosure was made of CARDINAL of the convictions the subject of this appeal . ”", "PERSON noted that ORG information was used for employment vetting . He observed that CRCs and ECRCs would contain details of spent convictions which , he indicated , provided an important protection to employers . He noted :", "“ ... Some emphasis is placed by [ counsel for the intervenor ] that no statutory obligation is placed on the police to retain data under LAW , but on any view Part V of the LAW seems to recognise that the data will be there to be provided . ”", "Taking as an example the case of CARDINAL of the individuals concerned , PERSON considered the purposes for which the data had been recorded :", "“ CARDINAL . ... [ I]t seems to me to be clear that CARDINAL of the purposes for which the police retained the data on the ORG was to be able to supply accurate records of convictions to the ORG , the courts and indeed the ORG . ‘ Rendering assistance to the public in accordance with force ORG clearly covers the roles the police seek to perform in those areas and if there was any doubt about it the recipients include ‘ ORG ‘ the ORG and ‘ law enforcement agencies’ . ”", "He continued :", "“ CARDINAL . If CARDINAL then poses the question whether the Data being retained is excessive or being retained for longer than necessary for the above purposes there is , it seems to me , CARDINAL answer , since for all the above a complete record of convictions spent and otherwise is required . That seems to me to be a complete answer to the appeal ... ”", "Even if a narrower approach to police purposes were adopted , PERSON considered that the retention of the data was lawful under the DPA DATE . He noted :", "“ CARDINAL . ... If the police say rationally and reasonably that convictions , however old or minor , have a value in the work they do that should , in effect , be the end of the matter ... It is simply the honest and rationally held belief that convictions , however old and however minor , can be of value in the fight against crime and thus the retention of that information should not be denied to the police . ”", "He continued :", "“ DATE . I emphasise the word ‘ retention’ because if there is any basis for complaint by the data subjects in this case , it seems to me to relate to the fact that in certain circumstances this information will be disclosed , but that is because ORG has made exceptions to LAW . What is more , the circumstances in which there will be disclosure are circumstances in which ORG would be bound to give the correct answer if he or she were asked . It is not as it seems to me the purpose of the DATE [ LAW to overrule the will of ORG by a side wind . ”", "As to the complaint of CARDINAL of the individuals concerned , PERSON , that she had been assured in DATE that the reprimand she had received aged DATE would be removed from her record when she was DATE if she did not get into anymore trouble and that the retention of the reprimand on the ORG after her eighteenth birthday was therefore unfair under the first data protection principle , PERSON , with whom Lord Justice PERSON agreed , held :", "“ CARDINAL . ... It seems to me that if it is fair to retain convictions under the new policy it does not become unfair to do so simply because the data subject was told of what the policy then was when being convicted or reprimanded . Furthermore , the deletion of this reprimand leading ( as it would have to ) to deletion of many others would be likely to prejudice the prevention and detection of crime and the apprehension or prosecution of offenders . The court and the ORG need the full information , never mind the fact the police are of the view that for their operational purposes they need the same . ”", "Finally , on the argument raised by the individuals that retention of the data violated LAW indicated that he was not persuaded that LAW was engaged at all in relation to the retention of the record of a conviction . He was of the view that disclosure might be another matter , but reiterated that the appeal before him was not about disclosure . Even if his conclusion were wrong , he considered that the processing was in accordance with the law and necessary in a NORP society .", "On the Article CARDINAL question , Lord Justice Carnwath noted as follows :", "“ DATE . ... [ W]ith regard to LAW , it is significant that the [ ORG ] Directive is itself specifically linked to the need to respect ‘ fundamental rights and freedoms , notably the right to privacy ... ’ , and that it refers in that respect to ORG ( Preamble ( CARDINAL ) , ( CARDINAL ) ) . This suggests that the maintenance of such a complete register of convictions , as implicitly endorsed by Article CARDINAL ) of the Directive , should not normally raise any separate issues under the ORG . ”", "He referred to “ considerable doubt ” as to whether recording the mere fact of a conviction could ever engage LAW in any case , distinguishing PERSON and GPE v. GPE [ ORG ] , ORG . CARDINAL and CARDINAL/CARDINAL , ORG , on the basis that it concerned the data of unconvicted persons and was , in his view , accordingly no authority for the proposition that a record of the mere fact of a conviction engaged LAW .", "As regards the specific facts of ORG case , given the assurance that she had received from the police that the reprimand would be removed when she reached DATE and the manner in which the police had sought to justify their subsequent decision not to do so , ORG considered that the decision of the first - instance tribunal that the retention of the data was unfair and in breach of the first data protection principle could not be faulted in law .", "Permission to appeal was refused by ORG on DATE .", "In its judgment in R ( L ) , handed down on DATE , DATE after ORG ruling in Chief Constable of GPE , ORG considered ORG ruling in R ( X ) ( see paragraphs CARDINAL above ) in the context of a case concerning disclosure of police information under the predecessor of section CARDINAL ) in the context of an ECRC . The appellant had secured a job as a playground assistant and the school required an ECRC to which the appellant consented . The ECRC disclosed that the appellant had been suspected of child neglect and non - cooperation with social services . The appellant had not been charged with , or convicted of , any offence , nor had she received a caution . Her employment was subsequently terminated and she brought judicial review proceedings , arguing that the disclosure of the information had violated her rights under LAW . At issue was whether the requirement in LAW that chief officers provide information which “ might be relevant ” and “ ought to be disclosed ” when an ECRC was requested , was proportionate .", "As to whether LAW was engaged by the mere retention of data , after reviewing the case - law of this Court , Lord Hope indicated ( at paragraph CARDINAL ) :", "“ This line of authority from GPE shows that information about an applicant ’s convictions which is collected and stored in central records can fall within the scope of private life within the meaning of article CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) , with the result that it will interfere with the applicant ’s private life when it is released . It is , in CARDINAL sense , public information because the convictions took place in public . But the systematic storing of this information in central records means that it is available for disclosure under Part V of LAW long after the event when everyone other than the person concerned is likely to have forgotten about it . As it recedes into the past , it becomes a part of the person ’s private life which must be respected . Moreover , much of the other information that may find its way into an ECRC relates to things that happen behind closed doors . A caution takes place in private , and the police gather and record information from a variety of sources which would not otherwise be made public . It may include allegations of criminal behaviour for which there was insufficient evidence to prosecute ... It may even disclose something that could not be described as criminal behaviour at all . The information that was disclosed on the appellant ’s ECRC was of that kind . ”", "He therefore considered that decisions taken by chief constables in the context of ECRCs were likely to fall within the scope of Article CARDINAL in every case as the information in question was stored in files held by the police . He noted that the approach taken by the police to questions of disclosure at the time was modelled on Lord PERSON ’s ruling in R ( X ) ( see paragraphs CARDINAL above ) .", "ORG . Lord Hope indicated that the approach to disclosure under the applicable legislation involved a CARDINAL - part test . In the first instance , the chief constable was required to consider whether the information might be relevant . Having concluded in the affirmative , he then had to turn his mind to the question whether the information ought to be included in the certificate . This required consideration of whether there was likely to be an interference with the individual ’s private life and , if so , whether the interference could be justified . This raised the question whether ORG in R ( X ) had struck the balance between the competing interests in the right place .", "Turning to examine the approach of ORG in that case , Lord Hope first endorsed the views expressed there as to the compatibility of the legislation itself with LAW see paragraph CARDINAL above ) . He noted that , as in that case , the appellant in the present case did not argue that the legislation itself contravened Article CARDINAL and accepted that it could be interpreted and applied in a manner that was proportionate . Lord Hope continued :", "“ DATE . So the issue is essentially one of proportionality . On the one hand there is a pressing social need that children and vulnerable adults should be protected against the risk of harm . On the other there is the applicant ’s right to respect for her private life . It is of the greatest importance that the balance between these CARDINAL considerations is struck in the right place ... [ T]he use that is being made of the requirement to obtain an ORG has increased substantially since the scheme was first devised . The number of disclosures of information by means of ECRCs has exceeded CARDINAL for each of DATE ( CARDINAL for DATE ; CARDINAL for DATE ) . Not far short of MONEY of these disclosures have had section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) [ now section DATE ) DATE see paragraphs CARDINAL above ] information on them ( CARDINAL for DATE ; CARDINAL for DATE ) . Increasing use of this procedure , and the effects of the release of sensitive information of this kind on the applicants’ opportunities for employment or engaging in unpaid work in the community and their ability to establish and develop relations with others , is a cause of very real public concern ... ”", "He noted in this regard that it was no answer to these concerns that the ORG was issued on the application of the persons concerned . While he accepted that they could choose not to apply for a position of the kind that required a certificate , he considered that they had , in reality , no free choice in the matter if an employer in their chosen profession insisted , as he was entitled to , on an ECRC . He observed :", "“ CARDINAL . ... The answer to the question whether there was any relevant information is likely to determine the outcome of their job application . If relevant information is disclosed they may as a result be cut off from work for which they have considerable training and experience . In some cases they could be excluded permanently from the only work which is likely to be available to them . They consent to the application , but only on the basis that their right to private life is respected . ”", "Lord Hope considered that the effect of the approach taken to the issue in R ( X ) had been to tilt the balance against the applicant too far . The correct approach , he explained , was that neither consideration had precedence over the other . He proposed that the relevant guidance to officers making a decision on disclosure under the provisions should be amended :", "“ CARDINAL . ... so that the precedence that is given to the risk that failure to disclose would cause to the vulnerable group is removed . It should indicate that careful consideration is required in all cases where the disruption to the private life of anyone is judged to be as great , or more so , as the risk of non - disclosure to the vulnerable group . The advice that , where careful consideration is required , the rationale for disclosure should make it very clear why the human rights infringement outweighs the risk posed to the vulnerable group also needs to be reworded . It should no longer be assumed that the presumption was for disclosure unless there was a good reason for not doing so . ”", "Lord PERSON , who indicated that his judgment largely echoed that of Lord Hope , was also firmly of the view that LAW was engaged in the case , noting :", "“ DATE . ... An enhanced criminal record certificate ... which contains particulars of any convictions ( potentially including spent convictions ) or cautions ... , or any other information ‘ which might be ORG and which ‘ ought to be included in the ORG ... will often have a highly significant effect on the applicant . In the light of the wide ambit of section CARDINAL ( extending as it does to social workers and teachers , as well as to those ‘ regularly caring for , training , supervising or being in sole charge CARDINAL children ) , an adverse ECRC ... will often effectively shut off forever all employment opportunities for the applicant in a large number of different fields ... ”", "He further observed :", "“ CARDINAL . ... Even where the ORG records a conviction ( or caution ) for a relatively minor , or questionably relevant , offence , a prospective employer may well feel it safer , particularly in the present culture , which , at least in its historical context , can be said to be unusually risk - averse and judgmental , to reject the applicant ... ”", "Lord PERSON also rejected the argument that LAW was not engaged because under the relevant legislation the claimant herself had requested the ORG , noting :", "“ CARDINAL . ... Where the legislature imposes on a commonplace action or relationship , such as a job application or selection process , a statutory fetter , whose terms would normally engage a person ’s Convention right , it can not avoid the engagement of the right by including in the fetter ’s procedural provisions a term that the person must agree to those terms . Apart from this proposition being right in principle , it seems to me that , if it were otherwise , there would be an easy procedural device which the legislature could invoke in many cases to by - pass Convention rights . ”", "He considered the aim of Part V of LAW , namely to protect vulnerable people , to be unexceptionable and explained how this was achieved by the requirement that relevant information available to the police about an applicant for a post involving responsibility for such vulnerable people be provided to the prospective employer . He continued :", "“ DATE . ... It is then for that employer to decide whether the information is relevant , and , if so , whether it justifies refusing to employ the applicant . As already mentioned , however , it seems to me realistic to assume that , in the majority of cases , it is likely that an adverse ECRC ... will represent something close to a killer blow to the hopes of a person who aspires to any post which falls within the scope of the section ... ”", "Turning to consider whether there was an infringement of LAW in the case , Lord PERSON was prepared to proceed on the basis that there was “ nothing objectionable ” in the requirement that an ORG had to contain details of convictions and cautions , even though , he noted , it might on occasions be “ rather harsh ” on the person concerned . However , like Lord Hope , he was of the view that where other information provided by the chief constable was concerned , the decision on whether to include it in an ORG had to incorporate a proportionality assessment and it might well be necessary to seek the prior views of the person concerned .", "Lords Saville and PERSON agreed with Lord Hope and , in the case of Lord PERSON , Lord PERSON .", "Lord PERSON , in the minority , considered ( at paragraph CARDINAL ) that if the compilation and retention of the information was unexceptionable , and the information was relevant to the appellant ’s suitability for the employment sought , then it was difficult to see on what basis her attack on the inclusion of the information in the ORG could succeed . He continued :", "“ DATE . It is at this point , as it seems to me , that it becomes necessary to remember that it was she who applied for the certificate . I do not doubt that the need for the certificate would have been impressed on her by ORG and that she would have realised that unless she agreed to make the application her chances of obtaining the employment position she desired would be reduced . She may or may not have had in mind the full implications of subsection ( CARDINAL ) of section CARDINAL and it would probably not have occurred to her that the history of her delinquent DATE son and her failure to have controlled his delinquency would be known to the police and might be considered relevant information . But it can not , in my opinion , possibly be said that the police response showed a lack of respect for her private life . It was she who , in making the application for an ORG , invited the exercise by the chief police officer of the statutory duty imposed by section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) . ”", "Lord PERSON accordingly endorsed the approach taken in R ( X ) .", "Following R ( L ) , the High Court quashed a decision by the chief constable to disclose details of a sexual allegation made against the claimant in an ECRC on grounds of procedural impropriety , because the claimant ’s views had not been sought and because the decision to disclose was disproportionate to the level of risk disclosed . The court granted an injunction to prevent future disclosure .", "On appeal , ORG upheld the decision to quash the disclosure on grounds of procedural impropriety but , emphasising that the primary decision - maker was the chief constable who would take a fresh decision on the basis of the material now before him , allowed the appeal against the injunction .", "In R ( F and another ) v Secretary of ORG for ORG , the respondents were convicted sex offenders subject to notification requirements under LAW DATE ( ORG DATE ) , whereby all those sentenced to CARDINAL months’ imprisonment or more for a sexual offence are registered on the sex offenders register and subject to a lifelong duty to notify police of their living and travelling arrangements , with no right for review . The question in the appeal was whether the absence of any right to review rendered the notification requirements disproportionate to the legitimate aims they sought to pursue and thus incompatible with LAW . Lord PERSON noted :", "“ CARDINAL . The issue in this case is CARDINAL of proportionality . It is common ground that the notification requirements interfere with ORG article CARDINAL rights , that this interference is in accordance with the law and that it is directed at the legitimate aims of the prevention of crime and the protection of the rights and freedoms of others . The issue is whether the notification requirements , as embodied in the CARDINAL Act , and without any right to a review , are proportionate to that aim . That issue requires consideration of CARDINAL questions . ( i ) What is the extent of the interference with article CARDINAL rights ? ( ii ) How valuable are the notification requirements in achieving the legitimate aims ? and ( iii ) To what extent would that value be eroded if the notification requirements were made subject to review ? The issue is a narrow one . The respondents’ case is that the notification requirements can not be proportionate in the absence of any right to a review . The challenge has been to the absence of any right to a review , not to some of the features of the notification requirements that have the potential to be particularly onerous . ”", "He found that the notification requirements were capable of causing significant interference with LAW . However , he continued ( at paragraph CARDINAL ) :", "“ ... This case turns , however , on CARDINAL critical issue . If some of those who are subject to lifetime notification requirements no longer pose any significant risk of committing further sexual offences and it is possible for them to demonstrate that this is the case , there is no point in subjecting them to supervision or management or to the interference with their article CARDINAL rights involved in visits to their local police stations in order to provide information about their places of residence and their travel plans . Indeed subjecting them to these requirements can only impose an unnecessary and unproductive burden on the responsible authorities . We were informed that there are now CARDINAL ex - offenders subject to notification requirements and this number will inevitably grow . ”", "He concluded :", "“ CARDINAL . No evidence has been placed before this court or the courts below that demonstrates that it is not possible to identify from among those convicted of serious offences , at any stage in their lives , some at least who pose no significant risk of re - offending . It is equally true that no evidence has been adduced that demonstrates that this is possible . This may well be because the necessary research has not been carried out to enable firm conclusions to be drawn on this topic . If uncertainty exists can this render proportionate the imposition of notification requirements for life without review under the precautionary principle ? I do not believe that it can .", "... I think that it is obvious that there must be some circumstances in which an appropriate tribunal could reliably conclude that the risk of an individual carrying out a further sexual offence can be discounted to the extent that continuance of notification requirements is unjustified . As the courts below have observed , it is open to the legislature to impose an appropriately high threshold for review . Registration systems for sexual offenders are not uncommon in other jurisdictions . Those acting for the first respondent have drawn attention to registration requirements for sexual offenders in GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE and GPE . Almost all of these have provisions for review . This does not suggest that the review exercise is not practicable .", "For these reasons I have concluded that ... the notification requirements constitute a disproportionate interference with article CARDINAL rights because they make no provision for individual review of the requirements . ”", "ORG issued a declaration that section CARDINAL of the SOA DATE was incompatible with the Convention .", "ORG of DATE for the protection of individuals with regard to automatic processing of personal data ( “ the LAW ” ) , which entered into force for GPE on DATE , defines “ personal data ” as any information relating to an identified or identifiable individual ( “ data subject ” ) . Article CARDINAL , which deals with quality of data , provides :", "“ Personal data undergoing automatic processing shall be :", "a. obtained and processed fairly and lawfully ;", "b. stored for specified and legitimate purposes and not used in a way incompatible with those purposes ;", "c. adequate , relevant and not excessive in relation to the purposes for which they are stored ;", "...", "e. preserved in a form which permits identification of the data subjects for no longer than is required for the purpose for which those data are stored . ”", "Article CARDINAL deals with “ special categories of data ” and stipulates that personal data relating to criminal convictions may not be processed automatically unless domestic law provides appropriate safeguards .", "Pursuant to Article CARDINAL , derogations are permitted where they are necessary in a NORP society in the interests of , inter alia , public safety , the suppression of criminal offences or protecting the rights and freedoms of others .", "ORG R ( CARDINAL ) CARDINAL regulating the use of personal data in the police sector on DATE , in the context of a sectoral approach to data protection intended to adapt the principles of ORG to the specific requirements of particular sectors . An Explanatory Memorandum ( “ EM ” ) sets out the background to the Recommendation ’s adoption , and notes at paragraph CARDINAL :", "“ Given the increased activities of police forces in the lives of individuals necessitated by new threats to society posed by terrorism , drug delinquency , etc as well as a general increase in criminality , it was felt even more necessary to establish clear guidelines for the police sector which indicate the necessary balance needed in our societies between the rights of the individual and legitimate police activities when the latter have recourse to data - processing techniques . ”", "It further observes that concerns which prompted the elaboration of ORG in regard to the increasing recourse to automation in all sectors are most acutely felt in the police sector , for it is in this domain that the consequences of a violation of the basic principles laid down in the Convention could weigh most heavily on the individual .", "As regards the derogations permitted under LAW , the ORG reiterates that they are only permitted if provided for by law and necessary in a NORP society in the interests of , inter alia , the “ suppression of criminal offences ” . It continues :", "“ CARDINAL ... Bearing in mind that ORG in its judgment in the Malone Case laid down a number of strict criteria ( precision , certainty , foreseeability , etc ) , it is thought that the principles contained in this non - binding legal instrument can provide helpful guidance to the legislator as to the interpretation of the derogation in DATE , paragraph CARDINAL , of ORG when regulating the collection , use , etc of personal data in the police sector . This point should be borne in mind , for example , in the context of paragraph CARDINAL . ”", "Principle CARDINAL of the ORG provides :", "“ Each member state should have an independent supervisory authority outside the police sector which should be responsible for ensuring respect for the principles contained in this recommendation . ”", "The EM emphasises the importance of such supervisory authority enjoying genuine independence from police control .", "Principle CARDINAL concerns collection of data and includes the following :", "“ CARDINAL.CARDINAL The collection of personal data for police purposes should be limited to such as is necessary for the prevention of a real danger or the suppression of a specific criminal offence . Any exception to this provision should be the subject of specific national legislation . ”", "The EM explains that Principle CARDINAL.CARDINAL excludes an “ open - ended , indiscriminate ” collection of data by the police and expresses a “ qualitative and quantitative ” approach to LAW . The ORG attempts to fix the boundaries to the exception in LAW by limiting the collection of personal data to such as are necessary for the prevention of a real danger or the suppression of a specific criminal offence , unless domestic law clearly authorises wider police powers to gather information .", "Storage of data is addressed in LAW . Principle CARDINAL.CARDINAL provides that as far as possible , the storage of personal data for police purposes should be limited to accurate data and to such data as are necessary to allow police bodies to perform their lawful tasks within the framework of national law and their obligations arising from international law . The ORG explains :", "“ DATE . Personal data when collected will subsequently be the subject of a decision concerning their storage in police files . Principle CARDINAL addresses the requirements of accuracy and storage limitation . The data stored should be accurate and limited to such data as are necessary to enable the police to perform its lawful tasks ...", "This principle is important given the fact that the commitment of personal data to a police file may lead to a permanent record and indiscriminate storage of data may prejudice the rights and freedoms of the individual . It is also in the interests of the police that it has only accurate and reliable data at its disposal . ”", "Principle CARDINAL deals with communication of data . Principle CARDINAL.CARDINAL permits communication of data between police bodies , to be used for police purposes , if there exists a legitimate interest for such communication within the framework of the legal powers of these bodies . In respect of communication to other public bodies , Principle CARDINAL stipulates :", "“ CARDINAL.CARDINAL.i . Communication of data to other public bodies should only be permissible if , in a particular case :", "a. there exists a clear legal obligation or authorisation , or with the authorisation of the supervisory authority , or if", "b. these data are indispensable to the recipient to enable him to fulfil his own lawful task and provided that the aim of the collection or processing to be carried out by the recipient is not incompatible with the original processing , and the legal obligations of the communicating body are not contrary to this .", "ORG . Furthermore , communication to other public bodies is exceptionally permissible if , in a particular case :", "...", "b. the communication is necessary so as to prevent a serious and imminent danger . ”", "As to the possibility of communicating indispensable data to public bodies under LAW , the ORG explains that it is recognised that certain public bodies engage in activities which are similar in some ways to police activities and that information held by the police may be of value to those activities . Regarding the possibility of communicating data to prevent a serious and imminent danger , the ORG recalls that this will only “ exceptionally ” allow communication and that the danger must be both serious and imminent , given that ORG is only concerned with exceptional cases justifying communication .", "As regards communication to private parties , Principle CARDINAL.CARDINAL provides :", "“ CARDINAL.CARDINAL.ii . The communication of data to private parties should only be permissible if , in a particular case , there exists a clear legal obligation or authorisation , or with the authorisation of the supervisory authority .", "Communication to private parties is exceptionally permissible if , in a particular case :", "...", "b. the communication is necessary so as to prevent a serious and imminent danger . ”", "The EM acknowledges that it may occasionally be necessary for the police to communicate data to private bodies , although not on the same scale as envisaged in the case of mutual assistance between the police and other public bodies . It continues :", "“ Once again , Principle CARDINAL.CARDINAL treats these as exceptional cases , requiring a clear legal obligation or authorisation ( for example the consent of a magistrate ) , or the consent of the supervisory authority . In the absence of these factors , Principle CARDINAL.CARDINAL repeats the same conditions set out in ORG . ”", "Concerning Principle CARDINAL generally , the EM notes :", "“ Outside the framework of communication within the police sector , the conditions governing transfer are stricter , given the fact that the communication may be for non - police purposes stricto sensu . The exceptional nature of the circumstances allowing communication set out in Principles CARDINAL and CARDINAL is stressed . It will be noted that circumstances a and b in both Principles CARDINAL.CARDINAL.ii and CARDINAL are specifically referred to as ‘ exceptional’ . ”", "Principle CARDINAL deals with length of storage and updating of data . Pursuant to Principle CARDINAL.CARDINAL measures should be taken so that personal data kept for police purposes are deleted if they are no longer necessary for the purposes for which they were stored . It further provides :", "“ ... For this purpose , consideration shall in particular be given to the following criteria : the need to retain data in the light of the conclusion of an inquiry into a particular case ; a final judicial decision , in particular an acquittal ; rehabilitation ; spent convictions ; amnesties ; the age of the data subject , particular categories of data . ”", "The EM explains that it is essential that periodic reviews of police files are undertaken to ensure that they are purged of superfluous or inaccurate data and kept up to date . It notes that Principle CARDINAL lists certain considerations which should be borne in mind when determining whether or not data continue to be necessary for the prevention and suppression of crime or for the maintenance of public order .", "Principle QUANTITY provides :", "“ Rules aimed at fixing storage periods for the different categories of personal data as well as regular checks on their quality should be established in agreement with the supervisory authority or in accordance with domestic law . ”", "The EM notes that domestic law may authorise the means for laying down such rules or that , alternatively , rules could be formulated by the supervisory authority itself in consultation with police bodies . It explains that where the police themselves elaborate rules , the supervisory authority should be consulted as to their content and application .", "Recommendation No . R ( CARDINAL ) CARDINAL of ORG on the criminal record and rehabilitation of convicted persons ( adopted on DATE ) notes in its preamble that any use of criminal record data outside the criminal trial context may jeopardise the convicted person ’s chances of social reintegration and should therefore be restricted “ to the utmost ” . It invited member GPE to review their legislation with a view to introducing a number of measures where necessary , including provisions limiting the communication of criminal record information and provisions on rehabilitation of offenders , which would imply the prohibition of any reference to the convictions of a rehabilitated person except on compelling grounds provided for in national law .", "The TFEU sets out in LAW the right to the protection of personal data concerning them . It requires ORG and the ORG to lay down the rules relating to the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by ORG institutions , bodies , offices and agencies , and by the Member States when carrying out activities which fall within the scope of Union law ; and the rules relating to the free movement of such data .", "The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights includes the right to protection of personal data . LAW reads :", "“ CARDINAL . Everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning him or her .", "Such data must be processed fairly for specified purposes and on the basis of the consent of the person concerned or some other legitimate basis laid down by law . Everyone has the right of access to data which has been collected concerning him or her , and the right to have it rectified .", "Compliance with these rules shall be subject to control by an independent authority . ”", "Directive CARDINAL of ORG and of ORG on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data ( “ ORG Directive ” ) provides that the object of national laws on the processing of personal data is notably to protect the right to privacy as recognised both in LAW and in the general principles of Community law . The Directive sets out a number of principles in order to give substance to and amplify those contained in LAW . It allows Member GPE to adopt legislative measures to restrict the scope of certain obligations and rights provided for in the Directive when such a restriction constitutes notably a necessary measure for the prevention , investigation , detection and prosecution of criminal offences ( LAW ) .", "Framework Decision CARDINAL/CARDINAL/JHA on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters ( “ ORG ” ) was adopted on DATE . Its purpose is to ensure a high level of protection of the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons , and in particular their right to privacy , with respect to the processing of personal data in the framework of cross - border police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters while guaranteeing a high level of public safety .", "Article CARDINAL of ORG provides that personal data may be collected by the competent authorities only for specified , explicit and legitimate purposes and may be processed only for the same purpose for which data were collected . Processing of the data must be lawful and adequate , relevant and not excessive in relation to the purposes for which they are collected . Article CARDINAL provides that appropriate time - limits must be established for the erasure of personal data or for a periodic review of the need for the storage of the data . Procedural measures must be in place to ensure that these time - limits are observed .", "In DATE ORG published proposals , based inter alia on LAW , for the comprehensive reform of the ORG ’s data protection framework . The proposals are currently under negotiation ." ]

[ "8" ]

[ "8-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment in penitentiary establishment ORG CARDINAL/CARDINAL of GPE , GPE .", "On DATE at TIME the applicant was arrested on suspicion of robbery and taken to the LOC police station , GPE . He was questioned at TIME DATE .", "According to the applicant , he was also questioned at TIME on DATE . During the questioning the police officers allegedly beat him on his head , chest and legs , seeking to obtain self - incriminating evidence . Afterwards the applicant was placed in a preliminary detention cell . The officer on duty was allegedly instructed not to let the applicant go to the toilet and not to give him anything to drink , notwithstanding the applicant ’s argument that he suffered from diabetes insipidus which , in case of dehydration , could provoke an abrupt deterioration in his health .", "According to the applicant , on DATE an ambulance was called by the police officers for a young man detained in the same cell as the applicant . Following the applicant ’s request , the ambulance doctor examined the applicant and allegedly told the police officers that he needed to be taken to the hospital . Notwithstanding the doctor ’s advice , the applicant was transferred to a pre - trial detention facility ( СИЗО-CARDINAL г. ORG ) , where he was again examined by a doctor .", "The Government maintained that an ambulance was never called for the applicant .", "On DATE the applicant , in the presence of his lawyer , wrote a complaint to ORG of ill - treatment by police officers and submitted it to the investigator . However , neither the applicant nor his lawyer ever received any answer to the complaint in question .", "According to the Government , however , on DATE the applicant ’s allegations of ill - treatment were examined by ORG of GPE , who did not find a prima facie case of ill - treatment and decided not to institute criminal proceedings . The Government submitted neither a copy of the above decision , nor the material of the investigation due to the fact that they had been destroyed on DATE as their retention period had expired .", "On DATE the ORG of GPE convicted the applicant of robbery and sentenced him to DATE and CARDINAL months’ imprisonment with forfeiture of property . Despite the applicant ’s objections the trial court did not obtain the attendance of PERSON . , a prosecution witness , and relied on the testimony given by him during the pre - trial investigation . During the trial the applicant raised the issue of illtreatment . The trial record reads as follows :", "“ ... In the morning I was taken to the police officers . I told them everything , but they said I was lying . TIME I was taken to the fourth floor . They bullied and beat me there . In the presence of my counsel I wrote a complaint and handed it to PERSON Kalyagin , the investigator . However , I never got any answer . An ambulance medic examined me and said I needed to be taken to ORG . CARDINAL . They threatened me all the time , but never explained what charges were being brought against me . I filed the complaint on DATE . ”", "However , the trial court left this issue unexamined .", "had failed to eliminate contradictions in the evidence , that it had left certain circumstances unexamined , that it had failed to establish the applicant ’s participation in the robbery and had relied on some evidence received in violation of the procedural rules . He further complained that PERSON . had not been informed of his right not to testify against himself . The applicant ’s lawyer further submitted :", "“ During the trial [ the applicant ] submitted that on DATE he wrote a complaint addressed to the Prosecutor of PERSON concerning the wrongful acts of the police officers . This complaint was written in my presence . Up to the pronouncement of the conviction [ the applicant ] had not received any answer to his complaint . ”", "On DATE ORG upheld the judgment on appeal . The appeal court did not investigate the applicant ’s allegations of illtreatment .", "Following the applicant ’s request , on DATE the ORG of ORG modified the qualification of the applicant ’s crime by way of supervisory review and reduced the sentence to DATE imprisonment .", "The applicant submitted to ORG an extract from his medical file dated DATE , which read as follows :", "“ Suffering from diabetes insipidus of medium severity [ the applicant ] has been observed by an endocrinologist since his childhood . Until DATE he had a ‘ category CARDINAL’ childhood disability .", "[ The applicant ] needs constant and regular intake of antidiuretic hormone CARDINAL times a day ( nasal drops ) , good nutrition with sufficient liquid , availability of necessary facilities for regular and timely compliance with physiological needs ( urination ) in order to prevent disease decompensation ( organ failure ) causing increased thirst and frequent urination ... ”", "The applicant also submitted a statement by CARDINAL of his codefendants , PERSON , who had been detained in the LOC police station together with the applicant from DATE to DATE . The statement was dated DATE and read as follows :", "“ ... On DATE , at TIME , [ the applicant ] was taken for questioning from the preliminary detention cell where we were being held . TIME he was brought back to the cell all beaten up , limping on his left leg , with a haematoma on his eye . [ The applicant ] told me that he had been beaten up by the police officers who were seeking to obtain his confession .", "... In my presence [ the applicant ’s ] request for a doctor was refused . ... ”", "The Government produced a medical reference issued by the PERSON ambulance unit on DATE pursuant to the request of ORG of GPE . The reference indicated that in the period from DATE through DATE an ambulance team was called to the LOC police station located at [ the address ] . Between the words “ was called ” an uncertified hand - made correction “ not ” was made . The applicant ’s personal information was indicated in the “ name ” and “ age ” of the patient ’s field .", "The Government produced a copy of the document approved by ORG of GPE dated DATE on destruction of documents with expired retention period . The reference to the applicant ’s case file ( CARDINAL volume ) is contained at number CARDINAL .", "They further produced an information note from ORG of GPE , from which it follows that the applicant ’s complaint about the alleged beatings was received by ORG on DATE , and that on DATE it was dismissed in accordance with LAW .", "Despite the ORG ’s request the Government did not submit the medical documents showing the state of the applicant ’s health after the alleged ill - treatment . The ORG explained that the requested information could have been retrieved from the outpatient record of the pretrial detention facility of GPE . However , on DATE the record in question was destroyed due to the expiration of its DATE retention period .", "The RSFSR Code of Criminal Procedure ( in force until DATE , “ the ORG ” ) established that a criminal investigation could be initiated by an investigator on a complaint by an individual or on the investigative authorities’ own initiative when there were reasons to believe that a crime had been committed ( Articles CARDINAL and CARDINAL ) . A prosecutor was responsible for general supervision of the investigation ( ORG CARDINAL and CARDINAL ) . He could order a specific investigative action , transfer the case from CARDINAL investigator to another or order an additional investigation . If there were no grounds to initiate a criminal investigation , the prosecutor or investigator issued a reasoned decision to that effect which had to be notified to the interested party . The decision was amenable to an appeal to a higher prosecutor or to a court of general jurisdiction ( LAW .", "On DATE ORG of GPE held that anyone whose legitimate rights and interests had been affected by a decision not to institute criminal proceedings should have the right to appeal against that decision to a court ." ]

[ "3" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , Mr PERSON , is a NORP national , who was born in DATE and lives in PERSON . The respondent Government were represented by PERSON , their Agent .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "On DATE the ORG convicted the applicant of extortion . The applicant appealed .", "ORG scheduled a hearing for DATE . On the latter date the case was adjourned due to the absence of the applicant ’s lawyer .", "After the decision to adjourn the case had been announced , the presiding judge imposed a procedural fine of CARDINAL NORP korunas ( SKK ) on the applicant pursuant to LAW ( CARDINAL ) of LAW . The decision with reasons was served on the applicant at DATE . It stated that , despite previous warnings , he had unduly interrupted the presiding judge , had disrespected the latter ’s instructions and that he had disturbed the conduct of the hearing .", "Under LAW ( CARDINAL ) , a person who , despite previous warnings , disturbs proceedings or behaves in an offensive manner in relation to a court , a public prosecutor , an investigator or a police authority or , without sufficient excuse , does not obey an order or does not comply with an instruction addressed to him or her under LAW , can be punished with a procedural fine amounting up to SKK CARDINAL,CARDINAL .", "Pursuant to LAW ) , the decision on such a procedural fine may be challenged by a complaint which has suspensive effect .", "Under Article ORG , a person who seriously and repeatedly disturbs a court hearing or who repeatedly behaves in an offensive manner or disparages the court shall be punished by a prison sentence of DATE or by a fine .", "Article CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) provides that a court may impose a fine between SKK CARDINAL and CARDINAL in cases when the perpetrator obtained material benefit from a premeditated offence .", "Pursuant to LAW ( a ) courts may otherwise impose a fine when such a punishment is foreseen in the special provisions of LAW ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "NORP The applicant , Mr PERSON , is a NORP national , who was born in DATE and lives in GPE . He was represented before the Court by PERSON , a lawyer practising in GPE .", "NORP The applicant is the owner of a court library and archives dating back to DATE . In DATE the library contained CARDINAL volumes ; DATE , it contains CARDINAL volumes . The library is accessible to the public and the archives are accessible for scientific purposes .", "NORP The property was originally incorporated in a family trust fund ( NORP ) . Under LAW ( PERSON über PERSON Familienfideikommisse und sonstiger ORG , ORG , see relvant domestic law , below ) , which entered into force on DATE , all family trust funds were dissolved by DATE . The property contained in these funds was , as a rule , transferred into normal private property . However , section CARDINAL of the abovementioned law allowed the authorities to impose certain protective and security measures in respect of objects of particular artistic , scientific , historical or patrimonial value .", "By decisions of DATE , CARDINAL DATE and DATE ORG , in its capacity as a trust fund court , relying on section CARDINAL of the above - mentioned law , placed the administration of the different parts of the court library and archives under the supervision of the director of the NORP ORG , and of the directors of ORG in GPE and GPE . The current owner and his legal successors were ordered to obtain authorisation from the supervising authority before changing , displacing , or disposing of the library or the archives or of parts thereof . Furthermore , it was ordered that the library and archives had to be maintained in an “ orderly condition ” .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a request with ORG to lift the above - mentioned measures . Relying on section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of the PERSON on the Dissolution of Family Trust Funds , he argued that the measures deprived him of making use of his property in a reasonable way . Under the orders issued in DATE , he had to bear considerable expenses while being denied any possibility of profiting from his property . The applicant submitted that the factual and legal circumstances had changed since DATE . The costs of maintenance for the court library and the central archives had increased dramatically . For DATE , the total expenses were estimated at MONEY . The applicant further argued that the limitations imposed were unconstitutional , as he did not receive any compensation for the factual expropriation .", "On DATE ORG rejected the applicant ’s request on the grounds that the applicant had not established that the factual and legal circumstances had changed since the imposition of the impugned measures in DATE . ORG conceded that the expenses submitted by the applicant for the maintenance of the library and the archives were considerable . However , there was no indication that these expenses had not merely increased because of general inflation , but had been generated after DATE . ORG further considered that section CARDINAL of the PERSON on the dissolution of ORG Funds was constitutional . The court noted in this context that the court library and archives were cultural goods of exceptional importance meriting special protection . The measures imposed were justified by the public interest in the conservation of valuable goods giving testimony of NORP culture and history . If the measures imposed in DATE were lifted , the conservation and accessibility of the court library and central archives could no longer be assured .", "On DATE the NORP High Court ( Oberstes Landesgericht ) rejected the applicant ’s complaint on the grounds that the orders issued in DATE were legally binding and that the factual and legal circumstances had not changed in a way which would justify the measures to be lifted . The court observed that the court library and central archives remained an important part of the cultural heritage which necessitated protection . Conversely , economic interests did not play a decisive role in the decision taken in DATE . Accordingly , the general change in the economic context did not justify the measures to be lifted . ORG further considered that there was no violation of the right to equal treatment . The situation had to be seen in the context of the historical and social circumstances under which the property was acquired . These circumstances , taken in their entirety , could not be compared to the circumstances under which “ civil ” property was acquired .", "On DATE ORG refused to accept the applicant ’s constitutional complaint for adjudication ( CARDINAL BvR CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) . This decision was served on the applicant ’s counsel on CARDINAL DATE .", "The PERSON on the Dissolution of Family Trust Funds ( PERSON über PERSON Familienfideikommisse und sonstiger ORG , ORG ) as in force from DATE until DATE read , in so far as relevant :", "Section CARDINAL Date of Dissolution", "“ ( CARDINAL ) All remaining family trust funds are dissolved by DATE ... ”", "ORG The Trust Fund Property", "“ As from the [ date of ] dissolution of the trust fund , the trust fund property becomes the free property of the last trust fund owner .... ”", "Section CARDINAL Other Safeguards and Security measures", "“ ( CARDINAL ) If the trust fund contained objects or collections of particular artistic , scientific , historical or local value ( e. g. buildings , picture galleries , archives , libraries ) or charitable institutions , ORG has to take the necessary measures for their appropriate conservation in case the objects appear to be endangered because of the dissolution of the trust fund and if the conservation lies in the public interest .", "( CARDINAL ) ORG may , in particular ... issue regulations on the storage and conservations of objects and may subject the change , displacement and the validity of legal dispositions to administrative authorisation . ORG is further obliged to ensure that objects of particular artistic , scientific , historical or patrimonial value are made accessible to the public in an appropriate way . ...", "...", "( CARDINAL) In case of a change of circumstances , ORG , on request of CARDINAL of the parties concerned , may change or lift the measures taken under the above paragraphs ... ”", "Under LAW , measures taken under that law did not give rise to compensation claims .", "The FideiErlG was re - published in ORG of DATE ( BGBl . III DATE ) and repealed by law of CARDINAL DATE under the condition that the rights and duties established under that law remained unchanged and that the law remained applicable for rights and duties established when it was still in force ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , Mr PERSON , is a NORP national who was born in DATE and lives in GPE . He was represented before ORG by PERSON , from ORG . ORG ( “ the Government ” ) were represented by their Agent , PERSON of ORG .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "The applicant ’s wife died on DATE . On DATE , the applicant made a claim for widows’ benefits namely ORG . On DATE the applicant was informed that his claim had been disallowed as he was not a woman . This decision was confirmed by an appeal tribunal on DATE . The applicant did not appeal further as he considered or was advised that such a remedy would be bound to fail since no such social security benefit was payable to widowers under GPE law .", "The domestic law relevant to this application is set out in Runkee and White v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , § § CARDINAL , DATE ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in Split .", "On DATE an investigating judge of ORG ( PERSON ) opened a criminal investigation in respect of the applicant and CARDINAL other persons for conspiracy to supply heroin and cocaine in GPE and GPE in the period DATE and DATE .", "At a hearing held on DATE before the investigating judge , the applicant stated that he had decided to remain silent . The investigating judge heard evidence from another suspect .", "On DATE the investigating judge heard evidence from CARDINAL other suspects . On DATE he asked for the applicant ’s criminal record , which was submitted on DATE with a note that he had not been previously convicted of any criminal offence .", "On DATE the investigating judge commissioned a psychiatric report on CARDINAL defendants , including the applicant , in order to assess their mental state at the time the criminal offence was committed and whether they were drug addicts .", "On DATE a psychiatric report commissioned for the purposes of the investigation was submitted by a psychiatrist of ORG . As regards the applicant , the report stated that he was a long - term drug addict who had received treatment on CARDINAL occasions but with no lasting results . He had resumed taking drugs DATE . Since being detained he had been on GPE therapy which helped him to overcome his withdrawal symptoms . It was recommended that he continued with that therapy .", "On DATE the investigating judge heard evidence from CARDINAL witnesses , police officers who conducted the police inquiry prior to the institution of the criminal proceedings .", "On DATE the investigating judge heard evidence from another suspect and on CARDINAL and DATE from CARDINAL further police officers . On DATE he heard evidence from another CARDINAL suspects .", "On DATE the State Attorney ’s Office for ORG preferred charges of conspiracy to supply heroin and cocaine in GPE and GPE in the period DATE and DATE against the applicant and CARDINAL other defendants in ORG .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal against the bill of indictment ( prigovor protiv optužnice ) . By DATE all the other defendants had also lodged their objections .", "On DATE ORG returned the bill of indictment to the State Attorney ’s ORG asking it to submit , within DATE , a request to take further investigative steps .", "On DATE the ORG Attorney ’s ORG asked the investigating judge to take further steps .", "On DATE the investigating judge ordered a transcript of all telephone conversations between the defendants , previously tapped by the police .", "On DATE an expert in telecommunications submitted his report with a transcript of those telephone conversations . The transcript comprises CARDINAL pages .", "On DATE the State Attorney ’s ORG submitted the same indictment to ORG .", "On DATE the applicant reiterated his objection to the indictment . He also requested that the evidence obtained by the police tapping of his telephone be excluded from the case file . The other defendants also lodged their objections .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the objections to the indictment and refused the applicant ’s request to exclude from the case file all evidence obtained by the police tapping of his telephone .", "The first hearing scheduled for DATE in ORG was adjourned because CARDINAL defendants did not appear . CARDINAL of them had been sent to ORG for treatment and the other was in another medical institution . On DATE the presiding judge ordered psychiatric report in respect of CARDINAL defendants . The report was submitted on CARDINAL DATE .", "A hearing before ORG was held on DATE and all the defendants stated that they would give their defence at end of the trial .", "At hearings held on CARDINAL , DATE and DATE CARDINAL witnesses and the expert in psychiatry gave their evidence .", "At hearings held on DATE and DATE CARDINAL witnesses gave their evidence .", "At a hearing held on DATE ORG refused the request by the defence to exclude from the case file recordings of the defendants’ conversations .", "At a hearing held on DATE the majority of the defendants , including the applicant , pleaded guilty and CARDINAL further witnesses gave their evidence .", "Further hearings were held on DATE and DATE and at the latter hearing a judgment was adopted , finding the applicant guilty and sentencing him to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment . His detention was lifted .", "Some of the defendants lodged appeals against the first - instance judgment and the proceedings are currently pending before ORG .", "On DATE an investigating judge of ORG ordered all the suspects to be detained on the grounds under LAW § CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) , ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW , namely the danger of the suspects absconding , the danger of the suspects reoffending and the gravity of the charges . The relevant part of the decision , referring to the grounds for detention , reads :", "“ In view of the manner in which the criminal offence was committed , the type and quantity of the illegal substances in which the suspects were trafficking , the large number of illegal transactions and the persistence and determination involved in committing the criminal offences , as well as the fact that the suspects are mostly unemployed with no means of support and that the suspects ... and PERSON have previously been convicted of the same criminal offence or of similar criminal offences , there exists a justified fear that if released they might repeat a criminal offence of the same kind ... ”", "A report drawn up on DATE by ORG expressly notes that the applicant had voluntarily come to that GPE DATE and that he had then been taken to ORG .", "In his appeal of CARDINAL DATE the applicant argued that the written charges against him alleged that he had had contact with CARDINAL of the other suspects , which showed that he could not have been a participant in any organised criminal activity since he did not know about the involvement of the other suspects and they were not even known to him . He supported these assertions with the argument that no illegal substances , money or equipment necessary for trafficking in the said substances on a large scale , such as packaging or scales , had been found on him , and that this showed that he personally had not been involved in such trafficking .", "He also claimed that he had never been convicted by a final judgment of trafficking in illegal substances , but only of the criminal offence of using illegal substances and that he was not a drug addict . Lastly , he argued that the possibility of ordering an alternative measure to detention had not been considered .", "On DATE the investigating judge asked for a copy of the applicant ’s criminal record . The report of CARDINAL DATE submitted by ORG indicated that the applicant had not been convicted of any criminal offence .", "On DATE a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG examined the appeals lodged by the defendants . It accepted that the ground under LAW ) of LAW no longer persisted . In other respects it dismissed the applicant ’s appeal on the grounds that : the documents in the case file showed that the applicant had previously been convicted of similar criminal offences ( without any further explanations in that respect ) , and that the persistent criminal activity over a long period with which the suspects were charged taken together with their economic situation justified the fear that they might repeat the same offences . The relevant part of the decision reads :", "“ In view of the level of criminal activity with which the defendants are charged , namely , that they have been engaged in trafficking in illegal drugs over DATE of time , and in view of the resolve and persistence shown in committing the offence , the fact that the defendants ... FAC ... have already been convicted of criminal offences , and almost all defendants have no means of subsistence , all these things indicate that there is a danger of the defendants reoffending ...", "The manner in which the criminal offences were committed , with the defendants organising themselves into a group , and the quantity of the illegal substances whose sale might put at risk the health of a large number of persons , amount to grave circumstances ... ”", "On DATE the investigating judge extended the applicant ’s detention for a further month on the grounds under LAW § CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW ( the danger of reoffending and the gravity of the charges ) . The relevant part of the decision reads :", "“ In view of the level of criminal activity with which the defendants have been charged , namely , that they have been engaged in trafficking in illegal drugs over DATE of time , and in view of the resolve to commit criminal offences and the fact that the defendants have previously been convicted of similar criminal offences , there is a danger of the defendants reoffending ...", "The offence was committed under grave circumstances as shown by the manner in which it was committed , the fact that the defendants organised a group and the quantity of the illegal substances in circulation , which , through the sale on the illegal market , could put at risk the health of a number of persons . ”", "In his appeal of DATE the applicant argued that he had not previously been convicted of the same offence and that the ordering of his detention under LAW ( CARDINAL ) of LAW ( danger of reoffending ) violated the principle of the presumption of innocence . He also reiterated that the written charges against him alleged that he had had contact with CARDINAL of the other suspects , which showed that he could not have been a participant in any organised criminal activity since he did not know about the involvement of the other suspects and did not even know who they were . He argued , in support of those assertions , that no illegal substances , money or materials necessary for trafficking in the said substances on a large scale , such as packaging or scales , had been found on him and that this showed that he had not personally been involved in such trafficking .", "On DATE a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG dismissed the applicant ’s appeal . The relevant part of the decision reads :", "“ ... the defendants have been charged with the criminal offence of trafficking in illegal drugs DATE ... The documents in the case file show that the defendant ... PERSON has already been convicted of similar criminal offences ; the defendant FAC ... is unemployed , and all CARDINAL defendants have no assets .", "In view of the high level of criminal activity with which they have been charged , namely that they engaged in trafficking in illegal drugs during the above - mentioned period and showed resolve and persistence in committing the offence , as well as their economic situation – all these circumstances taken together indicate a danger of the defendants reoffending ...", "Furthermore , the offence was committed under grave circumstances as shown by the manner in which it was committed , the fact that the defendants organised a group and the quantity of the illegal substances , which through their sale on the illegal market could put at risk the health of a number of persons ... ”", "On DATE the investigating judge lifted the applicant ’s detention on the ground that the psychiatric report indicated that he had been a drug user and that he had been buying drugs for his own use and not in order to sell it to others . His immediate release was ordered as well . The ORG Attorney lodged an appeal on DATE .", "On DATE a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG allowed the appeal and extended the applicant ’s detention again on the grounds under LAW ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW . The reasoning was the same as that in the decision of DATE . It was stated , inter alia , that the documents in the case file showed that the applicant had previously been convicted of similar criminal offences ( without any further explanations in that respect ) . The applicant was re - detained on DATE .", "On DATE the investigating judge extended the detention in respect of all the defendants for a further month again on the grounds under LAW ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW . This decision was quashed by a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG on DATE on the ground that the period of further detention had to be specified for each defendant .", "On DATE , in another set of criminal proceedings , ORG convicted the applicant of trafficking in heroin and sentenced him to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment .", "On DATE the investigating judge extended the applicant ’s detention until DATE , again on the grounds under LAW ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW . The reasoning relied on the allegations that the accused had been charged with trafficking in substantial quantities of heroin as their primary activity . On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal . He argued that no drugs , money or tools typical for the sale of drugs had been found on him and that he had never been convicted of any drug - related crimes . He again argued that the possibility of ordering an alternative measure to detention had not been considered .", "On DATE the investigating judge issued a fresh decision extending the applicant ’s detention until DATE , again on the grounds under LAW ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW . He relied on the allegations that the accused had been charged with trafficking in substantial quantities of heroin as their primary activity , on the gravity of the charges and the fact that the defendants had no means of support , without giving further details in this respect .", "On DATE a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG declared the applicant ’s appeal of DATE inadmissible because a fresh decision on detention had been adopted in the meantime .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal against the investigating judge ’s decision of DATE . He reiterated the arguments from his previous appeal of DATE and added that before his arrest he had been employed at a hotel in GPE .", "On DATE a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG dismissed the appeal and reiterated the reasoning from its decision of DATE . It also stressed that the applicant had been convicted before and that he had no assets .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint against the above decision , arguing that the following rights had been violated : his right to personal liberty ; right to a fair trial ; his right to equality before the law because the grounds for detention had been interpreted in an unusual fashion ; and his right to an effective remedy because the examination of his appeal had been inadequate .", "On DATE the ORG extended the applicant ’s detention , again on the grounds under LAW ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW . In addition to the reasoning in the previous decisions , it added that the applicant was a drug addict and stated , inter alia , that he had already been convicted of similar criminal offences , without any further explanations in that respect .", "DATE . On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal . In addition to the arguments put forward in his appeal of CARDINAL and DATE he added that his parents had a regular income and that therefore it could not be said that he had no means of subsistence .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the appeal of CARDINAL DATE , holding that the alleged manner in which the criminal offence had been committed amounted to particularly grave circumstances which justified detention on the ground under LAW ( CARDINAL ) of LAW . As regards the ground under LAW § CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) – danger of reoffending – it was deemed justified since the applicant was a drug addict and CARDINAL other sets of criminal proceedings concerning drug - related offences were pending against him , CARDINAL before FAC and the other before ORG .", "On DATE ORG declared the applicant ’s constitutional complaint of CARDINAL DATE against the decision of DATE inadmissible on the ground that a fresh decision on detention had been adopted in the meantime .", "On DATE the ORG extended the applicant ’s detention , again on the grounds under LAW ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW and with the same reasoning as before , stating , inter alia , that the applicant had already been convicted of similar offences , without any further explanations in that respect .", "On DATE ORG quashed the decision of CARDINAL DATE on the ground that the CARDINAL - judge panel which adopted it had no such power and that it was the investigating judge who should have decided whether to extend the detention .", "On CARDINAL DATE the investigating judge extended the applicant ’s detention , again on the grounds under LAW ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW . The reasoning relied on the allegations that the accused had been charged with trafficking in substantial quantities of heroin as their primary activity and had no other income . In his appeal lodged DATE the applicant reiterated the arguments from his appeal of DATE . As regards his previous conviction , he argued that ORG judgment of DATE had not yet become final .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the appeal , endorsing the reasons put forward by the investigating judge .", "On DATE the investigating judge again extended the applicant ’s detention , again on the grounds under LAW ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW and with the same reasoning as in the decision of CARDINAL DATE .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal . He reiterated his previous arguments .", "On DATE a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG extended the applicant ’s detention , again on the grounds under LAW § CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW , reiterating the same reasoning as in the previous decisions concerning the applicant ’s detention . It stated , inter alia , that the documents in the case file showed that the applicant had already been convicted of similar offences , without any further explanations in that respect .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal reiterating his previous arguments .", "On DATE a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG declared the applicant ’s appeal of DATE inadmissible because a fresh decision on his detention had been adopted in the meantime .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the applicant ’s appeal of DATE . As to the applicant ’s previous convictions , it stated :", "“ All appellants , save for ... Perica Oreb ... had already been convicted of similar criminal offences ...", "... criminal proceedings are currently pending against the accused Perica Oreb before ORG in which he has been convicted , by a judgment that has not yet become final , of a criminal offence under LAW of LAW and sentenced to DATE imprisonment . Therefore , the fact that the accused had not been finally convicted could not alter conclusion that there is a danger of him reoffending since other criminal proceedings are pending against the accused , which is also relevant in assessing the conformity of their lifestyles with the laws .", "... ”", "On DATE a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG again extended the applicant ’s detention on the grounds under LAW § CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW , reiterating the same reasoning as in the previous decisions concerning the applicant ’s detention and stating , inter alia , that the documents in the case file showed that the applicant had already been convicted of similar offences , without any further explanations in that respect .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal reiterating his previous arguments .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the appeal . As to the applicant ’s previous convictions , it stated :", "“ All appellants , save for ... Perica Oreb ... had already been convicted of similar criminal offences ...", "... criminal proceedings are currently pending against the accused Perica Oreb before ORG in which he has been convicted , by a judgment that has not yet become final , of a criminal offence under LAW of LAW and sentenced to DATE imprisonment .", "The above circumstances taken together justify the fear that they would continue committing the same or similar offences and that therefore [ the decision to extend ] their detention on the ground under LAW CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) of LAW is correct .", "... ”", "The applicant lodged a constitutional complaint , challenging the grounds for and the duration of his detention .", "On DATE a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG extended the applicant ’s detention , again on the grounds under LAW § CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW , reiterating the same reasoning as in the previous decisions concerning the applicant ’s detention and stating that the applicant ’s criminal record showed that he had already been convicted of similar offences .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal reiterating his previous arguments .", "DATE . On DATE ORG declared the applicant ’s constitutional complaint against the decision of DATE inadmissible on the ground that it was no longer in effect since a fresh decision on the applicant ’s detention had meanwhile been adopted .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the appeal . As to the applicant ’s previous convictions , it stated :", "“ All appellants , save for ... Perica Oreb ... had already been convicted of similar criminal offences ...", "Even though there is no previous conviction in the criminal record of FAC , the documents in the case file show that ... criminal proceedings are currently pending against him before ORG in which he has been convicted , by a judgment that has not yet become final , of a criminal offence under LAW of LAW and sentenced to DATE imprisonment . These circumstances , contrary to the submissions of all the appellants , are relevant in assessing the conformity of their lifestyles with the laws .", "The above circumstances together with the fact that all of the appellants , save for ORG , are heroin addicts and the accused ... PERSON is unemployed ... justify the fear that , if at large , they would continue to commit the same or similar criminal offences and therefore [ the decision to extend ] their detention on the ground under LAW CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) of LAW is correct .", "... ”", "The applicant lodged a constitutional complaint , again challenging the grounds for and the duration of his detention .", "On DATE a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG extended the applicant ’s detention , again on the grounds under LAW § CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW . The reasoning relied on the indictment , which charged the accused with conspiracy to supply a large quantity of heroin for a longer period of time , the danger of such criminal activity , the fact that they were heroin addicts and had no other income .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal reiterating his previous arguments .", "On DATE ORG declared the applicant ’s constitutional complaint against the decision of DATE inadmissible on the ground that it was no longer in effect since a fresh decision on the applicant ’s detention had meanwhile been adopted .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the appeal , endorsing the reasoning of the impugned decision . As regards the applicant , it specifically stated that :", "“ The accused Perica Oreb is , according to his own statement , unemployed , with no assets and the psychiatric report shows that he is a heroin addict . Furthermore , he has been convicted of the offence under LAW of LAW by a judgment of ORG which has not yet become final ”", "On DATE a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG extended the applicant ’s detention , again on the grounds under LAW § CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW , reiterating the same reasoning as in its decision of CARDINAL DATE .", "DATE . On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal reiterating his previous arguments .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the appeal , endorsing the reasoning of the impugned decision . As regards the applicant , it specifically gave the same reasons as in its decision of DATE .", "On DATE a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG extended the applicant ’s detention , again on the grounds under LAW § CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW , reiterating the same reasoning as in the decision of CARDINAL DATE .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal reiterating his previous arguments . As indicated above ( paragraph CARDINAL ) the applicant was convicted by ORG and released on DATE .", "The relevant provisions of LAW ( Official Gazette nos . PERCENT , CARDINAL/CARDINAL , CARDINAL , CARDINAL and CARDINAL ) provide :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) Where the conditions for ordering detention under LAW have been fulfilled , and where the same purpose may be achieved by other preventive measures under LAW , the court shall order that CARDINAL or more preventive measures are to be applied ...", "( CARDINAL ) Preventive measures are :", "CARDINAL ) prohibition on leaving one ’s place of residence ;", "CARDINAL ) prohibition on being in a certain place or area ;", "CARDINAL ) obligation on the defendant to report periodically to a certain person or a ORG body ;", "CARDINAL ) prohibition on access to a certain person or on establishing or maintaining contact with a certain person ;", "CARDINAL ) prohibition on undertaking a certain business activity ;", "CARDINAL ) temporary seizure of a passport or other document necessary for crossing the State border ;", "CARDINAL ) temporary seizure of a driving licence .", "... ”", "( CARDINAL ) ORG may be imposed only if the same purpose can not be achieved by another [ preventive ] measure .", "( CARDINAL ) Detention shall be lifted and the detainee released as soon as the grounds for detention cease to exist .", "( CARDINAL ) When deciding on detention , in particular its duration , the court shall take into consideration the proportionality between the gravity of the offence , the sentence which ... may be expected to be imposed , and the need to order and determine the duration of detention .", "( CARDINAL ) The judicial authorities conducting the criminal proceedings shall proceed with particular urgency when the defendant is in detention and shall review of their own motion whether the grounds and legal conditions for detention have ceased to exist , in which case the detention measure shall immediately be lifted .", "( CARDINAL ) Where a reasonable suspicion exists that a person has committed an offence , that person may be placed in detention :", "...", "special circumstances justify the suspicion that the person concerned might reoffend ...", "if the charges involved relate to murder , robbery , rape , terrorism , kidnapping , drug abuse , extortion or any other offence carrying a sentence of CARDINAL years’ imprisonment , when detention is justified by the modus operandi or other especially grave circumstances of the offence .", "The relevant provisions of ORG o izvršavanju kazne zatvora , ORG nos . ORG ) read as follows :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) This LAW regulates the execution of prison sentences .", "... ”", "“ The terms used in this LAW have the following meaning :", "A detainee is any person held in detention pursuant to a pre - trial detention order .", "...", "An inmate is any person sentenced to a prison sentence for a criminal offence , serving the prison sentence in a prison or in a jail .", "... ”", "“ ( CARDINAL ) An inmate may lodge a request for judicial protection against any acts or decisions unlawfully denying him , or limiting him in , any of the rights guaranteed by LAW .", "( CARDINAL ) NORP for judicial protection shall be decided by the judge responsible for the execution of sentences . ”", "“ ...", "( CARDINAL ) If a convict ’s pre - trial detention has been ordered or extended in another set of criminal proceedings , the judge responsible for the execution of the prison sentence shall send him to serve the prison sentence which will start after the pre - trial detention has been lifted .", "... ”", "In its decision of CARDINAL DATE , nos . GPE and U - III/CARDINAL/CARDINAL , in the case of PERSON , concerning , inter alia , the conditions of his pre - trial detention in FAC , ORG found a violation of PERSON ’s right to human treatment and to respect for his dignity and also ordered the Government to adjust the facilities at FAC to the needs of detainees within a reasonable time , not exceeding DATE . It further held that a complaint about prison conditions to a judge responsible for the execution of sentences under PERSON was also to be used by persons in pre - trial detention . The relevant part of this decision reads :", "“ CARDINAL . ... ORG established the following obligatory legal opinion :", "- the courts are obliged to apply the same procedures concerning requests for protection of the rights of convicted prisoners to the judges responsible for the execution of sentences with respect to such requests lodged by persons placed in pre - trial detention ...", "...", "For the reasons set out in points ... CARDINAL [ of this decision ] the Constitutional Court finds that the general conditions of the applicant ’s detention amount to degrading treatment and thus infringe his constitutional rights guaranteed under LAW and CARDINAL § CARDINAL of the LAW as well as his rights under LAW .", "ORG has not addressed the possibility of granting the applicant just satisfaction for the above infringements of his constitutional and Convention rights because in the NORP legal system there exists another , effective legal remedy in that respect ( see ORG decision no . U - III-CARDINAL/CARDINAL of DATE . ”", "In decision no . U - III-CARDINAL/CARDINAL of DATE ORG found that the conditions of detention of a prisoner , TIME , in FAC amounted to inhuman treatment . It also addressed the question of TIME ’s claim for just satisfaction . The relevant parts of the decision read :", "“ In particular , the Constitutional Court finds unacceptable the [ lower ] courts’ opinion that in this case a claim for non - pecuniary damage can not be awarded under LAW on the ground that such a compensation claim is unfounded in law .", "...", "Section CARDINAL of LAW defines non - pecuniary damage as infringement of the right to respect for one ’s personal integrity . In other words , every infringement of one ’s right to personal integrity amounts to non - pecuniary damage .", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW defines the right to personal integrity for the purposes of that LAW as : the right to life , physical and mental health , reputation , honour , respect for one ’s dignity and name , privacy of personal and family life , freedom and other aspects .", "... it is to be concluded that in this case there has been a violation of human , constitutional and personal values because the applicant was in prison conditions which were incompatible with the standards prescribed by LAW and also with the legal standards under LAW . For that reason the courts are obliged to award compensation for the infringement of the applicant ’s dignity .", "... ”" ]

[ "5", "6" ]

[ "5-3", "5-4", "6-2" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "NORP The applicant , Mr PERSON , is an NORP national who was born in DATE and lives in PERSON . He is represented before the ORG by PERSON , a lawyer practising in PERSON .", "ORG ( “ the Government ” ) are represented by their Agent , Ambassador PERSON , Head of ORG at ORG .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "The applicant worked for the ORG company as head of the customs duties department from DATE .", "In DATE and DATE ORG ) carried out inspections at CARDINAL subsidiary companies owned by ORG because it suspected irregularities in connection with the payment of customs duties .", "By letters dated DATE and DATE , ORG notified the applicant that criminal proceedings for financial offences had been instituted against him on suspicion of negligent evasion of customs and import duties . As the applicant was responsible for the customs declarations of the ORG company and its subsidiaries , the proceedings were directed against him . The applicant was asked to submit written statements within DATE .", "The applicant gave information in an oral statement and had his lawyer submit CARDINAL written statements , that included the applications to discontinue the proceedings , on DATE and DATE . ORG did not respond to these statements .", "By a letter dated DATE the applicant was summoned to a hearing before the PERSON and ORG as the criminal authority of first instance in financial matters ( PERSON als PERSON ) . The subject matter concerned the alleged financial criminal offences notified to the applicant on DATE and CARDINAL DATE .", "The hearing was held on CARDINAL DATE before the panel dealing with the case ( GPE beim PERSON als Organ des Zollamtes PERSON als PERSON ) . Certain of the customs duties the applicant was charged with having negligently evaded were found to be time - barred . As regards the remainder of the charges , the panel decided to discontinue the proceedings having found that the applicant had neither acted negligently nor against the law . The decision was served on the applicant ’s counsel on DATE .", "Under LAW ( Bundes - verfassungsgesetz ) , ORG rules on , inter alia , applications ( Beschwerden ) in which it is alleged that the administrative authorities have breached their duty to decide .", "Article CARDINAL of LAW , in its relevant part , reads as follows :", "“ An action for breach by the administrative authorities ... of the duty to decide can be lodged by anyone entitled as a party in administrative proceedings to enforce that duty . An action for breach of the duty to decide is inadmissible in administrative criminal proceedings , except private prosecutions and prosecutions in respect of tax offences . ”", "Section CARDINAL of LAW ( Allgemeines Verwaltungsverfahrensgesetz ) deals with the administrative authorities’ duty to decide . Its relevant part reads as follows :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) ORG to any contrary provision in the administrative regulations , the authorities must give a decision on applications by parties ... and appeals without unnecessary delay and at DATE after the application or appeal has been lodged .", "( CARDINAL ) If the decision is not served on the party within this time - limit , jurisdiction will be transferred to the competent superior authority upon the party ’s written request ... ”", "In proceedings under LAW an application for transfer of jurisdiction to the superior authority is not possible .", "Section CARDINAL of LAW ( PERSON ) , relating to applications against the administration ’s failure to decide reads as follows :", "“ An application under LAW for breach of the duty to decide ( application against the administration ’s failure to decide ) can be lodged only when the highest authority to which an application can be made in administrative proceedings , either by way of an appeal or an application for transfer of jurisdiction , ... has been applied to by a party and has not made a decision on the matter within DATE ... ”", "According to a judgment of ORG DATE ( published in the official collection of that court ’s decisions , PERSON ) , ORG may also receive applications against the administration ’s failure to decide under LAW of LAW , taken in conjunction with section CARDINAL of LAW , where an authority of first instance has failed to give a decision within the statutory DATE time - limit , provided that no other remedy ( such as a request for a transfer of jurisdiction ) lies against the failure to decide ( see PERSON v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , § DATE , ECHR CARDINAL-I ) .", "The competence of the tax authorities as regards proceedings relating to tax offences and the conduct of these proceedings are regulated by LAW ( Finanzstrafgesetz ) .", "Section CARDINAL of LAW , as in force at the relevant time , stated that proceedings regarding tax offences had to be conducted by the authorities proprio motu and that evidence on behalf of the defendant had to be taken into consideration as much as evidence against the defendant . It further stated that defendants not represented by counsel had to be properly advised and supported by the tax authority conducting the proceedings .", "On DATE an amended section CARDINAL of LAW entered into force that added a new paragraph CARDINAL stating that proceedings regarding tax offences had to be conducted speedily and without any unnecessary delays and had to be terminated within a reasonable time . It further introduced a remedy against delays of the first - instance authority in deciding : the defendant could lodge an application with the chairman / chairwoman of the competent appeal panel of ORG ( PERSON ) for the setting of a reasonable time - limit for the first instance tax authority to proceed ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "NORP The applicant is a NORP national who lives in GPE , PERSON . She was represented before the court by PERSON of ORG , a firm of solicitors based in GPE . The respondent Government were represented by PERSON , ORG .", "NORP The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "NORP The applicant was born in DATE . Her mother had been in local authority care . As a child , the applicant suffered physical violence and emotional neglect and in DATE both she and her older sister D were taken into care and placed , separately , in a number of different foster homes . In DATE the applicant left foster care . She was provided with independent living accommodation by the local authority . However , she found it hard to live on her own , gave up the flat and moved between friends and relatives . She continued to be supervised through the local authority ’s after - care programme .", "In DATE , aged DATE , she became pregnant following a single sexual liaison with the partner ( P ) of her sister ( D ) . A first scan was completed on DATE and showed that the applicant was DATE pregnant . On DATE she was referred by her after - care worker for a pre - birth assessment because of concerns about the applicant ’s ability to live in a settled environment and provide the baby with the care he or she would need . The assessment noted that the applicant had moved into a new house and had an understanding of basic childcare . It concluded that she should continue to be monitored by an outreach worker to support her with parenting skills . The applicant asked for it to be recorded in the report that she felt her ability to be a good mother had been pre - judged because she had grown up in care .", "The applicant ’s daughter , M , was born on DATE and discharged with the applicant to stay with the applicant ’s mother . On DATE the applicant was readmitted to hospital complaining of bleeding . Hospital staff were concerned that her mother might have given her drugs . She was discharged again on DATE . The following day the health visitor who visited the applicant at home became concerned that the applicant was tearful and was not properly bonding with her daughter . The applicant went to stay with her aunt for DATE . She was diagnosed by her general practitioner as suffering from post - natal depression and was prescribed anti - depressant medication , which she continued to take until DATE . On DATE the applicant moved in with her sister and her partner ( D and P ) . The arrangement broke down after DATE . D reported to the local authority that she was concerned about the applicant ’s poor hygiene and lack of interaction with and occasional rough handling of her daughter . The applicant denied these accusations and claimed that her sister was acting out of malice .", "A further assessment by a local authority social worker at this stage found that the care given to M during DATE of her life had been inconsistent and that the applicant required continuous input from family members and professionals to prompt her to meet the baby ’s basic needs . On DATE the applicant received a letter warning her that the local authority were considering bringing care proceedings . The applicant agreed to undertake a placement and assessment within a mother and baby unit .", "On DATE the applicant moved to the Abbeyfield Residential Family Centre for a DATE assessment and intensive support package . The applicant had her own flat within the centre but was given intensive support and regularly monitored throughout DATE and TIME .", "The midway assessment noted that the applicant had to be prompted to feed M , left her waiting for food for as long as possible and had expressed concerns that M would become fat ( whereas in fact M was failing to gain weight properly ) . It also noted that she appeared reluctant to spend time playing and interacting with QUANTITY Nonetheless , the report concluded that the applicant had demonstrated an understanding of the child ’s basic care needs and a willingness to accept support and instruction from staff . On DATE a LAW was held and M was made subject to a ORG under the category of neglect .", "The final report from LOC found that the applicant had profoundly low self esteem as a result of her childhood experiences . She was deeply needy , found caring for the child stressful and was unable to establish secure attachments with her daughter , putting the child at risk of emotional harm . The assessment concluded that the applicant was unable to safeguard the child or provide for her welfare . Despite repeated advice , the applicant did not feed the child at regular intervals , causing her to become dehydrated and to lose weight . She was also found to be unable to recognise and respond to cues in the baby ’s behaviour . Overall , the report concluded that , despite intensive input , the applicant was unable to demonstrate that she would consistently be able to meet her daughter ’s needs . M would be exposed to significant harm if she were returned to the applicant ’s care for a further period of assessment in the community .", "In the light of this assessment , on CARDINAL DATE the applicant was informed that the local authority intended to apply for an interim care order . The local authority intended to place M with foster carers from ORG in GPE . ORG operated a system of concurrent planning , whereby during the assessment period of an interim care order , children were placed with foster parents who had been approved as potential adopters . The local authority considered that this would be beneficial to M , since if it proved necessary to place her for adoption she would not have to move to another family . An interim care order was granted on DATE and on DATE , when M was DATE , she was placed with foster carers .", "The applicant had CARDINAL TIME contact sessions a week with her daughter , at ORG , during which her parenting skills were assessed . The applicant attended every session . In ORG first report , dated DATE , the applicant ’s commitment to her daughter was described as impressive . She was found to have recognised the need for change and to be more accepting of help and advice from professionals . Within the confines of the contact sessions she had demonstrated that she could physically care for M and the bond between them appeared to be strengthening . It was recommended that the contact should become less supervised in order to assess whether the applicant could sustain her progress with less support .", "During this period , various members of the applicant ’s family were assessed by ORG as possible carers for M , but CARDINAL suitable was found .", "NORP In subsequent contact sessions , staff remained outside the room and listened to the contact via a baby monitor . In total , the ORG team supervised TIME of contact between the applicant and her daughter . The Team ’s final report , dated DATE , concluded that the applicant had been unable to sustain the initial promise . She still had difficulty in recognising and responding to M ’s cues for food or sleep . M appeared distressed after extended contact sessions . The applicant did not eat regularly herself and there was concern that she would not feed M appropriately . She was reluctant to recognise or address the impact of her childhood experiences on her capacity to care for PERSON Despite an intensive level of professional input , the applicant had been unable to demonstrate that she could consistently meet her daughter ’s needs and M would be exposed to significant risk of harm if returned to her mother ’s care . There being no viable placement for M within the applicant ’s family , it was recommended that she be placed for adoption with her ORG carers .", "On DATE a ORG ad litem was appointed to represent the child and to advise on her best interests . The ORG attended some of the applicant ’s contact sessions with M , to a total of TIME , and also visited the applicant at her home on several occasions .", "The local authority applied for a final care order and an order placing M for adoption with her foster carers . Upon the making of these orders , the applicant ’s contact with M would be reduced , with the ultimate aim of stopping direct contact and establishing indirect contact via a letterbox scheme .", "In a report dated DATE a forensic clinical psychologist , who was fully independent and acted on behalf of all the parties , including the applicant , found inter alia :", "“ It is clear that [ PERSON ] loves [ M ] a great deal . In my view she has fairly profound psychological difficulties which are both subtle and central to her functioning . In my view such problems are masked by [ K.S ] ’s obvious intelligence . That is , she appears to function at a higher level because she is bright and , in many ways , a resourceful survivor .", "If [ ORG ] is to care for [ M ] on a full time basis , she will require a great deal of support , assistance and guidance . She has the intellectual capacity to make use of services and to understand what it is to be a good parent . However , [ PERSON ] is a very vulnerable young woman who is at risk of episodes of depression , an unstable lifestyle and possibly abusive intimate relationships .", "... [ If M ] is returned to [ ORG care , I am of the view that such an approach would have significant risks attached . [ PERSON ] may regress and her functioning may deteriorate as she becomes more in touch with the damage that has been caused to her . ”", "On DATE the applicant applied for an adjournment of the care proceedings to allow for an independent social worker to be instructed . The applicant did not have legal representation at that hearing , so PERSON adjourned the matter until DATE to allow her to find a representative . At the hearing on DATE , the applicant , who was represented by a solicitor , submitted that she recognised that she needed help and had applied for counselling . She had an extensive support network of family members , friends and professionals . All the professional assessments so far had reported that she was making progress in her ability to care for PERSON The applicant accepted that M could not be returned directly to her care but considered that , long - term , M would be better off with her birth mother , and that it was justifiable to allow time for an independent assessment before placing the child for adoption . The judge , however , decided that he could not rule on this application until he had heard all the evidence in the case at the full hearing , which would take place on DATE .", "Initially , the applicant had the support of the ORG ad litem . In an initial position statement made in DATE the ORG found , inter alia , that “ [ ORG ] is consistently able to demonstrate that she is able to meet [ M ] ’s emotional needs for love , comfort , acceptance , reassurance and affection ” . Although she did not consider that M should immediately be returned to her mother , she considered that an independent report might be justified .", "The final hearing took place DATE . The applicant had legal aid and was represented by experienced counsel . After hearing evidence from the applicant and professionals DATE , the ORG changed her position . She informed the court that she considered that the work that had been undertaken established that the applicant was able to offer , at best , only an inconsistent standard of care for PERSON She believed that it would be in M ’s best interests for the court to approve the plan for adoption and she no longer thought that an adjournment for any further assessment would serve a useful purpose .", "NORP In his judgment , dated DATE , Judge PERSON rejected the applicant ’s request for an adjournment to allow for further attachment work and assessment . He considered that it was necessary to balance the likelihood that further work or assessment would achieve “ the wonderful prize of rehabilitation of mother and daughter ” against the child ’s need for stability and a final decision . Having heard evidence from the applicant and the various professionals involved in the case , he concluded that rehabilitation was not a viable option . For DATE , professionals had worked sympathetically and intensively with the applicant to help her improve the bond with her daughter . The applicant had not been able to develop a consistent level of care and to show that she would be able to cope with the inevitable stresses and difficulties involved in raising a child . Unless the applicant ’s underlying problems were properly addressed , any further attachment work would be “ putting a sticking plaster on a huge wound ” and would achieve nothing of real substance . The judge accepted that it was a draconian step to remove the child from her mother , who was entitled to respect for her right to family life . However , the child was also entitled to a family life in which all her needs would be met and the applicant would not be able to meet those needs within the child ’s timescale . The judge therefore accepted the local authority ’s analysis of the welfare checklist . The child ’s interests were overwhelmingly in favour of adoption . He made a care order and dispensed with the applicant ’s consent to a placement order , on the ground that the welfare of the child so required . He declined to make any order regarding post - adoption contact , because he considered that the applicant ’s reaction to his judgment and ability to work with the adoptive parents and professionals would be important factors to be taken into account .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the applicant ’s appeal . The applicant did not apply for legal aid for the hearing and was represented by a “ PERSON friend ” , who was not legally qualified . She had lodged the appeal following the refusal of Judge PERSON on DATE to decide on her application for an adjournment . ORG , in ORG , decided instead to consider the refusal of an adjournment in judgment of Judge PERSON of DATE . He held that Judge PERSON had not made any error of law . In the light of the evidence , which he had analysed carefully in his long judgment , Judge PERSON had been entitled to make the care and placement orders .", "A second appeal , this time formally against the DATE judgment , was heard and dismissed without a hearing on CARDINAL DATE . ORG considered that the matter had already been dealt with by ORG on DATE , and said “ it would for practical purposes not be open to this court to reverse that decision ” , but added , “ for the record ” , that independently of ORG he had reached the same conclusion that , in accordance with the unanimous opinion of the professionals involved in the case , an order for further assessment and delay in making the final order would run counter to M ’s interests . He also made an order that , since the appeal was totally without merit , it could not be renewed at an oral hearing . The refusal of the appeal was , therefore , final .", "On DATE Judge PERSON made an adoption order in favour of the couple who had been caring for M since DATE . The applicant did not attend the hearing . She had been sent notice of it on DATE , and had sent a number of emails asking for it to be adjourned . The court clerks had telephoned the solicitors who had previously acted for the applicant , but had been informed that they were no longer instructed and that the applicant had issued a claim in negligence against them following the making of the placement order . The judge decided to go ahead in the applicant ’s absence because she had not explained why she could not be present . Moreover , she had no valid appeals or applications outstanding in other courts and , given the recent judgments in her case , there was no possible basis for her to challenge the making of an adoption order . The evidence showed that M was thriving and happy and that it would be detrimental to her to upset the placement . The applicant ’s behaviour since the making of the placement order showed that she had not accepted it and the judge therefore considered that it would be unsettling and contrary to the child ’s interests to allow her direct contact . However , all the professionals in the case recommended that the applicant maintain indirect contact with her daughter , through letters which would be passed on through the local authority .", "On DATE , the applicant ’s legal aid certificate in respect of the care and placement proceedings was discharged . On CARDINAL DATE the applicant appeared before Judge PERSON and unsuccessfully applied to set aside the adoption order and for Judge PERSON to recuse himself . On CARDINAL DATE Judge PERSON refused the applicant ’s request for leave to appeal against the adoption order , as totally without merit . He held that even if the applicant had attended the hearing on DATE , it would not have been possible to oppose or delay the adoption . On DATE Judge PERSON refused CARDINAL further applications by the applicant : for him to recuse himself and for her to have direct contact with her daughter pending the resolution of her application to this ORG .", "A summary of the relevant domestic law and practice can be found in GPE v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , § § CARDINAL , CARDINAL DATE ( not yet final ) ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "NORP In DATE the first applicant purchased from the GPE municipality a CARDINAL - room apartment of QUANTITY .", "The property had become ORG owned by virtue of the nationalisations carried out by the communist regime in GPE in DATE and DATE .", "Originally , the nationalised apartment had been bigger . Not DATE it had been divided into CARDINAL apartments . CARDINAL of them had been sold to an individual , Mr. PERSON , in DATE and the second one to the first applicant in DATE .", "In DATE , shortly after the enactment of LAW , the former pre - nationalisation owners brought proceedings under LAW against the first applicant .", "The proceedings ended by final judgment of ORG DATE .", "The courts examined the evidence and rejected , in reasoned decisions , the first applicant ’s argument that the claim under section CARDINAL had been brought after DATE the date of expiry of the relevant statutory time - limit .", "Dealing with the case on the merits , the courts declared the DATE contract null and void and restored the plaintiffs’ ownership of the apartment on the basis of CARDINAL arguments : CARDINAL ) the procedure for dividing an apartment into CARDINAL apartments had not been observed by PERSON and the municipality in DATE or earlier , and CARDINAL ) a relevant document concerning the DATE sale , a tenancy order , had not been signed by the mayor personally , as required by law , but by another official at the municipality .", "NORP Until DATE , within DATE of the final judgment in the case under LAW , it was possible for the first applicant to obtain compensation from the ORG , in the form of bonds which could be used in privatisation tenders or sold to brokers . The first applicant did not avail herself of this opportunity .", "As the first applicant did not vacate the apartment voluntarily , in DATE the owners brought rei vindicatio proceedings against her and her son , the second applicant , who apparently also lived in the flat . These proceedings ended by final judgment of ORG DATE ordering the applicants to vacate the flat . In DATE , the first applicant informed the ORG that she had not vacated the property and that the second applicant did not live there .", "In DATE the first applicant petitioned the regional governor with requests to provide her with a ORG - owned flat or , alternatively , with compensation bonds . In DATE the first applicant informed the ORG that she had not received a reply .", "The relevant background facts and domestic law and practice have been summarised in the ORG ’s judgment in the case of ORG and Others v. GPE , nos . CARDINAL , ORG , CARDINAL , CARDINAL , CARDINAL , GPE , CARDINAL/CARDINAL , ORG , and CARDINAL , DATE .", "In a judgment of DATE ( decision no . CARDINAL in administrative case no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) , ORG held that persons who had not applied for compensation bonds within the relevant time - limit , in force since DATE , could not seek such bonds after the enactment in DATE of paragraphs CARDINAL and CARDINAL of section CARDINAL of the ORG law ( see paragraphs CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the ORG ’s judgment in ORG and Others , cited above ) as these provisions did not give rise to additional entitlement to compensation bonds and therefore did not affect the relevant time - limit ." ]

[ "P1" ]

[ "P1-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , Mr PERSON , is a NORP national who was born in DATE . His last known place of residence in GPE was in PERSON . He was represented before the Court by Mr M .- O. Nordhorn , a lawyer practising in GPE .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the applicant , may be summarised as follows .", "On an unspecified date , the GPE prosecution authorities started an investigation against the applicant and several co - suspects on suspicion of drug trafficking .", "On DATE ORG ordered that the applicant ’s GPE apartment be searched . The ORG found that on the basis of information obtained by means of surveillance as well as telephone tapping in the course of preliminary proceedings ( ORG ) instituted against the applicant , there were grounds for suspecting that drugs , implements used for drug trafficking and consumption , as well as cash proceeds from drug deals were being stored in the applicant ’s GPE flat . The search warrant stated that in the course of the investigations a suspicion had arisen that co - suspect ( Mitbeschuldigter ) PERSON was storing and trafficking drugs for the applicant ’s benefit . According to the information provided in the search warrant , on DATE , PERSON had received a telephone call from the NORP town of GPE by an unidentified male person who had informed him in NORP that on DATE at TIME a “ friend ” would arrive at PERSON ’s domicile . On the occasion of a telephone conversation on DATE at TIME , PERSON informed the applicant that nobody had yet come by . Later that day the applicant informed PERSON over the phone that the said friend would arrive that TIME . At TIME received a further telephone call by an unidentified person informing him that due to an accident the latter was unable to drop by . TIME the applicant phoned PERSON to inquire about his “ uncle ’s ” arrival and the “ entrusted items ” and said he would return DATE . During a further telephone conversation on DATE , the applicant informed PERSON that a search had been carried out at the “ friends’ ” place and that their arrival was not to be expected until DATE . The search warrant indicated that on the basis of the aforementioned telephone ORG content the court found that there were grounds for suspecting that the delivery of drugs and the applicant ’s return were imminent . Furthermore , through surveillance of the applicant it had been established that he had frequently stayed for extended periods in his GPE apartment and that on DATE he had travelled with his father by car to the NORP town of GPE , presumably with a view to initiating a drug deal .", "On DATE ORG issued an arrest warrant ordering the applicant ’s detention on remand on suspicion of having imported drugs , an offence punishable under LAW ( Betäubungsmittelgesetz ) . In the detention order , running to CARDINAL pages , ORG found that there was a strong suspicion that the applicant - acting jointly with co - suspects PERSON , NORP , and PERSON - had coordinated the importation and delivery of QUANTITY of marijuana by NORP and NORP to PERSON ’s home address by means of several telephone conversations with PERSON The strong suspicion of the applicant having committed the offence resulted from the seizure of the drugs on the occasion of the search of his GPE apartment , the witness statements of CARDINAL police officers who had been involved in the search as well as from the information obtained in the course of police surveillance and the preliminary proceedings . The court further found that there was a risk of the applicant ’s absconding in view of an expected prison sentence of DATE . Since considerable amounts of money had been seized from the co - suspects , it had to be assumed that the criminal gang disposed of sufficient financial means to enable the applicant to abscond . Furthermore , the latter maintained good connections abroad , in particular in GPE , where he was presumably staying at present .", "By written submissions dated DATE the applicant ’s counsel informed ORG office that he had been mandated by the applicant and requested to be granted access to the file in the preliminary proceedings instituted against the applicant . He reiterated his request by letter of DATE .", "On DATE ORG informed counsel that for the time being his request to inspect the files had to be refused pursuant to LAW domestic law ” below ) on the ground that the preliminary investigations were ongoing and disclosure of the files might jeopardise the purpose of the investigations .", "By written submissions dated DATE the applicant ’s counsel applied for a court decision pursuant to section CARDINAL of LAW to LAW ( Einführungsgesetz zum Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz , ORG ) as to whether access to the files should be granted . He claimed that for the time being he had only obtained knowledge of the search warrant ’s content but that his inquiry with ORG as to whether a detention order had been issued against the applicant had been to no avail . He contended that where an arrest warrant was issued , the suspect would at least have to be granted the right to examine the part of the file providing information as to the reasons for his detention in order to be able to mount an effective defence .", "The application was dismissed by ORG as inadmissible by a decision of CARDINAL DATE . ORG held that according to LAW , pending the termination of the preliminary investigation , it was for ORG to decide whether to grant access to the files or not and that therefore a disciplinary complaint ( Dienstaufsichtsbeschwerde ) against ORG would be the only appropriate remedy in the case at hand . Relying in particular on a statement obtained from ORG ( PERSON ) on DATE , ORG further found that the charges brought against the applicant were clearly set out in the search warrant dated DATE and the applicant himself had confirmed that he was aware of the search warrant ’s content . There existed thus no particular circumstances that would require an exceptional quashing of the ORG ’s decision to refuse access to the file .", "By a letter dated DATE ORG informed the applicant that access to the file was still restricted in accordance with LAW and that such restriction would remain valid as long as the applicant was on the run .", "A further request by counsel to inspect the files dated DATE was rejected by ORG on DATE with similar reasoning .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a disciplinary complaint with ORG stating that the only information he had received so far with respect to the investigations was a copy of the search warrant of DATE as well as the detention order of CARDINAL DATE . While reiterating the grounds for his request set out in his written submissions to ORG of DATE , he argued in addition that there was no longer an indication that the purpose of the investigations would be jeopardised . This was in particular true in view of the fact that since ORG decision of CARDINAL DATE had passed , the proceedings against the applicant ’s cosuspects had meanwhile been terminated and that the applicant had been abroad for a considerable time , which excluded any danger of collusion ( PERSON ) on his part .", "The complaint was dismissed by ORG ( Generalstaatsanwaltschaft ) by a decision of DATE holding in particular that according to counsel ’s own submissions he had at his disposal a copy of ORG detention order of DATE and that the files revealed that he had discussed with the competent ORG on several occasions what impact a possible pleading to the charge ( ORG . There were thus still grounds to believe that giving him access to the file might put the preliminary investigations , which had not yet been terminated , at risk .", "On DATE ORG declined to consider the applicant ’s constitutional complaint of DATE against the aforementioned decisions of ORG , ORG and ORG on the ground that it was inadmissible and lacked any prospect of success . ORG held in particular that due to DATE that had elapsed since the last decision of ORG on DATE rejecting the applicant ’s request , as confirmed by ORG decision of DATE , the conditions underlying the impugned decisions might meanwhile have significantly changed in the course of the preliminary proceedings , which had now lasted for DATE . Under these circumstances the applicant was advised to pursue his objective by having recourse to the most effective and rapid remedy available , which in the case at hand would be a renewed request with the competent ORG to inspect the file . For this reason he lacked a legitimate interest ( Rechtsschutzbedürfnis ) in having his constitutional complaint examined . In the event of a further refusal by ORG and following an unsuccessful disciplinary complaint , a renewed constitutional complaint could be considered .", "On DATE defence counsel lodged a further application with ORG for permission to inspect the file in the preliminary proceedings . By a letter dated DATE his request was again refused pursuant to LAW grounds that the investigations were ongoing and that the reasoning provided by ORG in his decision of DATE was still valid . By a decision of CARDINAL DATE ORG , referring to the reasoning in the decision of DATE and confirming that the preliminary proceedings had not yet been terminated , rejected the applicant ’s related disciplinary complaint as unfounded . The decision was served on the applicant on DATE .", "By a decision of DATE the ORG declined to consider the applicant ’s constitutional complaint lodged on DATE without providing reasons . The decision was served on the applicant on CARDINAL DATE .", "It appears that the applicant is still at large .", "LAW provides that defence counsel is entitled to consult the files and to inspect the exhibits which have been presented to the trial court or which would have to be presented to the trial court in the event of indictment . LAW of this provision provides that access to part or all of the file or to the exhibits may be refused until the preliminary investigation has ended if it might otherwise be put at risk . However , in the event that the accused is remanded in custody or , in the case of provisional arrest , pre - trial custody has been requested , information of relevance for the assessment of the lawfulness of that deprivation of liberty shall be made available to defence counsel in suitable form and , as a rule , access to the files shall be granted .", "Pending the termination of the preliminary investigations , it is for ORG to decide whether to grant access to the files or not ; thereafter the decision rests with the president of the trial court ( LAW ) . The Public Prosecutor shall revoke an order refusing to allow inspection of the files upon conclusion of the investigation at the latest . Defence counsel shall be notified as soon as he once again has the unrestricted right to inspect the files .", "Pursuant to section CARDINAL of LAW to LAW ( Einführungsgesetz zum Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz , ORG ) the ordinary courts shall decide , upon request , on the lawfulness of directives , orders or other measures taken by the judicial authorities with a view to regulating individual issues in the sphere of , inter alia , criminal law . The same applies to directives , orders or other measures taken by the law enforcement authorities regarding the imposition of detention on remand .", "Articles CARDINAL et seq . of the Code of Criminal Procedure ( Strafprozessordnung ) concern detention on remand . Pursuant to Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL of the Code , a defendant may be detained on remand if there is a strong suspicion that he has committed a criminal offence and if there are grounds for arresting him . Grounds for arrest will exist where certain facts warrant the conclusion that there is a risk of his absconding ( LAW no . CARDINAL ) or of collusion ( LAW no . CARDINAL ) .", "LAW CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that detention on remand must be ordered by a judge in a written detention order . The detention order must identify the accused , and specify the offence of which he is strongly suspected , including the time and place of its commission , and the grounds for the arrest ( nos . CARDINAL of LAW ) . Moreover , the facts establishing the grounds for the strong suspicion that an offence has been committed and for the arrest must be set out in the detention order unless national security would thereby be endangered ( LAW no . CARDINAL ) .", "Pursuant to LAW an appeal may be lodged with the competent court by the defendant or defence counsel against a detention order that has not yet been executed with a view to having it quashed ( Haftbeschwerde ) .", "Pursuant to LAW , NORP law , in principle , does not allow for an in - absentia trial . A limited number of exceptions to this rule are notably laid down in sections CARDINAL et seq . A hearing may , in particular , be held in the defendant ’s absence in cases in which he has been summoned correctly and only a fine of CARDINAL “ DATE rates ” ( PERSON , a unit based on the average DATE net income of the offender ) is to be expected ( section CARDINAL of the Code of Criminal Procedure ) ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The first applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE ; the second applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE ; the third applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE ; and the fourth applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "The facts of the case may be summarised as follows .", "On DATE , during a demonstration in central GPE , the applicants were contained within a police cordon at ORG ( the junction between FAC and FAC ) .", "The first applicant , PERSON , is a member of ORG and had been on many demonstrations , including DATE demonstrations . On DATE she left her DATE daughter at a crèche , planning to collect her at TIME , and travelled from GPE to central GPE with her partner . They attended a protest against globalisation outside ORG before walking with other protesters to ORG , arriving at TIME Around TIME PERSON needed to leave the demonstration to collect her daughter from the crèche . She explained her situation to QUANTITY police officers maintaining the cordon but was told that she could not leave and that it was not known how long it would be before she would be able to leave the area . PERSON therefore arranged for a friend to collect the child from the crèche . She was finally allowed to leave at TIME", "DATE and TIME on CARDINAL May CARDINAL , the second applicant attempted to cross ORG to go to a bookshop on LOC . He was told by a police officer that he could not walk down FAC because of the approaching crowd of demonstrators and was advised to take FAC , a parallel road to the north . The applicant followed this advice but between FAC and FAC he was met by a wall of riot police with shields and helmets moving south . The applicant was forced into ORG at TIME He immediately asked to be allowed out of the cordon and was informed that there was an exit for nonprotesters at the FAC side of ORG ; when he went there he was told that there was no exit . The applicant was not able to exit the cordon until TIME", "The third applicant had no connection with the demonstration . She worked in the GPE Circus area and was on her lunch break at TIME when she was prevented from returning to her workplace by a line of police officers blocking the road . She turned and tried to pass in another direction but found that that exit was also now blocked by police officers , who began to advance towards her . She was held within the cordon at ORG until TIME She and others repeatedly requested to be allowed to leave the cordoned area but was told by the policemen she approached that they were under orders to allow no one to pass .", "The fourth applicant also worked in the GPE Circus area and was also caught up in the cordon while walking through ORG on his lunch break . He was able to leave at TIME", "Following the events on DATE , CARDINAL people who had been confined in ORG contacted various firms of solicitors with the intention of commencing proceedings . The various potential applicants , their legal representatives and the representatives of ORG entered into correspondence with a view to progressing the claims in an efficient manner . It was agreed that the first applicant and Mr PERSON , who was a passer - by caught up in the cordon , would act as “ test ” claimants . They commenced proceedings in ORG , claiming damages for false imprisonment and under LAW DATE for breach of the right to liberty guaranteed by LAW . The first applicant also initially advanced a claim for interference with her rights of freedom of expression and assembly contrary to Articles DATE and CARDINAL of the Convention , but she subsequently abandoned these claims . ORG provided undertakings to the legal representatives of the other claimants ( including the second , third and fourth applicants ) that they would not raise any limitation argument if they brought claims in the domestic courts after the test case had been determined .", "The hearing in ORG before Tugendhat J lasted DATE , including DATE of oral evidence . He considered live evidence from CARDINAL lay witnesses and CARDINAL experts , statements from a further QUANTITY witnesses , CARDINAL of pages of documentary evidence and video footage from hand - held and security cameras and police helicopters . In his judgment , delivered on DATE ( [ DATE ] EWHC CARDINAL ( QB ) ) , Tugendhat J devoted CARDINAL paragraphs to his assessment of the evidence and findings of fact . His factual findings can be summarised as follows .", "Tugendhat J found that on DATE and DATE and DATE there had occurred very serious breakdowns in public order in GPE , which the police feared would be repeated in DATE . The theme of all CARDINAL demonstrations was protest against capitalism and globalisation . The organisers of the event on DATE had failed to cooperate with the police and had distributed publicity material similar to that distributed by the organisers of DATE demonstration . During TIME of DATE a crowd of CARDINAL people , wearing masks , caused MONEY worth of damage and injury to members of the public and police officers , CARDINAL of whom required hospital treatment . Demonstrations on these themes had also resulted in serious breakdowns in public order in other countries at about this time , including in GPE on DATE ( ORG meeting ) , in GPE on DATE ( ORG meeting ) , in GPE on DATE ( World Economic Forum LOC summit ) , in GPE on DATE ( another ORG meeting ) , and on DATE in GPE ( a Summit of the LOC meeting ) . The planning for DATE reflected experience at these and earlier demonstrations , particularly in GPE , and recommendations made in the light of them .", "For DATE , CARDINAL events had been notified to the police , namely a trade - union DATE and ORG , taking place in different parts of GPE . In addition , intelligence indicated that activists representing a broad coalition of environmentalist , anarchist and left - wing protest groups intended to stage various protests at CARDINAL locations across GPE based on the squares of “ Monopoly ” , a boardgame . The final event was to be a rally at ORG at TIME The organisers of the “ DATE Monopoly ” protest did not make any contact with the police , nor attempt to seek authorisation for the demonstrations , and attempted to maintain secrecy about the locations and nature of the protest . Protesters were directly and indirectly encouraged to wear masks and to engage in looting and violence ( see Tugendhat J ’s judgment , § § CARDINAL ) . The intelligence available to LAW was that there would be “ CARDINAL hard - core demonstrators looking for confrontation , violence and to cause public disorder ” . The Special Branch assessment was that the protest would involve CARDINAL of the most serious threats to public order ever seen in GPE , with a real risk of serious injury and even death , as well as damage to property , if they did not effectively control the crowd . Those at risk included members of the public , police officers and other demonstrators . On DATE the Mayor of GPE wrote an article in the principal GPE evening newspaper , expressing the view that the organisers of the DATE protest deliberately sought to create destruction and urging PERSON to stay away . Similar warnings were reported in a number of other newspapers in DATE and DATE .", "The police plan for DATE involved the deployment of CARDINAL officers on foot wearing high - visibility jackets , in addition to mounted police officers . At that time , this was probably the largest number of police officers that had ever been deployed in GPE . The policemen and women responsible for policing on DATE were the most experienced public - order officers in GPE . Since it was foreseen that the final event would be a gathering at ORG at TIME , a speaker system was installed there . The strategic intentions of the police operation were stated as being to provide public reassurance and ensure public safety ; facilitate and police all legitimate protest ; prevent public disorder and protect key buildings such as FAC and ORG ; prevent crime and take all reasonable steps to apprehend offenders if crime was committed ; and generally minimise disruption . However , the police had little idea of what to expect or how they would react to it if and when it happened .", "During TIME there were a number of fairly small demonstrations across GPE . At TIME demonstrators started gathering outside the offices of ORG in the LOC area . They walked towards ORG then up FAC to ORG . By TIME it was estimated that there were over CARDINAL people in LOC and that more were steadily joining them . A number of people moving up FAC were wearing face masks . The police intelligence had indicated that the gathering at ORG was to take place at TIME and the size of the crowd there at this time took them by surprise , with insufficient officers in the area to prevent more people entering it .", "At TIME the police decided to put up a cordon to contain the crowd . The decision was based on the available intelligence , which had estimated that CARDINAL individuals intent on violence would take part in DATE protest and on what had occurred at previous similar demonstrations , rather than on the behaviour of the crowd up until that point . The decision was made in conscious exercise of common - law powers to prevent a breach of the peace . Once the decision to put in a cordon was made , it took TIME to put in a loose cordon and , as more police officers arrived , CARDINAL TIME to put in a full cordon . There was sufficient space within the cordon for people to walk around and there was no crushing . Nonetheless , as the afternoon progressed , conditions became uncomfortable . The weather was cold and wet . No food or water was provided and there was no access to toilet facilities or shelter .", "No announcement was made to the crowd when the cordon was first put in place because of police concern that it would not be strong enough to resist a concerted effort by the crowd to break through . The first announcement through the public - address system was made at TIME , informing the crowd that they were being contained to prevent a breach of the peace . It was accepted by the Police Commander in evidence before the domestic courts that the announcement to the crowd could have been made earlier , perhaps at CARDINAL or TIME", "At TIME , TIME after the full cordon was put in place , ORG commanding the operation planned to commence a controlled release from within the cordon up FAC north . However , release had to be delayed when members of the crowd both within and outside the cordon started to throw missiles and use violence against the police and when there was an attempt by the crowd to break through the cordon into FAC . At TIME a dispersal north was again planned but suspended because of violence by protesters on both sides of the cordon . At around this time more people started moving towards ORG to take part in the event which had been planned to take place there at TIME By TIME the police situation report was that officers were sandwiched between crowds , with pushing and shoving and bottles being thrown . At TIME there was a crowd of CARDINAL people outside the cordon following a samba band , which made dispersal into LOC difficult . The situation was reviewed at TIME but collective release was ruled out because of the risk of violence and disorder . At TIME there was serious disorder in LOC caused by a core of CARDINAL masked protesters which attracted a crowd of CARDINAL . At TIME the crowd within the cordon was calm but the police were not willing to risk collective release because of the presence of other large , disorderly crowds nearby .", "At TIME the decision was taken to disperse the crowd within the cordon . However , the crowd became violent again and at TIME the decision to release was reversed . At TIME release was commenced , with small groups and individuals being escorted away from the containment . However , at TIME the release was put on hold because of the difficulty in policing the crowds outside the cordon , some of whom were throwing large bits of masonry and burning missiles at the police , and because demonstrators released from the cordon were remaining in the vicinity . At TIME the collective dispersal was resumed , with additional police resources to escort those released from the cordon . However , the dispersal was soon halted again because it became apparent that those being released from ORG were joining another large crowd , which had previously been violent , to the north in FAC . By TIME FAC was clear and the collective release of the ORG crowd recommenced , in groups of CARDINAL . By TIME the dispersal was almost complete . CARDINAL people were arrested as a result of the disorder in ORG and the surrounding area . It was part of the collective - release policy to search some or all of those released , take a record of their names and addresses and photograph them .", "The police estimated that there were a maximum of CARDINAL people within the cordon at the peak time and CARDINAL in the crowd outside it . Analysis of the documentary and video evidence admitted at trial indicated that , over the course of the afternoon , CARDINAL people were released individually . It was accepted that this figure was unlikely to be accurate , but Tugendhat J found that the number of individual releases was likely to be “ CARDINAL ” . Of these , most were from the north and south sides of ORG , with very few people being released to the east and west . Most of the recorded releases were before TIME ; CARDINAL were TIME ; CARDINAL TIME ; CARDINAL between TIME and TIME ; and CARDINAL individual releases after TIME It was difficult for police officers to identify members of the crowd for individual release on the basis that they posed no threat of violence . Some of those released were identified in police records as being bystanders caught up in the demonstration . Others were described as being in physical distress , pregnant women , elderly people or children .", "The judge concluded that , in the light of the violence which had occurred at previous demonstrations , the intelligence available to the police , the lack of cooperation from the organisers and the conduct of certain sections of the crowd , the police had reasonable grounds to believe that there was a real risk of damage to property , serious physical injury and even death . The main risks were from crushing and trampling , but there were also risks from missile throwing . Given the situation at ORG , if they were to prevent violence and injury , the police had no alternative at TIME but to impose an absolute cordon and this was , therefore , a proportionate response by the police to the presence of the crowd . The principal purpose of the containment was to ensure the safety of persons ( including those within the cordon ) , the preservation of property in LOC and the protection of other rights of third parties . The police also intended to segregate some members of the crowd from others , if appropriate by asking them questions or by searching them .", "From TIME , no one in the crowd was free to leave without permission . The measure was a close confinement , with minimal liberty in LOC , and its effects were severe , increasingly so as time went by . However , it was never expected that the containment would last so long and the possibility of safely releasing the crowd was kept under review at all times .", "It was not practicable for the police to release the crowd collectively earlier than they did . There were periods when the dispersal route was blocked by other crowds attempting to get into ORG . It would not have been reasonable or safe to allow these crowds to join each other without controlling their movement . In addition , there were long periods during which the police did not have the resources to provide for safe dispersal , and it was not suggested that the Commissioner of ORG could or should have made available more police officers than he had on the streets DATE . CARDINAL reason the resources were inadequate was that a substantial proportion of the crowd was not cooperating with the police on the cordons around them . The judge estimated that PERCENT were actively hostile at any given time , pushing and throwing missiles , and otherwise showing a lack of cooperation . Those not pushing or throwing missiles were not disassociating themselves from the smaller minority who were . As a result the cordon had to be manned by enough officers to resist a concerted push by these people to break out . A cooperative crowd could have been contained by fewer officers , leaving others available to control the dispersal . The other reason why there were insufficient resources was that other crowds outside the containment were refusing to accept control by or directions from the police . The police were doing the best that they could in the most difficult circumstances . The resources they needed to control the dispersal of the crowd in ORG were necessarily and properly deployed elsewhere . That did not mean that the police had to allow the crowd in ORG to disperse without control . According to the judge , that would have been an abnegation of their duty to prevent a breach of the peace , and of their duty of care and the positive obligation incumbent upon them to protect the members of the crowd and third parties , including police officers , from the risk of serious injury , as well as to protect third parties from risk of damage to property .", "In the circumstances that existed in ORG , and in particular the difficulty for the police to distinguish between peaceful and violent or potentially violent individuals within the cordon , the judge was unable to find any individual release policy , other than that applied , which would have been workable . Once the cordon was in place , any measure of controlled release was bound to have taken a considerable time before all of the crowd was released . It was impossible to say how long it would have taken if there had been no searches or evidence gathering , but it would have been more than a matter of TIME . If a release was to be combined with searches and evidence gathering , it was bound to take as long as this one took from the time it restarted at TIME , that is TIME at least .", "As regards the false - imprisonment claim , Tugendhat J held that the defence of necessity was available and that the police action was necessary .", "In connection with LAW , the judge found that containment within the cordon amounted to deprivation of liberty within the meaning of LAW . Although he found that there was never an intention on the part of the police to bring everyone contained at ORG before a judge , the purpose was to contain the crowd so that the police could arrest and bring before a judge all those they reasonably considered had committed offences and those whose arrest was necessary to prevent them committing offences , and that this was sufficient for the requirements of LAW ( c ) .", "In addition , Tugendhat J found that , on the unusual facts of the case , there had been no interference with the rights of freedom of speech and assembly . None of the witnesses was able to explain what the purpose of the procession to ORG was or what it was proposed should have happened either there , or anywhere else , if the police cordon had not been imposed . He found that the literature distributed in advance by the organisers was intended to encourage at least a substantial minority of those present to engage in some form of disorderly and criminal activity , probably including public - order offences such as affray , criminal damage and theft . If there had been no cordon , it would in practice have been impossible in this environment of disorder for anyone intending to carry out lawful acts of protest to do so . Moreover , there was no evidence that anyone at ORG intended to exercise any rights of speech that they did not in fact exercise . Tugendhat J therefore concluded that the case was about public order and the right to liberty , and not about freedom of speech or freedom of assembly , and he dismissed all the plaintiffs’ claims .", "Tugendhat J granted PERSON and Mr PERSON leave to appeal against his findings as regards the claims for false imprisonment and under LAW . In a judgment delivered on DATE ( [ DATE ] EWCA Civ CARDINAL ) , ORG dismissed the appeal .", "In connection with the claim of false imprisonment , ORG held that , in order to prevent a breach of the peace threatened by others , the police could lawfully take action which interfered with or curtailed the lawful exercise of the rights of innocent third parties , but only where all other possible steps had been taken to avoid a breach of the peace and to protect the rights of third parties , and where the action taken was reasonably necessary and proportionate . Applying this test , in the circumstances of the demonstration at ORG , PERSON containment was lawful because it was necessary to prevent an imminent breach of the peace by others .", "In connection with the claim under LAW concluded that the detention did not amount to a deprivation of liberty . Sir PERSON , giving the judgment of the court , held as follows .", "“ CARDINAL . ... [ T]he first question is whether the appellants were deprived of their liberty from the outset . In our opinion they plainly were not . The position at that time was not markedly different in terms of detention from a number of different types of confinement or detention to which the judge referred which would not be regarded as a deprivation of liberty within LAW . A good example is perhaps a football crowd . It is commonplace for such a crowd to be contained for what may turn out to be quite long periods , partly for the protection of individuals in the crowd and partly ( in some cases ) to avoid crowd violence , perhaps as between groups of opposing supporters ... Other examples would be ... for example where motorists are unable to leave a motorway , perhaps for TIME , because of police action following an accident . In such cases it may be necessary for police to confine individuals in particular areas for what may be much longer than originally intended .", "In our opinion this was plainly such a case . On the judge ’s findings of fact , the police had no alternative but to impose the cordon which they did . They anticipated orderly release over TIME in order to avoid violence . The judge identified their various purposes , which included safety and the prevention of crime by individuals in the crowd many of whom could not be identified . In these circumstances the original imposition of the cordon could not , in our judgment , properly be regarded as the kind of arbitrary detention which the GPE authorities would describe as deprivation of liberty within the meaning of LAW . For these reasons we hold that the judge erred in principle in concluding that the appellants were unlawfully detained as from TIME", "On that basis , it is for us to consider afresh the remaining question , namely whether they were unlawfully detained thereafter . In our judgment the answer to that question is ‘ No’ . So for example , ... on a number of occasions during TIME the police gave the order to commence controlled release , only to find that they could not safely carry it through ... On CARDINAL occasions the decision to commence controlled dispersal north had to be reviewed or suspended because of the conduct of protesters either inside or outside the contained area , with the result that the final release phase did not begin until TIME ... During the whole period there was very considerable violence , although not it must be stressed by the appellants ... As the judge concluded ... this was not simply a static crowd of protesters in LOC surrounded by police and held in place for TIME . It was a dynamic , chaotic , and confusing situation in which there were also a large number of other protesters in the immediate vicinity outside the cordon who were threatening serious disorder and posing a threat to the officers both on the cordon and within it .", "In these circumstances it could not sensibly be held that there came a time in which what was originally something less than a deprivation of liberty subsequently became a deprivation of liberty within the meaning of LAW . We therefore hold , contrary to the conclusion of the judge , that , if all the relevant circumstances are taken into account , there was not here the kind of arbitrary deprivation of liberty contemplated by the LAW . ”", "PERSON , like Mr PERSON , was granted leave to appeal by ORG in connection with the issues under LAW . The case was heard on DATE and DATE , and on CARDINAL DATE a unanimous judgment was delivered , dismissing the appeal on the ground that LAW did not apply since the applicant had not been deprived of her liberty ( [ DATE ] ORG CARDINAL ) .", "Lord Hope of PERSON , with whom all the other Law Lords agreed , explained his approach to the interpretation of “ deprivation of liberty ” as follows .", "“ CARDINAL . The application of LAW to measures of crowd control is an issue which does not appear so far to have been brought to the attention of the court in GPE . So there is no direct guidance as to whether LAW is engaged where the police impose restrictions on movement for the sole purpose of protecting people from injury or avoiding serious damage to property . The need for measures of crowd control to be adopted in the public interest is not new , however . It is frequently necessary , for example , for such measures to be imposed at football matches to ensure that rival fans do not confront each other in situations that may lead to violence . Restrictions on movement may also be imposed by the police on motorists in the interests of road safety after an accident on a motorway , or to prevent local residents from coming too close to a fire or a terrorist incident . It is not without interest that it has not so far been suggested that restrictions of that kind will breach LAW so long as they are proportionate and not arbitrary .", "The restrictions that were imposed by the police cordon in this case may be thought , as compared with the examples that I have just mentioned , to have been greater in degree and intensity . But Lord PERSON for the respondent submitted that one could not sensibly ignore the purpose of the restriction or the circumstances . Detention in the paradigm sense was not in the minds of anyone . There would have been no question of there being a deprivation of liberty if the cordon had remained in place for TIME . The fact that it remained in place for much longer ought to make no difference , as the fact that it was not possible to release everyone from the cordon earlier was due to circumstances that were beyond the control of the police . This was a case , he said , where the answer to the question whether what was done was within the scope of LAW was to be determined by striking a fair balance between the rights of the individual and the interests of society . It was , of course , necessary to give full effect to the fact that LAW was a fundamental right whose importance was paramount . But the fact that infringement was not open to justification except in the cases listed in sub - paragraphs ( a ) to ( f ) pointed to the need for care to be taken to identify the limits of its application .", "PERSON for the appellant , on the other hand , said that the purpose for which the measure was employed was irrelevant . The fact that it was a necessary response and was proportionate was a pre - condition for establishing the measure ’s legality for the purpose of sub - paragraphs ( a ) to ( f ) of LAW . But it went no further than that . There was no balance to be struck when consideration was being given to the initial question whether LAW applied to the measures adopted by the police . Questions of purpose and balance only arose when consideration was being given to the cases listed in sub - paragraphs ( a ) to ( f ) .", "Is purpose relevant ?", "The decision whether there was deprivation of liberty is , of course , highly sensitive to the facts of each case . Little value can be derived therefore from decisions on the application of LAW that depend entirely on their own facts . But they are of value where they can be said to illustrate issues of principle . In the present context some assistance is to be derived from the cases as to the extent to which regard can be had to the aim or purpose of the measure in question when consideration is being given as to whether it is within the ambit of LAW at all .", "If purpose is relevant , it must be to enable a balance to be struck between what the restriction seeks to achieve and the interests of the individual . The proposition that there is a balance to be struck at the initial stage when the scope of the LAW is being considered was not mentioned in PERSON v The GPE ( No CARDINAL ) ( DATE ) CARDINAL EHRR CARDINAL or ORG ( DATE ) CARDINAL EHRR CARDINAL . Nor can it be said to be based on anything that is to be found in the wording of the Article . But I think that there are sufficient indications elsewhere in the court ’s case - law that the question of balance is inherent in the concepts that are enshrined in the ORG and that they have a part to play when consideration is being given to the scope of the first rank of fundamental rights that protect the physical security of the individual . ”", "Lord Hope then reviewed a number of judgments and decisions of ORG , including X. v. GPE , no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , Commission decision of DATE , ORG and Reports ( DATE , p. CARDINAL ; GPE v. GPE , no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , Commission decision of DATE , PERSON , p. CARDINAL ; PERSON v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , ORG CARDINALII ; PERSON v. GPE , DATE , Series A no . CARDINAL ; PERSON GPE , DATE , Series A no . CARDINAL ; O’Halloran and PERSON the GPE [ ORG ] , ORG . ORG , ORG CARDINALIII ; and N. v. the GPE [ ORG ] , no . DATE . He concluded :", "“ CARDINAL . I would hold therefore that there is room , even in the case of fundamental rights as to whose application no restriction or limitation is permitted by the Convention , for a pragmatic approach to be taken which takes full account of all the circumstances . No reference is made in DATE to the interests of public safety or the protection of public order as one of the cases in which a person may be deprived of his liberty . This is in sharp contrast to LAW , which expressly qualifies the right to freedom of expression in these respects . But the importance that must be attached in the context of LAW to measures taken in the interests of public safety is indicated by LAW , as the lives of persons affected by mob violence may be at risk if measures of crowd control can not be adopted by the police . This is a situation where a search for a fair balance is necessary if these competing fundamental rights are to be reconciled with each other . The ambit that is given to LAW as to measures of crowd control must , of course , take account of the rights of the individual as well as the interests of the community . So any steps that are taken must be resorted to in good faith and must be proportionate to the situation which has made the measures necessary . This is essential to preserve the fundamental principle that anything that is done which affects a person ’s right to liberty must not be arbitrary . If these requirements are met however it will be proper to conclude that measures of crowd control that are undertaken in the interests of the community will not infringe the LAW individual members of the crowd whose freedom of movement is restricted by them . ”", "Lord PERSON of GPE agreed that there had been no deprivation of liberty , and observed as follows .", "“ CARDINAL . The police are under a duty to keep the peace when a riot is threatened , and to take reasonable steps to prevent serious public disorder , especially if it involves violence to individuals and property . Any sensible person living in a modern democracy would reasonably expect to be confined , or at least accept that it was proper that she could be confined , within a limited space by the police , in some circumstances . Thus , if a deranged or drunk person was on the loose with a gun in a building , the police would be entitled , indeed expected , to ensure that , possibly for TIME , members of the public were confined to where they were , even if it was in a pretty small room with a number of other people . Equally , where there are groups of supporters of opposing teams at a football match , the police routinely , and obviously properly , ensure that , in order to avoid violence and mayhem , the CARDINAL groups are kept apart ; this often involves confining CARDINAL or both of the groups within a relatively small space for a not insignificant period . Or if there is an accident on a motorway , it is common , and again proper , for the police to require drivers and passengers to remain in their stationary motor vehicles , often for TIME or two . In all such cases , the police would be confining individuals for their own protection and to prevent violence to people or property .", "So , too , as I see it , where there is a demonstration , particularly one attended by a justified expectation of substantial disorder and violence , the police must be expected , indeed sometimes required , to take steps to ensure that such disorder and violence do not occur , or , at least , are confined to a minimum . Such steps must often involve restraining the movement of the demonstrators , and sometimes of those members of the public unintentionally caught up in the demonstration . In some instances , that must involve people being confined to a relatively small space for some time .", "NORP In such cases , it seems to me unrealistic to contend that Article CARDINAL can come into play at all , provided , and it is a very important proviso , that the actions of the police are proportionate and reasonable , and any confinement is restricted to a reasonable minimum , as to discomfort and as to time , as is necessary for the relevant purpose , namely the prevention of serious public disorder and violence .", "It was suggested on behalf of the appellant that , at any rate in some of the examples I have given , consent to being confined could be imputed to the people concerned . I am not sure that that is a satisfactory analysis , not least because , unless the consent is to be treated as being involuntary or irrebuttably deemed to be given , it would not deal with the case of a person who informed the police that he objected to being confined . However , if imputed consent is an appropriate basis for justifying confinement for LAW , then it seems to me that the confinement in the present case could be justified on the basis that anyone on the streets , particularly on a demonstration with a well - known risk of serious violence , must be taken to be consenting to the possibility of being confined by the police , if it is a reasonable and proportionate way of preventing serious public disorder and violence .", "So , in agreement with ORG , I would hold that , in the light of the findings of the Judge , as summarised in para [ CARDINAL ] above , the actions of the police in the present case did not give rise to any infringement of the appellant ’s LAW . The feature of the present case which gives particular cause for concern is the length of the period of confinement , TIME . However , having reached the conclusion that reasonable and proportionate constraint , which is requisite to prevent serious public disorder and violence , does not infringe LAW , it seems to me hard to contend that the mere fact that the period of constraint was unusually long can , of itself , convert a situation which would otherwise not be within the ambit of LAW into one which is . I think that some support for that view can be found in cases where it has been held that detention in prison is not taken out of LAW because it was only for a short time – see e.g. PERSON v GPE ( Application No CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) DATE .", "As already indicated , it appears to me that the intention of the police is relevant , particularly in a non - paradigm case , such as this , and where the intention is manifest from the external circumstances . If it transpired , for instance , that the police had maintained the cordon , beyond the time necessary for crowd control , in order to punish , or ‘ to teach a lesson’ to , the demonstrators within the cordon , then it seems to me that very different considerations would arise . In such circumstances , I would have thought that there would have been a powerful argument for saying that the maintenance of the cordon did amount to a detention within the meaning of LAW . However , as is apparent from the clear and careful findings made by the Judge , which have quite rightly not been challenged on appeal , there could be no question of such a contention being raised in the present case .", "Furthermore , it is worth bearing in mind that , at least as I see it , if the restraint in the present case did amount to detention within DATE , it would not be possible for the police to justify the detention under the exceptions in paras ( b ) or ( c ) , not least because of the reasoning of ORG in GPE ( No CARDINAL ) ( DATE ) CARDINAL EHRR CARDINAL . I consider that the fact that the restraint in the present case could not be justified under any of the exceptions in paras ( a ) to ( f ) supports the contention that the constraint did not amount to detention within DATE at all . It would appear to me to be very odd if it was not open to the police to act as they did in the instant circumstances , without infringing the LAW those who were constrained . ”", "Lord PERSON agreed with Lord Hope , and Lord ORG agreed with ORG and PERSON , emphasising that “ the purpose of the confinement or restriction and the intentions of the persons responsible for imposing it rank very highly in the circumstances to be taken into account in reaching the decision ” whether there has been a deprivation of liberty .", "Lord ORG agreed with Lord Hope , but added as a “ footnote ” :", "“ CARDINAL . In paras ORG of his opinion PERSON poses the question ‘ Is purpose relevant?’ His conclusion is a very guarded one , that is ( para DATE ) that there is room , even in the case of fundamental rights , for a pragmatic approach which takes full account of all the circumstances . I respectfully agree that it is right to be cautious on this point . ORG has frequently made clear that all the surrounding circumstances may be relevant in determining whether there is a deprivation of liberty : see for instance ORG v GPE ( DATE ) CARDINAL EHRR CARDINAL , para CARDINAL :", "...", "It is noteworthy that the listed factors , wide as they are , do not include purpose .", "The purpose of confinement which may arguably amount to deprivation of liberty is in general relevant , not to whether the threshold is crossed , but to whether that confinement can be justified under LAW ( a ) to ( f ) : see for instance ( in relation to LAW ) PERSON v GPE ( DATE ) CARDINAL EHRR CARDINAL ; GPE ( DATE ) CARDINAL EHRR CARDINAL ; Wall v GPE , ( DATE ) admissibility decision ORG ; ORG v GPE ( above ) ; ORG v GPE ( DATE ) CARDINAL EHRR CARDINAL ; PERSON ( DATE ) CARDINAL EHRR CARDINAL ; and ORG v GPE ( DATE ) CARDINAL EHRR CARDINAL . If confinement amounting to deprivation of liberty and personal security is established , good intentions can not make up for any deficiencies in justification of the confinement under CARDINAL of the exceptions listed in LAW ( a ) to ( f ) , which are to be strictly construed .", "Many of these LAW ( e ) cases also raise issues as to express or implied consent ( to admission to a psychiatric ward or old people ’s home ) . Some of the earlier cases seem questionable DATE insofar as they relied on ‘ parental rights’ ( especially PERSON , which was a CARDINAL decision that the admission to a psychiatric ward of a DATE boy was not a deprivation of liberty , because of his mother ’s ‘ parental rights’ ) . ORG has , I think , sent out a clear message indicating a different approach to the personal autonomy of young people ( although the unfortunate claimant in that case was DATE at the time of her compulsory medication in a locked ward in the clinic at GPE , for which she was made an exceptionally large award for non - pecuniary loss ) .", "I also feel some unease about the decision in GPE ( DATE ) admissibility decision CARDINAL/CARDINAL ; police stations can be intimidating places for anyone , particularly children , and it seems rather disingenuous to reason that", "‘ in the present case the police action was not aimed at depriving the children of their liberty but simply to obtain information from them about how they obtained possession of the objects found on them and about thefts which had occurred in the school previously’ .", "Having said all that , however , I conclude that it is essential , in the present case , to pose the simple question : what were the police doing at ORG on DATE ? What were they about ? The answer is , as Lord Hope has explained in his full summary of the judge ’s unchallenged findings , that they were engaged in an unusually difficult exercise in crowd control , in order to avoid personal injuries and damage to property . The senior officers conducting the operations were determined to avoid a fatality such as occurred in FAC on DATE . The aim of the police was to disperse the crowd , and the fact that the achievement of that aim took much longer than they expected was due to circumstances beyond their control . ”" ]

[]

[]

[]

[ "5" ]

[ "5-1" ]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "The applicant and the Government gave partly different statements in respect of certain facts of the case concerning the “ dangerous detainee ” regime , the conditions of the applicant ’s detention and his contact with his family during his detention ( see paragraphs DATE and CARDINAL - CARDINAL below ) . The remaining facts were not in dispute .", "On DATE the applicant was arrested on suspicion of drug trafficking committed together with other identified and yet unidentified persons .", "On DATE ORG ( Sąd Rejonowy ) remanded him in custody , relying on the reasonable suspicion that he had committed the offence in question . It attached importance to the likelihood of a severe sentence of imprisonment being imposed on the applicant and the risk that he would attempt to obstruct the proceedings by bringing to bear pressure on – unspecified – witnesses and co - suspects , in order to create favourable conditions for his defence .", "An appeal by the applicant against the detention order and further decisions extending his detention , and his numerous applications for release and appeals against refusals to release him , were all unsuccessful .", "In the course of the investigation , the applicant ’s detention was extended on DATE ( to DATE ) and CARDINAL DATE ( to DATE ) . In their decisions on the matter the authorities relied on the original grounds given for his detention . The courts also stressed that , owing to the complexity of the case , the investigation had still not been completed .", "On DATE a bill of indictment was lodged with ORG . The applicant was charged with drug trafficking , attempted money laundering and obtaining a loan by deception .", "ORG , the applicant ’s common - law wife ( konkubina ) , was indicted on a charge of attempted money laundering in that she had attempted to invest the proceeds of crime received by the applicant from drug trafficking in the purchase of a car and entering into a bank loan agreement in order to conceal the criminal origins of the invested money .", "On DATE the ORG prolonged the applicant ’s detention until DATE and then , on DATE , until DATE . The courts repeated the original grounds for his detention .", "On DATE ORG made a severance order referring part of the charges to ORG ( PERSON ) . Both the prosecutor and the applicant lodged interlocutory appeals against that decision .", "On DATE the case in its entirety was referred to ORG . However , on account of the subsequent amendment to the provisions governing the jurisdiction of criminal courts , the case was eventually referred back to ORG on DATE .", "In the meantime , on DATE , ORG had further extended the applicant ’s detention until DATE , holding that evidence so far gathered sufficiently supported the suspicion that he had committed the offences with which he had been charged . It stressed the likelihood of a severe sentence of imprisonment being imposed on the applicant and the fact that he was a recidivist offender .", "During the court proceedings the applicant ’s detention pending trial was extended on several occasions , namely on DATE ( to DATE ) , DATE ( to DATE ) , DATE ( to DATE ) , DATE ( to DATE ) . The courts repeated the grounds that had previously been given for keeping him in custody .", "The trial was to start on DATE but it was adjourned until DATE due to the absence of CARDINAL of the witnesses .", "On DATE the trial was again adjourned because the presiding judge was ill .", "The first hearing was held on DATE .", "On DATE ORG decided that the applicant ’s detention should no longer be continued but he remained in custody in the third set of criminal proceedings ( see paragraphs CARDINAL - CARDINAL below ) .", "On DATE the ORG convicted the applicant as charged and sentenced him to a cumulative penalty of DATE imprisonment and a fine .", "ORG was convicted as charged and sentenced to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment on DATE probation .", "The proceedings are pending the parties’ appeals .", "On DATE ORG remanded the applicant in custody , relying on the reasonable suspicion of his having committed robbery , theft and unlawful detention . It attached importance to the likelihood of a severe sentence of imprisonment being imposed on the applicant and the risk that he would attempt to obstruct the proceedings by bringing pressure to bear on witnesses and co - suspects in general – their names or any related circumstances were not specified .", "An appeal by the applicant against the detention order , and likewise his further appeals against decisions extending his detention and all his subsequent applications for release and appeals against refusals to release him were unsuccessful .", "In the course of the investigation , the applicant ’s detention was extended on DATE ( to DATE ) and DATE . In their decisions on the matter the authorities relied on the original grounds given for holding him in custody .", "On an unspecified date in DATE a bill of indictment was lodged with ORG . The applicant was indicted on charges of robbery , theft and unlawful detention .", "The first hearing was scheduled for DATE but it was adjourned . The trial started on DATE .", "During the court proceedings the applicant ’s detention pending trial was further extended on DATE , CARDINAL DATE and DATE ( to DATE ) , DATE ( to DATE ) and DATE ( to DATE ) . The courts repeated the grounds that had previously been given for his continued detention .", "On DATE the court decided that the applicant ’s detention should no longer be continued in this case since the maximum statutory time - limit of DATE for pre - trial detention had expired . He was still detained on remand in the first and the third set of criminal proceedings against him ( see paragraphs CARDINAL and DATE above and paragraphs CARDINAL and CARDINAL below ) .", "On DATE the ORG gave judgment . The applicant was acquitted of all the offences with which he had been charged .", "On DATE ORG remanded the applicant in custody , relying on the suspicion that he had set up and organised a criminal group involved in drug - trafficking . It attached importance to the likelihood of a severe sentence of imprisonment being imposed on the applicant , the serious nature of the offences of which he was suspected , the large quantities of drugs involved and the risk that he would attempt to obstruct the proceedings . That risk was based on the assumption that , having regard to the leading role played by him in the group , he might bring pressure to bear on witnesses or other suspects in general ; no specific persons were named .", "An appeal by the applicant against the detention order , likewise his further appeals against decisions extending his detention and all his subsequent applications for release and appeals against refusals to release him were unsuccessful . In his submissions , the applicant first of all stressed that the evidence gathered had not supported sufficiently the suspicion that he had committed the offences in question . He maintained that the grounds given for his detention were vague and general and did not indicate any concrete circumstances justifying the risk that he would obstruct the course of the proceedings . He also stated that the prosecutor ’s refusal to grant him access to the case file made it impossible for him to challenge the grounds for his continued detention .", "In its decision of DATE , rejecting his appeal against the order of CARDINAL DATE ORG held , among other things , the following :", "“ It must be firmly stressed that the material gathered in the case [ in the form of other accused ’s testimonies and the results of searches carried out ] makes it highly probable that [ the applicant ] had committed the offences with which he had been charged . ...", "The offence in question is liable to a maximum sentence of CARDINAL years’ imprisonment which , having regard to the social danger of the offences , the fact that [ the applicant ] acted together with other persons in an organised criminal group and made crime his permanent source of income , as well as to the quantity of drugs distributed and [ the applicant ’s ] criminal record , supports the [ lower court ’s ] conclusion as to the severity of the anticipated penalty .", "ORG was also right in relying on the justified fear that [ the applicant ] might unlawfully influence statements of other persons . The realisation of the purposes of the investigation requires [ the authorities ] to make such actions impossible , in particular influencing the content of testimonies or evidence given by the accused .", "It must be added that , as demonstrated by evidence so far obtained , [ the applicant ] set up and led an organised criminal group and had a decisive say in all matters concerning its functioning . ...", "In these circumstances , the imposition of detention is entirely justified because other preventive measures would not be sufficient to ensure the proper course of the investigation . ”", "In the course of the investigation , the applicant ’s detention was extended on DATE ( to DATE ) and DATE ( to CARDINAL DATE ) . In their decisions the authorities relied on the original grounds given for keeping him in custody , stressing , in particular , the severity of the penalty DATE up to eight years’ imprisonment .", "On DATE a bill of indictment was lodged with ORG . It comprised CARDINAL charges brought against CARDINAL accused . The applicant was indicted on charges of drugtrafficking committed as a leader of an organised criminal group .", "During the court proceedings the courts further extended the applicant ’s detention pending trial on several occasions , namely on DATE ( to CARDINAL October CARDINAL ) , DATE ( to CARDINAL DATE ) , DATE ( to CARDINAL DATE ) , DATE ( to DATE ) , CARDINAL DATE ( to CARDINAL DATE ) , on DATE ( to CARDINAL DATE ) , on DATE ( to CARDINAL DATE ) and on an unspecified subsequent date . The courts essentially repeated the grounds that had previously been given for his continued detention . In some decisions , they also relied on the highly complex nature of the case , stressing that the case file comprised CARDINAL volumes , and the need to carry out time - consuming procedural actions ( such , as for instance , the need to acquaint the accused with classified material – a process that lasted for DATE in DATE ) .", "On DATE the court released the applicant on bail and under police supervision , i.e. on condition that he would report DATE to a police station . It also imposed on the applicant a ban on leaving the country .", "On DATE ORG convicted the applicant of setting up and leading an organised criminal group and of participating in the distribution of large amounts of drugs . It sentenced him to a cumulative penalty of CARDINAL years’ imprisonment and a fine .", "The proceedings are pending the parties’ appeals .", "On DATE , in connection with his appeals against the detention order ( see paragraphs CARDINAL above ) the applicant requested ORG ( Prokurator Okręgowy ) to grant him access to the investigation file and to allow him to obtain photocopies of some documents relating to the grounds given for his detention .", "On DATE the prosecutor refused that request , relying on the important interests of the proceedings ( ważny interes postępowania ) . The prosecutor observed that the investigation was still in progress and , in these circumstances , the interests of the investigation outweighed the applicant ’s right to be acquainted with the evidence so far obtained by the prosecution . The applicant appealed .", "On DATE the GPE ORG upheld the refusal of CARDINAL DATE . He observed , in particular , that the right to full disclosure of evidence gathered at the investigative stage of criminal proceedings was not absolute and could , in pursuit of a legitimate aim such as the protection of witnesses or secret sources of information or the interests of the investigation , be subject to limitations . It was also underlined that such limitations were even more stringent during the investigation as at that stage the principle of adversarial proceedings did not apply .", "On DATE the applicant again asked the investigating prosecutor to grant him access to the case file in order to enable him to make photocopies of certain parts of the file . He listed CARDINAL relevant pages out of CARDINAL contained in the file . The applicant relied on LAW and the principle of equality of arms , stressing that in anticipation of the prosecutor ’s request to the trial court for his detention to be further extended , he needed to inspect at least some parts of the evidence in order to challenge properly and effectively the lawfulness of his detention . In their requests , he added , the prosecution relied on evidence , LOC and circumstances that were unknown to him , which made it impossible for him to respond to the arguments adduced by them in the procedure for the extension of his detention . Lastly , the applicant invoked his constitutional right to defend himself .", "On DATE ORG extended the applicant ’s detention until DATE ( see also paragraph CARDINAL above ) .", "On DATE the prosecutor , relying on Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW ( Kodeks postępowania karnego ) , refused to grant the applicant access to the case file . The prosecutor observed that it was already the second such request lodged within a short period of time . The only difference was that this time the applicant relied on the LAW and international law . That being so , the grounds given for the previous refusal were still valid . It was stressed that the prosecutor in his actions , in particular in assessing evidence , must be guided by the principle of objectivity and must respect the suspect ’s defence rights . However , the prosecutor should first of all ensure the efficient and unimpeded course of the investigation . Since several other persons had been charged together with the applicant , the interests of the investigation required the prosecution to keep secret the findings of fact so far made in order to secure an undisturbed process of obtaining evidence and to avoid any attempt to obstruct unlawfully the outcome of the investigation . As regards the constitutional and international - law arguments advanced by the applicant , the prosecutor considered that they had a marginal impact in the context of this decision since it had a legal basis in the Code of Criminal Procedure . The applicant appealed .", "On DATE the GPE ORG upheld the refusal , repeating the previous grounds .", "On DATE the applicant made a subsequent request to the investigating prosecutor , asking for photocopies of certain documents contained in the case file . He listed a total of CARDINAL relevant pages , out of CARDINAL currently contained in the file . He relied on the previous arguments , stressing that , given that his last detention order would expire on DATE , he needed to get acquainted with at least the selected documents – without being given access to the entire case file – so as to be able to challenge effectively the likely prolongation of his detention .", "On DATE the prosecutor rejected the request without giving any specific grounds for his refusal .", "DATE . On DATE ORG extended the applicant ’s detention until DATE ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) .", "The applicant submitted that as of DATE , i.e. the time when he had been about to be indicted before ORG ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) , he still had no access to the file .", "The applicant submitted that during his detention his correspondence was continually censored by the authorities .", "He produced CARDINAL envelopes of the censored letters .", "Four envelopes bear a stamp that reads : “ Censored , date ... , Prosecutor ” ( ORG , dnia ... Prokurator ) , a hand written date and an illegible signature . Those envelopes contained :", "CARDINAL ) NORP CARDINAL letter from ORG ( ORG ) , censored on DATE ;", "CARDINAL ) NORP CARDINAL letters from ORG ( PERSON ) , censored on DATE and DATE respectively ;", "CARDINAL ) NORP CARDINAL letter from ORG ( PERSON ) , censored on DATE .", "CARDINAL envelopes bear a stamp that reads : “ Censored , ORG , received date ... , sent date ... ” ( ORG , PERSON , otrzymano dnia ... , wysłano dnia ... ) , a stamped date and an illegible signature . The envelopes contained the following letters :", "CARDINAL ) NORP from the applicant ’s defence counsel ; censored on DATE ;", "CARDINAL ) NORP from ORG for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman and Degrading Treatment , censored on CARDINAL DATE ;", "CARDINAL ) NORP from ORG , censored on DATE .", "The applicant did not lodge a civil action for compensation for the infringement of his personal rights on account of censorship of his correspondence under LAW read in conjunction with LAW .", "DATE ( when he was arrested in the first set of proceedings ) and CARDINAL DATE ( when he was indicted before ORG ) , the applicant , despite numerous requests to that effect , was not allowed to receive visits from his son , GPE , born in DATE .", "DATE and DATE the applicant was granted several open visits ( widzenie przy stoliku ) from the child , who was brought to the remand centre by a certain GPE , a third party .", "On several occasions the applicant requested the Governor of ORG to have the standard CARDINAL-minute long visits from the son prolonged to TIME . All his requests were dismissed as the authorities considered that the applicant ’s behaviour was not “ more than exemplary as regards respecting the internal order in the remand centre and the prison rules ” – a circumstance which justified granting visiting privileges .", "Between DATE ( when the applicant was remanded in custody in the third set of proceedings ) and DATE he was again not allowed to see his son .", "The Government submitted that over the period from DATE to CARDINAL DATE the applicant had not asked for permission to receive visits from the son .", "They stated that between DATE and DATE the applicant did not receive visits from the son .", "The Government produced a detailed list of visits received by the applicant DATE and DATE . As from DATE he received visits from his son on the following dates : CARDINAL DATE , DATE , DATE , DATE , DATE DATE , DATE , DATE , CARDINAL and DATE , DATE and DATE , DATE , CARDINAL and DATE , CARDINAL and DATE and CARDINAL DATE . In DATE the visits took place on CARDINAL DATE , CARDINAL , DATE and DATE , DATE and DATE , DATE and DATE , CARDINAL and DATE , CARDINAL and DATE , DATE , DATE and DATE , CARDINAL , DATE and DATE , CARDINAL and DATE , DATE and DATE , DATE and DATE , DATE , DATE and DATE . Further visits took place on CARDINAL and DATE .", "The child was initially accompanied by ORG and , as from DATE by ORG , the applicant ’s common - law wife and the mother of his son .", "On DATE W.W. , the applicant ’s defence counsel , made a declaration that reads , in so far as relevant , as follows :", "“ As [ the applicant ’s ] defence counsel from the date on which he had been detained on remand [ in the first set of the criminal proceedings against him ] , i.e. DATE to CARDINAL DATE I made numerous requests on his behalf to the investigating prosecutor , asking him to issue permission for my client to have a visit form his CARDINAL old son PERSON ...", "Despite my repeated requests , I did not obtain such permission . The grounds given for these decisions referred to [ such circumstances as ] the child ’s interests and the possibility of obtaining additional evidence or new facts from my client . Throughout the entire investigation , the prosecutor issued CARDINAL permission in DATE , which was about the time when [ the applicant ] was indicted before the court . I should add that this put a severe strain on my client and had a negative impact on his psychological state . ”", "On DATE ORG informed the applicant that he had granted GPE a closed visit ( widzenie przez telefon ) and that the latter was allowed to bring the applicant ’s son with him . The visit took place in a special room with a Perspex partition separating the applicant from his visitors . The applicant was informed that in the future he would be granted CARDINAL such visit from the son DATE and that visits enabling them to have direct contact could not be allowed at that stage of the procedure .", "From DATE to CARDINAL DATE the applicant was not allowed to receive visits from PERSON Initially , the investigation authorities informed him that since PERSON was to be heard as a witness in the first set of criminal proceedings against him she could not obtain permission for visits . Later , on an unspecified date in DATE , in those proceedings PERSON was charged with money laundering committed together with the applicant . She was indicted on that charge before ORG on DATE ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) . On this basis , the authorities refused to grant her permissions for visits for some further DATE .", "On DATE the applicant was allowed to have a QUANTITY long conversation on the prison phone with A.W.", "On DATE the applicant was granted the first open visit from ORG , who was allowed to bring their son with her . Since then the applicant has been granted on average CARDINAL visits from her and the son DATE ( see also paragraphs CARDINAL above and CARDINAL below ) .", "The applicant maintained that from DATE until DATE he had not been allowed to receive visits from GPE , his mother , on the ground that she was to be heard as a witness in the first set of criminal proceedings against him .", "The Government submitted that the applicant ’s mother visited the applicant in prison on DATE and CARDINAL DATE . On DATE , the applicant was granted an open visit . The second visit , in which GPE , his son , also participated was closed .", "The applicant was also allowed to have a QUANTITY long conversation on the prison phone with his mother on DATE and DATE .", "A copy of the applicant ’s request of CARDINAL DATE for permission to have a visit from his mother and his son , addressed to ORG ( ORG Okręgowa ) , shows that on the original request the prosecutor made a handwritten note : “ I grant permission for a supervised visit ; CARDINAL.CARDINAL.CARDINAL ” and that the permission document was given to the person concerned on DATE .", "DATE . The list of visits supplied by the ORG shows that DATE and DATE the applicant received CARDINAL visits , of which CARDINAL were meetings with his defence counsel ( including CARDINAL together with a police officer ) , CARDINAL meetings with police officers , CARDINAL meetings with prosecutors and CARDINAL meeting with a notary .", "The meetings with the defence counsel took place once a DATE on average .", "The remaining CARDINAL visits involved the applicant ’s family . They lasted from TIME but on most occasions were TIME .", "At the initial stage of his detention the applicant was only allowed to have a QUANTITY long conversation on the prison phone with his mother on DATE . He received the first family visit on DATE it was an open visit from his mother and lasted TIME .", "Later , he was allowed to have CARDINAL CARDINAL-minute long phone conversation with his common - law wife , PERSON , on DATE .", "He was allowed to have a second phone conversation with his mother on DATE .", "On DATE the applicant received the first – supervised – visit from his son , GPE , who was brought to the remand centre by the applicant ’s mother .", "On DATE the applicant received the first visit from ORG , who was allowed to bring their son with her . It was an open visit that lasted TIME .", "As regards the visits which took place after the applicant was classified as a “ dangerous detainee ” ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) , i.e. from CARDINAL DATE onwards , the list of visits supplied by the ORG shows that the applicant received CARDINAL visits altogether , of which CARDINAL were meetings with his lawyers , CARDINAL with a police officer , CARDINAL with a notary and CARDINAL with prosecutors . The CARDINAL remaining visits were from his family .", "On DATE the applicant was placed in FAC ) . On DATE he was transferred to ORG .", "DATE and DATE the applicant was placed in a solitary cell for dangerous detainees ( a so - called “ tymczasowo aresztowany niebezpieczny ” ; in the relevant legal provisions referred to as „ tymczasowo aresztowany stwarzający poważne zagrożenie społeczne albo poważne zagrożenie dla bezpieczeństwa aresztu ” ) without having been classified as such . The authorities of ORG justified their decision by security reasons . At that time , the applicant was not subjected to the stringent regime for dangerous detainees .", "On DATE the applicant was transferred to a cell for regular prisoners .", "On DATE ORG ( PERSON ) classified the applicant as a “ dangerous detainee ” . It considered that it was necessary to place him in a cell for dangerous detainees as he had been charged with numerous offences , including unlawful detention and violent robbery , committed as a leader of an organised criminal group . The commission also referred to the applicant ’s serious lack of moral character ( wysoki stopień demoralizacji ) . The applicant unsuccessfully appealed against this decision .", "DATE . From DATE , when the applicant was placed in a cell for dangerous detainees , he remained under increased supervision . The cell , including its sanitary facilities , was constantly monitored via close - circuit television . He was subjected to a body search every time he left and entered the cell , which in practice meant that he had to strip naked in front of prison guards and was required to carry out deep knee - bends . The body search was performed in a separate room , which was monitored and its recording was viewable in a duty room .", "The applicant , whenever he was outside his cell , including his appearances at court hearings or medical visits , wore the so - called “ joined shackles ” ( kajdanki zespolone ) on his hands and feet . Those shackles consisted of handcuffs and fetters joined together with chains .", "On DATE he was taken to ORG , where he underwent a number of medical examinations and tests in connection with severe pains in the abdominal cavity . He remained there for TIME , being handcuffed and fettered . He was all the time accompanied and watched by QUANTITY policemen .", "The applicant was allowed to spend TIME per day in an outdoor yard but was segregated from other detainees .", "DATE and DATE , at the applicant ’s request , another inmate , a certain GPE was placed in his cell . Later , from CARDINAL DATE to DATE and from DATE to DATE he had CARDINAL inmate assigned to his cell .", "Every DATE ORG reviewed , and upheld , its decision classifying the applicant as a “ dangerous detainee ” . The relevant decisions were limited to a short description of the nature of the suspicions or charges laid against him which , as such , justified the maintaining of the previous decisions .", "For example , the decision of DATE read , in so far as relevant , as follows :", "“ Pursuant to LAW , ORG assigned [ the applicant ] to the category of detainees who should be placed in a remand centre in conditions ensuring increased protection of society and the security of the remand centre . The decision was based on the suspicion that he had a very high rank in organised crime structures and that he was a person displaying a serious lack of moral character . The detainee is suspected of committing offences of unlawful detention and robbery , which involved particular suffering for victims . On DATE a fresh detention order was issued by ORG , from which it transpired that he was suspected of setting up and leading an organised criminal group involved in the illegal distribution of large amounts of drugs . For this reason , the Commission upholds its decision to classify him in the category of detainees who should be placed in a remand centre in conditions ensuring increased protection of society and the security of the remand centre because the grounds for the further application of LAW of [ LAW ] did not cease to exist . ”", "The applicant appealed against all the decisions , arguing that the authorities violated the provisions of LAW ( NORP karny wykonawczy ) relating to that matter . He also complained about being regularly subjected to a body search , constant monitoring of his cell and the generally inadequate equipment of the solitary cell . For instance , in his appeal against ORG decision of DATE , upholding his classification as a “ dangerous detainee ” , he submitted , among other things , the following :", "“ ... Since DATE I have been classified as a ‘ dangerous ORG .... This decision is arbitrary and was given without any evaluation of the circumstances that had given rise to classify me as such . I am suspected of drug trafficking in an organised criminal group ... and for this reason I was assigned the “ dangerous ” category . Article CARDINALa § CARDINAL of LAW obliges the prison administration to evaluate the circumstances that justify the maintaining of this classification .", "Regrettably , the assessment of [ the need to maintain it ] is illusory or non - existent and the subsequent extensions of the classification as ‘ dangerous’ are , so to speak , automatic .", "The very fact that I was charged with acting in an organised criminal group is not sufficient to consider me a dangerous person , and certainly not sufficient to maintain this classification for DATE , having regard to the extent of the interference with [ my ] civil rights and liberties ... .", "Relying on this classification , ORG subjects me to repression and interferences :", "- stripping me naked ( including underwear ) and inspection of the anus – at least twice a day ;", "- isolating me from all persons ( I am in a solitary cell ) for DATE ;", "- watching me during my physiological acts in the toilet ;", "- making it impossible for me to participate in any kind of sports activity in the prison sports field ( I do not leave the cell at all ) ;", "- walking me in joined shackles all the time .", "Given the degree of the interference in my life , which amounts to DATE ill - treatment and which is not based on a court conviction , one should ask to what extent a mere charge of participating in a criminal group suffices to treat me in this way , especially over the lengthy period of DATE .", "For that reason , the acts of the prison administration are in breach of the law , in particular LAW [ the Convention ] . ... This conclusion is reinforced by the fact that for my part there has never been any danger to the functioning of the remand centre – this is confirmed by the fact that there has been no single instance of the use of force against me . ... [ T]he prison administration subjects me to these practices without good reason , and the status of ‘ dangerous’ serves , so to speak , as a measure of prevention , whereas this status should be restricted to the necessary minimum – otherwise it becomes an arbitrary interference with the most intimate spheres of human life . ... ”", "All the applicant ’s subsequent , similar appeals were dismissed . The authorities relied on the grounds given for the initial decision .", "By way of example , ORG decision of CARDINAL DATE , upholding ORG decision of DATE ( the object of the appeal cited in paragraph CARDINAL above ) read , in so far as relevant , as follows :", "“ The detainee ’s appeal is groundless and will not be allowed . ...", "Pursuant to LAW , a detainee who is suspected of committing an offence in an organised criminal group or organisation aimed at committing offences shall be placed in a remand centre in conditions ensuring increased protection of society and the security of the remand centre .", "According to paragraph CARDINAL of that provision , the review of a decision on classification of a detainee in conditions ensuring increased protection of society and prison security shall take place at least once DATE .", "[ The applicant ] still poses a serious danger to society and prison security . In addition , he is remanded by ORG as a person suspected of setting up and leading an organised criminal group involved in illegal distribution of large amounts of drugs .", "Accordingly , it transpires from the material gathered in the present case that the conditions of the above - cited provision have been fulfilled and , by the same token , the contested decision is lawful . ”", "In DATE the applicant made many requests to the prison authorities , asking for permission to have in his cell his own sports equipment ( i.e. dumb - bells ) , own TV set , “ ORG ” console , computer games , PERSON and CDs with foreign language courses and music but all those requests were refused . He also asked the authorities to enable him to take part in training , workshops , courses or any sports activities organised for other inmates or to allow him to perform any unpaid work , submitting that his complete isolation from other people was putting an exceptionally severe strain on him . The authorities replied that there would be advertisements informing prisoners of the possibility of enrolling on courses or trainings or of unpaid work opportunities . They added , however , that the need to socialise with others was not a ground for being qualified for participation in such activities in prison .", "As of DATE the applicant was still not allowed to perform any paid or unpaid work , take part in any training course , workshop or sports activity .", "Until his release on DATE he was continually classified as a “ dangerous detainee ” .", "The Government submitted that DATE and DATE the applicant was placed in a solitary cell in accordance with the Ordinance of the Minister of ORG of DATE on means of protection of organisational units of ORG ( ORG z dn . CARDINAL października DATE r. w sprawie sposobów ochrony jednostek organizacyjnych PERSON ) ( “ the DATE LAW ) . They did not indicate any specific provision of that ordinance . They added that during his placement in the solitary cell the applicant could watch television .", "They further stated that in FAC the cells in which the applicant was held were equipped with a television set and a radio enabling him to listen to various radio stations . Every DATE Mass was broadcast .", "The applicant stated that he had never had radio in his cell .", "The applicant submitted that the living conditions in FAC and ORG were inadequate . The cells were unventilated ; the windows were covered by a plastic blind , which made the cell very hot during DATE . The applicant could not wear his own clothes but only a red uniform designated for dangerous detainees , which was not warm enough during the DATE time . The furniture was permanently fixed to the floor .", "The applicant made numerous complaints to the prison authorities and the ORG but they were to no avail .", "The applicant was detained in FAC from DATE to DATE . Until DATE he was in a cell designated for CARDINAL persons . Each inmate had at his disposal a cell surface of QUANTITY . From CARDINAL November to DATE ( i.e. for DATE ) the space available was QUANTITY per person .", "The cells in which the applicant was placed were equipped with a sanitary corner with a sliding door .", "The conditions of detention in FAC were good . All detainees were provided with the appropriate clothing , linen and detergents . Personal hygiene products were distributed once DATE . The bed linen was washed CARDINAL a month and underwear once DATE . Other clothes and footwear were changed depending on a given detainee ’s needs .", "The detainees received meals in their cells . The meals were always served at the proper temperature and contained all the required nutritional values .", "From DATE the applicant was detained in FAC . From DATE to DATE he was placed in the following cells : PERSON ( surface QUANTITY ) , ORG surface QUANTITY ) , CARDINAL ( surface CARDINAL mCARDINAL ) , CARDINAL ( surface QUANTITY ) , X- CARDINAL ( surface QUANTITY ) and X-CARDINAL ( surface QUANTITY ) . From CARDINAL DATE to DATE and from DATE to DATE he had CARDINAL inmate assigned to his cell .", "All the cells in which the applicant was placed were equipped with a sanitary corner , to which the applicant had permanent access .", "The detainees were provided with appropriate clothing , linen and detergents . Personal hygiene products were given to the applicant once DATE . The bed linen was washed at least twice DATE and underwear once DATE . Other clothes and footwear were changed according to a given detainee ’s needs .", "On DATE , at the applicant ’s request , the authorities provided him with an extra pullover .", "The detainees received meals in their cells . The meals were always served at the proper temperature and contained all the required nutritional values . The quality of meals was verified by a doctor and approved by the governor . All the cells were equipped with ventilation and heating . Detainees , including those classified as dangerous , could open the windows in their cells .", "NORP Throughout his detention the applicant received adequate medical treatment from prison doctors . He also consulted specialists in psychiatry , dermatology and surgery .", "In DATE the applicant sued ORG – station fisci ORG and ORG before ORG , seeking damages for the degrading conditions of his detention . On an unspecified date the particulars of claim were returned to the applicant for non - compliance with formal requirements .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a fresh claim for damages arising from the physical conditions of his detention ( in particular , overcrowding , lack of proper light and ventilation and inadequate clothing provided by the authorities ) against the same defendants . It was registered in ORG under no . IC CARDINAL/CARDINAL . According to the material in the ORG ’s possession , the proceedings are pending .", "The relevant domestic law and practice concerning the imposition of detention on remand ( aresztowanie tymczasowe ) , the grounds for its extension , release from detention and rules governing others , so - called “ preventive measures ” ( środki zapobiegawcze ) are set out in the ORG ’s judgments in the cases of ORG v. GPE ( no . CARDINAL , § § DATE , CARDINAL DATE ) and PERSON v. GPE ( no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , § § DATE , CARDINAL DATE ) .", "Until DATE no provision of LAW specifically addressed the issue of a detainee ’s access to an investigation file in connection with his challenge to the imposition or to the lawfulness of his detention on remand . A general provision governing access to the case file was laid down in LAW , which is still worded as at the relevant time and which reads :", "“ Unless otherwise provided for by law , in the course of an investigation the parties , defence counsel , legal and lay representatives shall be given access to the case file and shall be able to make copies and photocopies or to obtain against payment certified copies and photocopies only with the permission of the person conducting the investigation . With the permission of a prosecutor and in exceptional circumstances in the course of an investigation access to the case file may be given to other persons . ”", "On the above - mentioned date Article CARDINAL was amended and a new paragraph CARDINAL(a ) was inserted . The new paragraph reads :", "“ In the course of an investigation a suspect and his defence counsel shall be given access to the case - file in part including evidence indicated in a [ prosecutor ’s ] application for the imposition or extension of detention on remand and [ evidence ] listed in a [ court ] decision imposing or extending detention on remand . The prosecutor may refuse to give access to this part of the case - file only if there is a justified fear that this would jeopardise the life or health of the victim or another party to the proceedings , would entail the risk of evidence being destroyed , concealed or forged or would hinder the identification and apprehension of an accomplice to the offence with which the suspect has been charged or of perpetrators of other offences disclosed in the course of the proceedings , would reveal actions undertaken at the preinvestigative stage or would entail the risk of obstructing the investigation by any other unlawful means . ”", "ORG . The relevant domestic law and practice concerning the censorship of ORG correspondence are set out in the ORG ’s judgment in the case of Kliza v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , § § DATE , DATE .", "Article CARDINALa of LAW Sentences reads , in so far as relevant , as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . NORP The penitentiary commission shall classify a detainee as posing a serious danger to society or to the security of a remand centre . It shall review its decisions on that matter at least once DATE . The authority at whose disposal a detainee remains and a penitentiary judge shall be informed of decisions taken .", "A detainee , referred to in subparagraph CARDINAL , shall be placed in a designated remand centre ’s ward or in a cell in conditions ensuring increased protection of society and the security of the remand centre . A penitentiary judge shall be informed about this placement .", "A detainee who is suspected of committing an offence in an organised criminal group or organisation aimed at committing offences shall be placed in a remand centre in conditions ensuring increased protection of society and the security of the remand centre , unless particular circumstances militate against such placement .", "... ”", "The penitentiary commission referred to in the above provision is set up by the governor of the prison or the governor of the remand centre . It is composed of prison officers and prison employees . Other persons DATE such as representatives of associations , foundations and institutions involved in rehabilitation of prisoners as well as church or religious organisations – may participate in the work of the commission in an advisory capacity . If the commission ’s decision on the classification of a prisoner or detainee is contrary to the law , the relevant penitentiary court may quash or alter that decision ( Article CARDINAL ) . A detainee may appeal against the penitentiary commission ’s decision but solely on the ground of its non - conformity with the law ( Article CARDINAL ) .", "Article CARDINALb of the Code of Execution of Criminal Sentences lays down specific arrangements for detention of a “ dangerous detainee ” . It reads , in so far as relevant , as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . In a remand centre a detainee referred to in Article CARDINAL shall be held in the following conditions :", "CARDINAL ) NORP cells and places designated for work , study , walks , visits , religious services , religious meetings and religious classes , as well as cultural and educational activities , physical exercise and sports , shall be equipped with adequate technical and protective security systems ;", "CARDINAL ) cells shall be controlled more often than those in which detainees [ not classified as “ dangerous ” ] are held ;", "CARDINAL ) a detainee may study , work , participate directly in religious services , religious meetings and classes , and participate in cultural and educational activities , exercise and do sports only in the ward in which he is held ;", "CARDINAL ) a detainee ’s movement around a remand centre shall be under increased supervision and shall be restricted to what is strictly necessary ;", "CARDINAL ) a detainee shall be subjected to a personal check ( kontrola osobista ) each time he leaves and enters his cell ;", "CARDINAL ) a detainee ’s walk shall take place in designated areas and under increased supervision ;", "...", "CARDINAL) visits shall take place in designated areas and under increased supervision ... ;", "CARDINAL ) a detainee may not use his own clothes or footwear .", "Rules on the use of handcuffs , fetters and other restraint measures are laid down in the ORG ’s Ordinance of CARDINAL DATE on conditions and manner of using direct restraint measures by policemen ( as amended on DATE ) ( ORG PERSON z dnia CARDINAL września DATE r. w sprawie określenia przypadków oraz warunków i sposobów użycia przez policjantów środków przymusu bezpośredniego ) ( “ the DATE LAW ) . Paragraph CARDINAL of the DATE Ordinance reads , in so far as relevant , as follows :", "“ CARDINAL Handcuffs shall be put on hands kept on the front . If a person is aggressive or dangerous , handcuffs may be put on hands kept behind the back .", "CARDINAL NORP In respect of persons detained or sentenced to imprisonment , in particularly justified cases joined shackles designed to be worn on hands and legs may be used . ”", "The wards “ N ” ( from “ niebezpieczny ” – dangerous in NORP ) designed for dangerous detainees are closed units within prisons or remand centres , shut off to other sections of the detention facility . They are placed in a separate building or in a specific part of the prison building fully isolated from other sections of the prison , usually through a special entry or corridor . A security door remains closed at all times and the entire ward is continually monitored via close - circuit television . Regular DATE routines ( provision of meals , clothes , etc . ) are organised with the use of remote- controlled devices , reducing to the minimum any direct contact between the detainees and the prison guards . The prison guards wear bullet - proof jackets .", "Routine searches of cells are often carried out .", "The detainees , whenever outside cells , even within the ward “ N ” , wear “ joined shackles ” or are handcuffed at all times . They are subjected to a personal check before leaving cells and on return . They all wear special red uniforms . They have a DATE , solitary walk in a specially designated and segregated area and if they are allowed to spend some time in a DATE room , they usually remain alone . They are not necessarily subjected to solitary confinement and may share the cell with an inmate or inmates but , pursuant to paragraph CARDINAL of the DATE Ordinance , the number of detainees in the cell is limited to CARDINAL persons at the same time .", "According to paragraph CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of the DATE Ordinance , a dangerous detainee can move within the detention facility only singly . In justified cases such detainees may move in a group of CARDINAL but under the increased supervision by the prison guards .", "Paragraph CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) states that , outside the cell and facilities designated for “ N ” detainees , an “ N ” inmate must be permanently and directly supervised by CARDINAL prison guards . This restriction can only exceptionally and in justified cases be lifted by the Prison Governor .", "A dangerous detainee can not perform any work using dangerous tools , handle devices designed to make dangerous or illegal objects , take up any work enabling him to set fire , cause an explosion or any danger to the prison security or work in any place enabling an escape or uncontrolled contact with other persons ( paragraph CARDINAL ) . He is not allowed to make purchases in the prison shop but must submit his shopping list to a designated prison guard . The goods are delivered directly to his cell ( paragraph CARDINAL ) .", "As of DATE there were CARDINAL “ N ” wards in NORP prisons , which had the capacity to hold from CARDINAL to CARDINAL detainees .", "As of DATE there were CARDINAL “ dangerous detainees ” ( convicted or detained on remand ) in “ N ” wards .", "Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW defines the “ personal check ” in the following way :", "“ A personal check means an inspection of the body and checking of clothes , underwear and footwear as well as [ other ] objects in a [ prisoner ’s ] possession . The inspection of the body , checking of clothes and footwear shall be carried out in a room , in the absence of third parties and persons of the opposite sex and shall be effected by persons of the same sex . ”", "Pursuant to paragraph CARDINAL of the DATE Ordinance :", "“ CARDINAL . A [ dangerous ] detainee shall be subjected to a personal or cursory check , in particular :", "CARDINAL ) NORP before leaving the ward or the workplace and after his return there ;", "CARDINAL ) NORP before individual conversations or meetings with the representatives of the prison administration or other persons that take place in the ward ;", "CARDINAL ) NORP immediately after the use of a direct coercive measure – if it is possible given the nature of the measure ;", "CARDINAL ) NORP directly before the beginning of the escort . ”", "By virtue of the law of DATE on amendments to LAW ( ustawa o zmianie ustawy – Kodeks karny wykonawczy ) ( “ the DATE LAW Article PERSON was rephrased and new rules on monitoring detention facilities by means of close - circuit television were added . LAW entered into force on DATE .", "NORP The former text of LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) became paragraph CARDINAL of this provision and a new paragraph CARDINAL was introduced . This new provision is formulated as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . The behaviour of a person in pre - trial detention referred to in LAW in a prison cell , including its part designated for sanitary and hygienic purposes and in places referred to in paragraph CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) [ of this provision ] shall be monitored permanently . The images and sound [ obtained through monitoring ] shall be recorded . ”", "The above provision belongs to the set of new rules that introduced monitoring in prisons by means of close - circuit television as a necessary security measure .", "The new Article CARDINALa reads , in so far as relevant , as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . Detention facilities may be monitored through an internal system of devices registering images or sound , including close - circuit television .", "Monitoring , ensuring the observation of a prisoner ’s behaviour , may be used in particular in prison cells including parts designated for sanitary and hygienic purposes , in baths , in LOC designated for visits , in places of employment of detainees , in traffic routes , in prison yards , as well as to ensure observation of the prison grounds outside buildings , including the lines of external walls .", "Monitored images or sound may be registered with the help of appropriate devices .", "Monitoring and registering of sound may not include information subject to the seal of confession or secret protected by law .", "Images from close - circuit television installed in the part of the prison cell designated for sanitary and hygienic purposes and in baths shall be transmitted to monitors or other devices referred to in paragraph CARDINAL in a manner making it impossible to show [ detainees’ ] private parts or their intimate physiological functions .", "... ”", "Pursuant to LAW ( a ) § § CARDINAL and DATE , if the registered material is not relevant for the prison security or security of an individual prisoner it shall be immediately destroyed . The Prison Governor decides for how long the relevant registered material should be stored and how it is to be used .", "NORP However , all registered material concerning a dangerous detainee is stored in accordance with Article CARDINALc , which reads as follows :", "“ The behaviour of a [ detainee classified as dangerous ] in a prison cell , including its part designated for sanitary and hygienic purposes and in places referred to in LAW ( CARDINAL ) [ places and premises designated for work , education , walking exercise , receiving visits , religious service , religious meetings and teaching , as well as cultural , educational and sports activity ] shall be monitored permanently . The images and sound [ obtained through monitoring ] shall be recorded . ”", "Before that amendment , the rules on monitoring detainees were as included in paragraph CARDINAL § DATE Ordinance , according to which a prison cell could be additionally equipped with video cameras and devices enabling listening .", "Pursuant to LAW , as applicable until DATE , a detainee was allowed to receive visitors , provided that he had obtained a visit permission ( “ zezwolenie na widzenie ” ) from the authority at whose disposal he remained , i.e. an investigating prosecutor ( at the investigative stage ) or from the trial court ( once the trial had begun ) or from the appellate court ( in appeal proceedings ) . A detainee was entitled to CARDINAL onehour long visit per month .", "According to paragraphs CARDINAL and CARDINAL , a visit should take place in the presence of a prison guard in a manner making it impossible for a detainee to have direct contact with a visitor but the authority which issued the permission may set other conditions . In practice , there are QUANTITY types of visits : an “ open visit ” , a “ supervised visit ” ( widzenie w obecności funkcjonariusza PERSON ) and a “ closed visit ” .", "An open visit takes place in a common room designated for visits . Each detainee and his visitors have at their disposal a table at which they may sit together and can have an unrestricted conversation and direct physical contact . Several detainees receive visits at the same time and in the same room .", "A supervised visit takes place in the same common room but the prison guard is present at the table , controls the course of the visit , may restrict physical contact if so ordered under the visit permission , although his principal role usually is to ensure that the visit is not used for the purposes of obstructing the proceedings or achieving any unlawful aims and to prevent the transferring of any forbidden objects from or to prison .", "A closed visit takes place in a special room . A detainee is separated from his visitor by a Perspex partition and they communicate through an internal phone .", "Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL lays down specific conditions for receiving visits by dangerous detainees in the following way :", "“ In the case of a [ dangerous detainee ] , the governor of the remand centre shall inform the authority at whose disposal a detainee remains of the existence of a serious danger for a visitor and that it is necessary to grant a visit permission in a manner making [ his or her ] direct contact with a detainee impossible . ”", "The judgment was given following an application , lodged by the ORG on DATE , alleging that LAW was incompatible with a number of constitutional provisions , including the principle of protection of private and family life ( LAW ) , the principle of proportionality ( LAW ) , LAW . ORG judgment became effective on DATE , the date of its publication in ORG ) .", "ORG ruled that LAW , in so far as it did not specify the reasons for refusing family visits to those in pre - trial detention , was incompatible with the above provisions . The court held that this provision did not indicate with sufficient clarity the limitations on a detainee ’s constitutional right to protection of private and family life . The court also considered that LAW was incompatible with LAW in so far as it did not provide for a possibility to appeal against a prosecutor ’s decision to refuse a family visit to those in pre - trial detention .", "On DATE ORG adopted amendments to LAW . In particular , subparagraphs CARDINALa-CARDINALf were added . These provisions stipulate that a detainee is entitled to CARDINAL family visit per month . In addition , they indicate specific conditions for refusing a family visit to a detainee and provide an appeal procedure against such a refusal . The amendments entered into force on DATE .", "Article CARDINAL of the Civil Code contains a non - exhaustive list of socalled “ personal rights ” ( dobra osobiste ) . This provision states :", "“ The personal rights of an individual , such as , in particular , health , liberty , honour , freedom of conscience , name or pseudonym , image , secrecy of correspondence , inviolability of the home , scientific or artistic work , [ as well as ] inventions and improvements , shall be protected by the civil law regardless of the protection laid down in other legal provisions . ”", "Article CARDINAL , paragraph CARDINAL , of the Civil Code provides :", "“ A person whose personal rights are at risk [ of infringement ] by a third party may seek an injunction , unless the activity [ complained of ] is not unlawful . In the event of infringement [ the person concerned ] may also require the party who caused the infringement to take the necessary steps to remove the consequences of the infringement ... In compliance with the principles of this LAW [ the person concerned ] may also seek pecuniary compensation or may ask the court to award an adequate sum for the benefit of a specific public interest . ”", "Under LAW of LAW , a person whose personal rights have been infringed may seek compensation . That provision , in its relevant part , reads :", "“ The court may grant an adequate sum as pecuniary compensation for non - material damage ( krzywda ) suffered to anyone whose personal rights have been infringed . Alternatively , the person concerned , regardless of seeking any other relief that may be necessary for removing the consequences of the infringement sustained , may ask the court to award an adequate sum for the benefit of a specific public interest ... ”", "Articles CARDINAL et seq . of the NORP LAW provide for the ORG ’s liability in tort .", "Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW ( as amended ) provides :", "“ ORG , or [ as the case may be ] a self - government entity or other legal person responsible for exercising public authority , shall be liable for any damage ( szkoda ) caused by an unlawful act or omission [ committed ] in connection with the exercise of public authority . ”", "Article CARDINAL of LAW sets out limitation periods for civil claims based on tort , including claims under LAW read in conjunction with ORG and CARDINAL of LAW . This provision , in the version applicable as from DATE , reads , in so far as relevant , as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . A claim for compensation for damage caused by a tort shall lapse after the expiration of DATE from the date on which the claimant learned of the damage and of a person liable for it . However , this time - limit may not be longer than DATE following the date on which the event causing the damage occurred . ”", "The recommendation , in its part relating to the application of security measures reads , in so far as relevant , as follows :", "“ CARDINAL.CARDINAL The security measures applied to individual prisoners shall be the minimum necessary to achieve their secure custody .", "CARDINAL The security which is provided by physical barriers and other technical means shall be complemented by the dynamic security provided by an alert staff who know the prisoners who are under their control .", "CARDINAL As soon as possible after admission , prisoners shall be assessed to determine :", "a. the risk that they would present to the community if they were to escape ;", "b. the risk that they will try to escape either on their own or with external assistance .", "CARDINAL Each prisoner shall then be held in security conditions appropriate to these levels of risk .", "CARDINAL The level of security necessary shall be reviewed at regular intervals throughout a person ’s imprisonment . ”", "“ CARDINAL.CARDINAL As soon as possible after admission , prisoners shall be assessed to determine whether they pose a safety risk to other prisoners , prison staff or other persons working in or visiting prison or whether they are likely to harm themselves .", "CARDINAL Procedures shall be in place to ensure the safety of prisoners , prison staff and all visitors and to reduce to a minimum the risk of violence and other events that might threaten safety .", "CARDINAL Every possible effort shall be made to allow all prisoners to take a full part in DATE activities in safety .", "CARDINAL It shall be possible for prisoners to contact staff at all times , including during TIME .", "CARDINAL National health and safety laws shall be observed in prisons . ”", "“ CARDINAL Special high security or safety measures shall only be applied in exceptional circumstances .", "CARDINAL.CARDINAL There shall be clear procedures to be followed when such measures are to be applied to any prisoner .", "CARDINAL The nature of any such measures , their duration and the grounds on which they may be applied shall be determined by national law .", "CARDINAL The application of the measures in each case shall be approved by the competent authority for a specified period of time .", "CARDINAL Any decision to extend the approved period of time shall be subject to a new approval by the competent authority .", "CARDINAL Such measures shall be applied to individuals and not to groups of prisoners . ”", "From DATE to CARDINAL DATE ORG for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment ( “ the ORG ” ) carried out a periodic visit to selected detention establishments in GPE .", "The ORG visited wards designated for dangerous detainees in the FAC , FAC and FAC . The ORG report contains a general description of the “ N ” regime and a number of specific recommendations aimed at ameliorating conditions of detention of inmates with “ N ” category status in the establishments visited . It also lists recommendations aimed at removing perceived shortcomings of the “ dangerous detainee ” regime in general .", "The following observations were made in paragraph CARDINAL of the report in respect of the application of the regime :", "“ The regime applied to ‘ N’ category prisoners remained very restrictive , similar to the CARDINAL described in the report on the DATE visit . Out - of - cell time consisted essentially of TIME of outdoor exercise per day ( taken either alone or in the company of a cellmate ) and access to a recreation room twice DATE at FAC and FAC . Inmates could have their own TV in the cell . They were entitled to a DATE shower , DATE , and CARDINAL phone calls per month for sentenced prisoners ( at the prosecutor ’s discretion for remand prisoners ) at ORG and PERSON prisons , and a TIME - daily phone call for sentenced prisoners at FAC . Contact with staff was limited to occasional visits by educators , psychologists and a chaplain .", "The ORG remains of the opinion that the regime for ‘ N’ status prisoners should be fundamentally reviewed . Solitary confinement or small - group isolation for extended periods is more likely to de - socialise than re - socialise people . There should instead be a structured programme of constructive and preferably out - of - cell activities , and educators and psychologists should be proactive in working with \" N \" status prisoners to encourage them to take part in that programme and attempt to engage them safely with other prisoners for at least a part of DATE . As stressed in the report on the visit in DATE , regardless of the gravity of the offences of which prisoners are accused or have been convicted and/or their presumed dangerousness , efforts must be made to provide them with appropriate stimulation and , in particular , with adequate human contact . ”", "In paragraph CARDINAL of the report the ORG referred to the procedure for the classification as a “ dangerous detainee ” and the usually lengthy application of the “ dangerous detainee ” status in the following terms :", "“ The procedure for allocation and review of ‘ N’ status remained unchanged . Despite the presence of regular DATE reviews , most prisoners remained in ‘ N’ status for lengthy periods of time . ...", "The ORG must stress that placement in an ‘ N’ unit should not be a purely passive response to the prisoner ’s attitude and behaviour . Instead , reviews of placement should be objective and meaningful , and form part of a positive process designed to address the prisoner ’s problems and permit his ( re-)integration into the mainstream prison population . In the ORG ’s opinion , the procedure for allocating a prisoner to ‘ N’ status should be refined to ensure that only those who pose an ongoing high risk if accommodated in the mainstream of the prison population are accorded this status . Reviews of ‘ N’ status should specify clearly what is to be done to assist the prisoner concerned to move away from the ‘ N’ status and provide clear criteria for assessing development . Prisoners should be fully involved in all review processes . The ORG reiterates its recommendation that the NORP authorities review current practice with a view to ensuring that \" N \" status is only applied and maintained in relation to prisoners who genuinely require to be placed in such a category . ”", "In paragraph CARDINAL , the ORG expressed the following opinion regarding the practice of routine strip - searches :", "“ The ORG also has serious misgivings about the systematic practice of obliging ‘ N’ status prisoners to undergo routine strip - searches whenever entering or leaving their cells . The prisoners concerned had to undress completely , and squat fully naked in view of the guards and any prisoner(s ) sharing the cell while all their clothes were examined .", "In the ORG ’s opinion , such a practice could be considered as amounting to degrading treatment . ORG recommends that strip - searches only be conducted on the basis of a concrete suspicion and in an appropriate setting and be carried out in a manner respectful of human dignity . ”", "The ORG gave the following general recommendations to ORG in respect to prisoners classified as “ dangerous ” ( “ N ” status ) :", "“ - the NORP authorities to review the regime applied to ‘ N’ status prisoners and to develop individual plans aimed at providing appropriate mental and physical stimulation to prisoners ( paragraph CARDINAL ) ;", "- the NORP authorities to review current practice with a view to ensuring that ‘ N’ status is only applied and maintained in relation to prisoners who genuinely require to be placed in such a category ( paragraph CARDINAL ) ;", "- strip - searches to be conducted only on the basis of a concrete suspicion and in an appropriate setting , and to be carried out in a manner respectful of human dignity ( paragraph CARDINAL ) .", "ORG response to the ORG report was published on DATE .", "In respect of the recommendation that the NORP authorities should revise the regime applied against “ N ” status prisoners and develop individual plans aimed at providing inmates with appropriate psychological and physical stimulation ( paragraph CARDINAL ) , they stated :", "“ PERSON ] ... classified in the category of so - called dangerous offenders have a possibility of selecting a system in which they serve their sentence of imprisonment , i.e. programmed impact or an ordinary system . The above does not apply to sentenced juvenile offenders who are classified as dangerous and who obligatorily serve their sentence in the system of programmed impact . In an ordinary system , a convict may use employment available at the penitentiary institution , as well as education and cultural - educational and sports classes . As far as such convicts are concerned , no plans are made for application of the individual programme of impact . The individual programme of impact is prepared in co - operation with the convict who declared that he wishes to serve his sentence in the system of programmed impact , which anticipates active participation of the convict in the process of re - socialization by means of fulfilment of tasks imposed upon him as part of the programme which are aimed at solving the problems constituting the grounds for the offences he committed .", "Dangerous convicts qualified in a therapeutic system requiring specialized impact re presented with individual therapeutic programmes preceded by diagnosis , which encompasses :", "CARDINAL ) a description of the causes of the event ;", "CARDINAL ) a description of irregularities in the area of cognitive , emotional and behavioural processes ;", "CARDINAL ) characteristics of the actual state of their psychological and physical condition ;", "CARDINAL ) a description of the problem constituting the grounds justifying delegation for the therapeutic system ;", "CARDINAL ) description of individual problems of the convict ;", "CARDINAL ) evaluation of motivation to participate in implementation of the individual therapeutic programme ;", "CARDINAL ) indication of positive features if personality and behaviour of the convict .", "When developing an individual therapeutic programme , the following should be specified :", "CARDINAL ) the scope of the conducted activities ;", "CARDINAL ) purpose of impact , possible to be undertaken in the conditions of a therapeutic ward or outside such ward , taking into account the properties of the convict ;", "CARDINAL ) methods of specialized impact ;", "CARDINAL ) criteria for implementation of an individual therapeutic programme .", "Convicts qualified in the category of so - called dangerous are subjected to penitentiary impact with limitations deriving from the fact of causing by them of serious social threat or a serious threat to security of the institution . Moreover , they are subjected to impact whose purpose is to , in particular , decrease emotional tensions , as well as limitation of tendencies for aggressive or self - aggressive behaviours . In the individual programme of impact and the individual therapeutic programme conducted for him , methods and measures are specified which are aimed at mental and physical stimulation of the convict . It should also be emphasised that each inmate , including dangerous offender , exhibiting symptoms of worsening of his mental conditions is covered by psychological and psychiatric help . Moreover , dangerous inmates are also covered by intensive psychological supervision for the purpose of elimination of tensions resulting from an increased isolation .", "The NORP prison system developed rules of organization and conditions of conduct of penitentiary impact against convicts , persons under detention on remand and punished persons who pose serious social danger or serious danger for security of the penitentiary institution or a detention on remand centre , kept in conditions ensuring increased security of the community and the security of the penitentiary institution . Such solutions are aimed at intensification and unification of impact against dangerous inmates , and in particular :", "- directing the penitentiary work on preventing of negative consequences of limitation of social contacts by organization and initiation of desirable activity as part of cultural - educational and sports activities , re - adaptation programmes ;", "- undertaking measures connected with maintenance of mental hygiene , including the reduction of the level of stress and aggression ;", "- a need of allowing the inmate to commence or continue education ( in particular in case of juvenile offenders ) ;", "- undertaking of employment in the division ;", "- impact based on educational and prophylactic programmes .", "Recommendations of the ORG concerning development of individual programmes for dangerous convicts have been taken into account and are implemented according to the provisions binding in this regard . ”", "Referring to the recommendation that the NORP authorities should verify their current practice in order to ensure that the “ N ” status is accorded appropriately and maintained only in respect to prisoners who do , in fact , require being qualified in such category ( paragraph CARDINAL ) , the Government responded :", "“ In the NORP penal law , the basic legal act specifying criteria of qualifying inmates creating serious social danger or serious danger to security of the institution is the [ LAW ] .", "The aforementioned inmates are placed in a designated division or cell of a penitentiary institution or an investigation detention centre in conditions ensuring increased protection of the community and the security of the penitentiary unit . An authority authorized to verify a necessity of further stay of the inmate in a designated division or cell is a penitentiary commission . The penitentiary commission is obliged to verify its decisions in this regard at least once DATE . Decisions taken by the penitentiary commission shall be each time notified to the penitentiary judge , and in the event of detention on remand , also to the authority at whose disposal the inmate is . The penitentiary commission performed an inquisitive and , in every case , individual analysis of justification of the request for qualification , as well as verifies a necessity of continued stay of the inmates in delegated division or cell .", "Moreover , attention should be drawn to the fact that each decision of the authority executing the judgement according to Art . CARDINAL of the [ LAW ] is subject to an appeal by the inmate .", "Summing up the above , we can state that such frequent verification of this category of inmates , an analysis of behaviours and a legal situation gives a guarantee of real evaluation of the situation of the inmate and possible benefits deriving from continued application against him of an extended system of protection . ”", "Lastly , in regard to the recommendation that a strip - search should be conducted only on the basis of a concrete suspicion and under appropriate conditions , as well as with respect for human dignity ( paragraph CARDINAL of the Report ) , the Government stated :", "“ The principles and procedures of performing a personal search of the inmate and other persons in penitentiary institutions and investigation detention centres are regulated in the [ Code of Execution of Criminal Sentences ] and the [ Ordinance of the Minister of ORG of DATE on means of protection of organisational units of ORG ] . According to these provisions , personal check - up consists of examination of the body and checking clothes , underwear and shoes , including any objects in possession of the convict . Inspection of the body and checking - up clothes and shoes is each time performed by officers of ORG in a separate room , in absence of any third parties and persons of a different sex , and is performed by persons of the same sex . The conducted control must , on many occasions have a prevention character , but it is always performed with respect for human dignity , applying the principle of humanitarianism and legality . The control is conducted for the purpose of finding dangerous and forbidden products and preventing an escape or in other justified cases . Departure from these rules would entail a realistic threat to security of the penitentiary unit and inmates kept therein . ”" ]

[ "3", "5", "8" ]

[ "5-3", "5-4", "8-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , Mr PERSON , is a NORP national who was born in DATE and lives in GPE . He was represented before ORG , solicitors in GPE . ORG ( “ the Government ” ) were represented by their Agent , PERSON of ORG .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "The applicant ’s wife died on DATE . His claim for widows’ benefits was made on DATE and was rejected on DATE on the ground that he was not entitled to widows’ benefits because he was not a woman . The applicant did not appeal as he considered or was advised that such a remedy would be bound to fail since no such social security benefits were payable to widowers under GPE law .", "The applicant was not in receipt of child benefit at the time of his claim .", "The domestic law relevant to this application is set out in PERSON v. the GPE , no . CARDINAL , § § DATE , ORG CARDINAL-IV and Runkee and White v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , § § CARDINAL , DATE ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "He is the owner of a flat in GPE , which he had let to GPE", "In a registered letter of CARDINAL DATE , the applicant informed the tenant that he intended to terminate the lease on expiry of the term on DATE and asked him to vacate the LOC by DATE .", "In a writ served on the tenant on DATE , the applicant reiterated his intention to terminate the lease and summoned the tenant to appear before ORG .", "By a decision of CARDINAL DATE , which was made enforceable on DATE , ORG upheld the validity of the notice to quit and ordered that the premises be vacated by DATE .", "On DATE , the applicant served notice on the tenant requiring him to vacate the premises .", "On DATE , the applicant made a statutory declaration that he urgently required the premises as accommodation for himself .", "On DATE , he informed the tenant that the order for possession would be enforced by a bailiff on DATE .", "DATE and DATE , the bailiff made CARDINAL attempts to recover possession . Each attempt proved unsuccessful , as the applicant was never granted the assistance of the police in enforcing the order for possession .", "In the meanwhile , pursuant to LAW . CARDINAL of DATE , on DATE , the tenant asked ORG to postpone the enforcement proceedings . On DATE , ORG set a fresh date for DATE .", "On DATE , the tenant asked ORG to postpone the enforcement proceedings .", "On DATE , ORG decided to provisionally suspend the enforcement and adjourned the hearing until DATE .", "On DATE , the hearing was reported to DATE .", "On DATE , ORG ordered that the premises be vacated as soon as possible .", "On DATE , the applicant recovered possession of the flat .", "The relevant domestic law and practice is described in the ORG ’s judgments in the cases of ORG , ( no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , § § DATE , CARDINAL ) and PERSON v. GPE , ( no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , § § DATE , CARDINAL ) ." ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "The relevant facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows . The events described below took place DATE .", "The applicant contacted the police after he was attacked by a young man with whom he had had homosexual relations . He was arrested for allegedly engaging in buggery with a young man aged DATE of age contrary to section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) and schedule CARDINAL of LAW DATE . The applicant underwent a medical examination with his consent during which samples were taken and his residence was searched by police . He was released on police bail DATE and was subsequently formally charged .", "NORP The applicant attended before ORG on four occasions and each time he was bailed to re - appear . During this period , the applicant wrote to ORG ( ORG ) and other government officials stating that the criminal proceedings against him violated his human rights , citing the case of GPE v. GPE ( no . ORG report of DATE , unpublished ) .", "The applicant subsequently requested leave to apply for judicial review of the ORG decision to prosecute him but this application was refused . His renewed application was later rejected by ORG . Following a hearing at ORG , the applicant was committed for trial at ORG . He appeared before ORG for a plea and directions hearing and for a hearing on various matters including his request for the trial to be postponed in order to allow him more time to prepare .", "The ORG later advised the applicant by letter that it had decided not to proceed with the case against him and that he should accordingly attend ORG on a particular date . On DATE he was formally acquitted by that court . The trial judge asked the applicant if he would like to make a claim for costs but , following a brief discussion , the applicant decided not to make any claim on the grounds that , in his view , the ORG were “ quibbling ” over the amount to be awarded .", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW DATE ( “ the DATE LAW ) made it an offence for a person to commit buggery with another person . Pursuant to LAW of LAW it was an offence for a man to commit an act of “ gross indecency ” with another man , whether in public or private .", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW made it an offence for a person to commit indecent assault on a woman . LAW ) of LAW provided that a girl under DATE could not give any consent which would prevent an act being an assault for the purposes of the section .", "Section CARDINAL of LAW DATE ( “ the CARDINAL Act ” ) provided , inter alia , as follows :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) Notwithstanding any statutory or common law provision ... a homosexual act in private shall not be an offence provided that the parties consent thereto and have attained DATE . ...", "( CARDINAL ) For the purposes of this section a man shall be treated as doing a homosexual act if , and only if , he commits buggery with another man or commits an act of gross indecency with another man or is a party to the commission by a man of such an act ... ”", "The subsequent ORG and LAW DATE ( “ the DATE LAW ) replaced “ DATE ” in LAW with “ DATE ” .", "This Act entered into force on DATE . Section CARDINAL reads :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) In LAW CARDINAL-", "( a ) in subsections ( CARDINALA ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW ( buggery ) ; and", "( b ) in sub - paragraphs ( a ) and ( b ) of paragraph CARDINAL ( indecency between men etc . ) of Schedule CARDINAL ( punishments etc . ) ,", "for the word ' DATE ' there shall be substituted the word ' QUANTITY ' . ”" ]

[ "14", "8" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "On DATE ORG expropriated a plot of land belonging to the applicant . A committee of experts assessed the value of the plot and the relevant amount was paid to him when the expropriation took place .", "Following the applicant ’s request for increased compensation , on DATE ORG of First - instance awarded him additional compensation plus interest at the statutory rate .", "On DATE ORG quashed the judgment .", "On DATE ORG of First - instance awarded the applicant an additional compensation of GPE NORP liras ( GPE ) plus interest at the statutory rate applicable at the date of the court ’s decision running from DATE , the date on which the title deed to the land had been transferred to ORG .", "On DATE ORG upheld the judgment of the Firstinstance court .", "On DATE ORG rejected the parties’ request for rectification .", "On DATE ORG paid the amount of ORG to the applicant .", "After the application was communicated to the Government , the applicant was requested to submit his observations on the merits of the case and also her just satisfaction claims until DATE . However , he failed to submit them within the required time - limit . He did not request any extension of time , either .", "By registered letter of CARDINAL DATE the applicant was informed that ORG had not received his observations and just satisfaction claims and that the ORG might strike a case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant did not intend to pursue the application .", "On DATE the applicant submitted his observations containing his just satisfaction claims .", "The relevant domestic law and practice are set out in the Aka v. GPE judgment of DATE ( Reports of Judgments and Decisions CARDINAL-VI , pp . DATE , § § DATE ) ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "The applicant was arrested on DATE on suspicion of having committed armed robbery at the market place in GPE on CARDINAL DATE . On DATE he was heard as a suspect in the presence of an interpreter . On DATE a police officer issued a decision to institute an informed of the charges against him in the presence of an interpreter .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal , in LANGUAGE , against the decision to remand him in custody . It was translated into NORP and dismissed by ORG on DATE .", "On DATE the applicant asked for “ the opportunity to see a legal - aid lawyer ” . On DATE the public prosecutor informed him that there was no legal basis for granting legal aid to suspects of foreign citizenship . On DATE the applicant requested , in NORP , to be released . His request was dismissed on DATE .", "On an unspecified date during the investigation NORP , the victim of the offence , was questioned by the police . He submitted a detailed description of the applicant 's conduct during the material events .", "The applicant was questioned during the investigation . He denied all the charges against him . He explained that PERSON had given him money and requested him to buy alcohol . Later on , PERSON wanted his money back . The latter exchange was seen by witnesses who had wrongly interpreted it as proof that he had previously exerted pressure with use of violence on PERSON in order to get money from him .", "On DATE the prosecutor appointed an interpreter for the purposes of the final examination of the case file by the applicant . On DATE the applicant read the case file in the interpreter 's presence . On DATE the investigation was closed . On DATE a bill of indictment against the applicant was transmitted to ORG . The applicant was charged with armed robbery . On DATE the bill of indictment was remitted to the prosecuting authorities , the court having requested that it be translated into NORP . On DATE the bill of indictment together with its translation was again submitted to the court . On DATE the presiding judge ordered that the bill of indictment in NORP and NORP be served on the applicant .", "On DATE the presiding judge fixed the date of the first hearing in the case and appointed a legal - aid lawyer for the applicant . The first hearing was held on DATE in the presence of the applicant , his legal - aid lawyer and the interpreter . During that hearing the applicant stated as follows : “ I have learned NORP by reading books and watching TV . I have good linguistic abilities . I also speak some NORP and some NORP ” .", "In DATE , PERSON , the victim of the offence , who was also a NORP national , living at that time in GPE , declared in writing that “ he [ did ] not request that the prosecution be continued and [ did ] not intend to appear before the court in order to testify against the applicant ” .", "On DATE the court held a second hearing in the case , in the presence of the applicant , his legal - aid lawyer and the interpreter . The court read out the testimony given by PERSON during the investigation , heard oral evidence from CARDINAL other eyewitnesses to the incident , PERSON and PERSON , who had also informed the police of it , and from QUANTITY police officers who had arrested the applicant .", "By a judgment of CARDINAL DATE ORG in GPE found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced him to DATE imprisonment . The judgment was delivered in the presence of the applicant , his legal - aid lawyer and the interpreter .", "Following an appeal submitted by the applicant 's legal - aid lawyer , on DATE ORG held an appeal hearing in the presence of that lawyer . The court read out the written declaration of the victim , referred to above ( see paragraph CARDINAL ) and noted that the first - instance court had entirely failed to address it and to examine whether it could have been relevant for the finding of the applicant 's guilt . It further noted that the victim 's wife , who had seen the alleged robbery , had not been questioned . Moreover , her CARDINAL friends had also been present at the scene of the offence . The court further noted that another ground for appeal , namely that the applicant had been refused legal aid at the pre - trial stage of the proceedings , was ill - founded , as the applicant had not shown how it had influenced the outcome of the proceedings .", "The appellate court quashed the first - instance judgment and remitted the case for re - examination to ORG .", "By a decision of DATE ORG remitted the case to ORG . The prosecution was ordered to pursue an investigation in order to rectify the shortcomings of the investigation which had been conducted hitherto . In particular , the court ordered the prosecution to question the victim again , and to question the victim 's wife and her QUANTITY friends who were present tempore criminis at the market place . The court further ordered the prosecuting authorities to confront the victim and his wife with eyewitnesses PERSON and PERSON This decision was translated into NORP . On DATE the prosecuting authorities ' appeal against this decision was dismissed .", "Subsequently , on DATE and DATE the applicant 's detention was extended . On DATE the applicant was released on bail . All the relevant decisions were translated into LANGUAGE .", "On DATE the prosecutor appointed an interpreter in order to translate into LANGUAGE all evidence collected during the investigation conducted in DATE ( the witnesses ' testimonies and the decision to terminate the investigation ) . On DATE a new bill of indictment was submitted to ORG together with its NORP translation . The prosecuting authorities relied on the evidence given by the QUANTITY eyewitnesses , by QUANTITY police officers , and on the evidence given by PERSON during the first round of the investigation . They further noted that they had tried several times to contact PERSON and his wife with a view to questioning them , to no avail .", "On DATE ORG summoned the applicant , the victim and his wife to a hearing to be held before that court . All summons were sent through the intermediary of ORG , by way of international judicial assistance . At a hearing fixed for DATE the applicant was present together with his legal - aid lawyer and the interpreter . The victim and his wife failed to attend the hearing . The court did not obtain any confirmation as to whether they had been properly summoned by the NORP authorities . As both parties to the proceedings requested that the victim be heard before the court , it adjourned the hearing until DATE . The victim and his wife , though properly summoned , failed to attend that hearing . The court adjourned the hearing until DATE .", "On DATE , again faced with the absence of the victim and his wife , both parties to the proceedings requested that the victim and his wife be questioned by way of international judicial assistance by a court in Łuck in GPE . ORG allowed their request , adjourned the hearing and requested ORG for assistance in obtaining the testimony of the victim and his wife . In its request the court also emphasised that the applicant and his legal - aid lawyer should be informed by ORG date when the victim and his wife would be questioned before that court . It further indicated the addresses of the applicant and his defence counsel for the purpose of sending them summons for questioning . The applicant did not contest the list of questions put to PERSON and did not indicate that any further questions should be asked in order", "A list of questions to be put to the witnesses was appended to the request , which was subsequently translated into NORP and sent to the NORP authorities through ORG .", "On DATE the victim testified before ORG . The record of the hearing indicates that the NORP court had not summoned either the applicant or his legal - aid lawyer to that session . The victim upheld his initial statement , made during the investigation , that the applicant had robbed him ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) . He further stated that he had withdrawn his previous incriminating statements ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) at the applicant 's wife 's request . He further clarified by way of explanation that “ he did not want to ruin his relationship with the couple ” . ORG did not question other persons requested by ORG . The testimony of the victim was later forwarded to the NORP authorities and translated into NORP .", "On DATE ORG stayed the proceedings and requested the NORP authorities to proceed with the examination of the case . On DATE the NORP authorities refused to continue the prosecution . On DATE ORG resumed the proceedings .", "NORP The subsequent hearing was held on DATE in the presence of the applicant , his legal - aid lawyer and the interpreter . The parties again requested that the victim be examined at the hearing . The court adjourned the hearing and decided to summon once again the victim and his wife . The witnesses , duly summoned , failed to attend the subsequent hearings , held on DATE and DATE . PERSON attended the hearing on CARDINAL May and was questioned .", "On DATE , the parties did not object to the victim 's testimony being read out from the investigation file . The court closed the hearings , having regard to the fact that all attempts to obtain direct evidence from the victim and his wife before that court had failed .", "By a judgment of DATE ORG found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced him to DATE imprisonment and a fine .", "The court established that on DATE the applicant and the victim , who did not know each other , had been selling merchandise at the marketplace in GPE . The written grounds of the judgment , in so far as relevant , read as follows :", "After trading TIME had ended , when PERSON and the women who accompanied him were walking out of the market place , the accused came up and demanded that he give him PLZ CARDINAL,CARDINAL . PERSON refused saying that he did not have that amount of money ( PERSON testimony , pp . DATE , CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) . In reaction , the accused put a knife first to the victim 's neck and then to his stomach and told him that he would beat up him and his wife up . As the accused was under the influence of alcohol and behaved in a vulgar and aggressive manner , his threats made PERSON fear for his and his wife 's life . He gave PLZ CARDINAL,CARDINAL to him ( testimony of PERSON , page CARDINAL , of GPE , page CARDINAL , of GPE , page CARDINAL ) .", "Later on that evening PERSON and his wife went to the train station and saw the accused there .", "PERSON and a man named PERSON decided [ then ] to try to take the money from [ the accused ] . They approached him and started to talk to him . The discussion ended with [ the accused 's refusal ] and a scuffle ; [ the accused ] hit PERSON in the face . That incident was observed , from DATE , by PERSON and PERSON [ also present at the train station ] who decided to inform the police . After their intervention CARDINAL uniformed police officers arrived . Seeing them , the accused started to run away . He was apprehended after a while . He behaved aggressively and tried to get away . The police officers handcuffed him and took him to the police station ( testimony of PERSON , p. CARDINAL , CARDINAL - CARDINAL , CARDINAL ; PERSON p.CARDINAL , CARDINAL ; PERSON , p. CARDINAL , CARDINAL ; TIME , pp . DATE , CARDINAL ) .", "The accused denied that he had committed the offence [ ... ] He explained that [ on the material date ] after selling spare parts , he had been drinking alcohol at the market place with other traders ( p. CARDINAL , CARDINAL CARDINAL - CARDINAL , CARDINAL ) . He had met PERSON there and had had a quarrel with him ; however , he had stated that they had not been involved in a scuffle and denied that he had threatened him at knifepoint ; he had only insulted him ( pp . CARDINAL , QUANTITY , CARDINAL ) . He also stated that he had proposed that they had a drink to smooth things over ( ... ) PERSON had not wanted to go for a drink but had given him money of his own free will for the purchase of alcohol . Some time later , at the train station , PERSON along with another man had demanded his money back , saying that if he refused things would turn bad for the accused ( pp . CARDINAL , CARDINAL ) . This demand had so annoyed the accused that he had caught PERSON 's shirt and shaken him violently , but , as he stated , he had had no intention of getting into a fight . ( p. CARDINAL ) . ...", "The court refused to consider the explanations given by the accused as credible as they were incompatible with PERSON 's deposition made during the investigation . ... After the accused had been apprehended , PERSON had recognised him as the person who had attacked him and had identified some of the banknotes which he had had with him .", "It is true that on DATE PERSON made a written statement that all charges against the accused were erroneous and were caused by a succession of misunderstandings and that the accused had neither threatened the victim nor his wife , nor used a knife against LANGUAGE ( pp . CARDINAL ) . However , when questioned before ORG , that witness had convincingly explained the motives which had prompted him to make this declaration , saying that he had made it at the request of the accused 's wife and his colleagues as he had not wanted to jeopardise his relationship with the couple ( p. CARDINAL ) . On the same occasion he made a deposition which had fully confirmed his deposition made on DATE ( pp . CARDINAL , CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) . [ NORP ] admitted that the accused had threatened him and his wife and that he had been using some sort of instrument at that time , but did not remember whether it had indeed been a knife . He emphasised that he had given money to the applicant under threat .", "The court considers that PERSON 's statements were credible and is of the view that his declaration of DATE had been made as a result of pressure exerted on him by the family and friends of the accused . The testimony of that witness is clear , consistent and coherent . ( ... ) It should be emphasised that before the incident PERSON had never met the accused . He did not therefore have any grounds on which to make a false accusation against the accused because he had held a grudge against him .", "PERSON recognised the accused immediately after his apprehension by the police ; he also identified some banknotes which the accused had on him as the same which the accused had previously taken from him . He tried to describe the material events in an objective manner , without over - dramatising or distorting them . It is also of relevance for the assessment of his credibility that the police were informed of the incident by objective by - standers .", "The defence , in its final oral submissions to the court , disregarded these factors relating to PERSON 's credibility . The defence lawyer focused on the fact that PERSON had not been questioned by the trial court and on the procedural shortcoming committed by ORG in that it had failed to summon the applicant and his lawyer to the questioning before that court . Defence counsel stressed the level of education and post held by the accused which , in his view , indicated that he could not have committed the offence at issue .", "The court went on to explain the grounds why it did not consider that the applicant 's denial of having committed the offence was credible . It went on to say :", "The court considers that it is of paramount importance that testimony given by the victim has been confirmed by depositions made by the eyewitnesses to the incident , PERSON and PERSON was standing at the market place just CARDINAL – CARDINAL.CARDINAL metres away from the victim ( p. CARDINAL ) and he saw the incident clearly . He confirmed the fact that the accused had put a knife to the victim 's throat and demanded money from him , threatening him with murder and that he would rape his wife . PERSON saw the victim give PLZ CARDINAL,CARDINAL to the accused ( p. CARDINAL ) .", "When PERSON was questioned at the hearing held at the previous trial ( p. CARDINAL ) , he had stated categorically and unequivocally : “ I did not have the slightest doubt as to who the perpetrator was and now , looking at the accused , I do n't have any doubt that it was him who had committed the offence in the circumstances which I have described ” ( p. CARDINAL ) .", "When that witness [ PERSON ] was heard again , at the hearing of QUANTITY DATE , he did not , due to the lapse of time , remember the exact details of the incident ; however , he confirmed his earlier deposition .", "Witness PERSON also confirmed the version of events given by the victim . Questioned immediately after the incident , he had stated that the accused had threatened the victim at knifepoint and with murdering him and raping his wife , and had demanded PLZ CARDINAL,CARDINAL from him . PERSON had given him PLZ CARDINAL and PERSON took the money ( p. CARDINAL ) . When [ that witness ] was questioned at the hearing held on DATE , he had confirmed the veracity of his earlier deposition , even though he did not remember on that occasion whether it had been the accused who had subsequently been apprehended by the police at the train station ( pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) .", "When the trial in the present case was conducted again , attempts to serve the summons on that witness [ PERSON ] so that he could be questioned again failed .", "It should be stressed that it was as a result of the intervention of GPE and PERSON that the accused was apprehended by the police . Neither knew the accused or the victim before ; hence they could not have had any reasons for falsely accusing him .", "Neither the accused nor his lawyer made any concrete objections as to the veracity of the depositions made by these CARDINAL witnesses .", "The court concluded that the evidence in the case , seen as a whole , allowed the conclusion that the applicant was guilty as charged .", "On DATE the applicant 's legal - aid lawyer lodged an appeal against this judgment . He submitted that the court had based its finding of guilt on testimony given by the victim PERSON , despite the fact that he had never been heard by the NORP court and the Łuck court had failed to summon the applicant and his lawyer to the questioning . It had also failed to question PERSON 's wife . This rendered the conviction unsafe .", "A hearing before the appellate court was held on DATE in the presence of the applicant and his lawyer . The court upheld the firstinstance judgment . It stressed , inter alia , that ORG had expressly requested the NORP authorities to summon them to that hearing ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) . The first - instance court could not be held responsible for the NORP authorities ' failure to summon the applicant and his lawyer for the questioning of witnesses before ORG , as requested . Moreover , ORG had afterwards summoned both PERSON and his wife to the hearings to be held on DATE and DATE , to no avail . Furthermore , the applicant 's lawyer had acquiesced to the prosecutor 's request that the depositions of witnesses who had not been questioned during the trial be read out from the file .", "On DATE the applicant 's legal - aid lawyer lodged a cassation appeal with ORG . It was argued that the hearing before the appellate court was unfair in that the applicant had not been assisted by an interpreter . He further repeated the arguments submitted in his appeal against the first - instance judgment .", "The appeal itself , a subsequent order by which it was accepted for examination , and the prosecutor 's response , were translated into NORP .", "On DATE ORG held the cassation hearing in the presence of the applicant 's legal - aid lawyer . It quashed the judgment of DATE and remitted the case for re - examination to that court . It observed that the absence of an interpreter at the hearing held on DATE constituted a serious procedural shortcoming and limited the applicant 's procedural rights . It further noted that the remaining arguments submitted by the applicant were merely a re - statement of the grounds of appeal which had already been examined by the appellate court .", "On DATE ORG held a hearing in the case in the presence of the applicant , his legal - aid lawyer and an interpreter . On DATE the court delivered its judgment in the presence of an interpreter . It upheld the first - instance judgment . The court stated that the failure of ORG to comply with the terms of the international judicial assistance request could not , by itself , justify the discontinuation of the criminal proceedings against the applicant . Nor should it have prevented ORG from reading out PERSON 's deposition before that court . The applicant had been aware of the questions to be put to PERSON before ORG . He had not contested them and had not requested that they be supplemented by any other questions . Under LAW , the parties had a right to participate in the taking of evidence carried out by a judge or court other than the one examining the merits of a case , but their participation was by no means mandatory . The first - instance court had repeatedly taken steps with a view to examining both PERSON and his wife in the applicant 's presence , in conformity with the recommendations formulated by ORG on DATE . However , as all these efforts had failed , that court was justified in considering that it had been ultimately impossible to have this evidence taken before that court in adversarial proceedings .", "In so far as the applicant relied on lack of legal aid during the investigation held in DATE and DATE , ORG noted that it was only after DATE had entered into force that a grant of legal aid to a foreign citizen became possible . In any event , after the entry into force of that Code the case - law of ORG had already affirmed that lack of legal aid at the pre - trial stage of proceedings could serve as a basis for quashing a judgment only when it had not been subsequently rectified by a grant of legal aid at the judicial stage of the proceedings .", "On DATE the applicant 's defence counsel lodged a cassation appeal against this judgment , essentially reiterating his previous arguments .", "On DATE ORG held a hearing in the presence of the applicant 's legal - aid lawyer . It pronounced its decision to dismiss the cassation appeal as manifestly ill - founded at an open court session . Subsequently , the judge rapporteur orally presented the main reasons justifying that decision .", "Until DATE LAW of DATE ( “ the DATE Code ” ) governed the conduct of criminal proceedings . It was replaced by a code adopted in DATE ( “ the DATE Code ” ) .", "Under LAW to LAW , that Code was applicable to proceedings which had been instituted before its entry into force .", "LAW DATE Code provided :", "“ Judges shall rule on the basis of their conviction deriving from evidence obtained and founded on their free assessment of evidence [ and they shall ] draw on knowledge and life experience . ”", "Article CARDINAL provided , in its relevant part :", "“ CARDINAL . If a witness has without reason refused to testify , or has given testimony different from DATE , or has stated that he does not remember certain details , or if he is abroad , or a summons can not be served on him , or if he has not appeared on the ground of irremovable obstacles or if the president of the court has declined to summon him pursuant to LAW [ because upon the lodging of the bill of indictment the prosecution has asked that the records of his testimony be read out at trial ] , the records of his previous statements may be read out , [ regardless of whether they ] have been made in the investigation or before the court in the case in question or in another case or in any other procedure provided for by the law .", "NORP In the circumstances referred to in paragraph CARDINAL , the records of evidence that a witness has given when heard as an accused may also be read out . ”", "Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL of the DATE Code reads as follows :", "“ If there is a risk that the witness can not be heard at the hearing , a party or the prosecutor or other body conducting proceedings may submit a request to have the witness heard by a court . ”", "Article CARDINAL of the Code reads :", "“ § CARDINAL . If the accused refuses to give his explanations to the court or if his explanations are manifestly different from his or her previous ones , or if he declares that he or she does not remember certain circumstances , TIME of the explanations given previously during the investigation or at the trial stage in the same or another criminal case can be read out [ by the court ] in their relevant parts .", "§ CARDINAL . After TIME have been read out , the president shall request the accused to take a position in respect of their content and the contradictions between them and his or her later explanations . ”", "Article CARDINAL of the DATE Code provides as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . If a witness has without good reason refused to testify , or has given testimony different from DATE , or has stated that he does not remember certain details , or if he is abroad , or a summons can not be served on him , or if he has not appeared as a result of obstacles that could not be removed or if the president of the court has declined to summon him pursuant to LAW [ because upon the lodging of the bill of indictment the prosecution has asked that the records of his testimony be read out at trial ] , and also when a witness has died , the records of his previous statements may be read out , [ regardless of whether they ] have been made in the investigation or before the court in the case in question or in another case or in any other procedure provided for by the law .", "NORP In the circumstances referred to in paragraph CARDINAL [ ... ] the records of evidence that a witness has given when heard as an accused may also be read out . ”", "Article CARDINAL of the LAW provides that the following documents can be read out at a trial : TIME of an on - the - spot examination and post - mortem , search and retaining of objects for evidentiary purposes ; opinions given by experts and institutions , criminal records and all official documents submitted to the file during the investigation and trial . Notes concerning measures in respect of which official TIME should have been prepared can not be so read out . A request that a criminal offence has been committed can be read out ; however , it can serve only as proof of who submitted this request , when and in respect of what offence .", "Article CARDINAL of the Code governs the provision of international judicial assistance . It provides , in so far as relevant :", "“ The measures necessary in criminal proceedings may be conducted by way of judicial assistance , particularly the following :", "CARDINAL ) service of documents on persons abroad or on agencies having their headquarters abroad ,", "CARDINAL ) taking depositions from persons as accused , witnesses , or experts ... ”", "According to LAW", "“ The official records of inspections , examinations of persons as accused persons , witnesses or experts , or records of other evidentiary measures prepared upon a request from a NORP court or ORG prosecutor , by the courts or ORG prosecutors of foreign countries or by agencies acting under their supervision , may be read aloud at the hearing according to the principles prescribed in ORG CARDINAL , CARDINAL and CARDINAL . This may be done provided that the manner of carrying these measures does not conflict with the principles of the legal order of GPE . ”", "NORP Under LAW Code a party to criminal proceedings can lodge a cassation appeal with ORG against a final judgment of the appellate court which has terminated the proceedings . The cassation appeal has to be drafted and signed by a lawyer .", "A cassation appeal can be lodged only on the grounds referred to in LAW . These grounds include certain procedural shortcomings which justify the quashing of a first - instance decision , regardless of whether they are invoked by the party challenging such a decision ( for example , wrong composition of the court , lack of legal assistance in cases where such assistance was compulsory , violation of the rules governing jurisdiction of criminal courts , certain breaches of defence rights ) . A cassation appeal can also be lodged on the ground of a flagrant breach of law if such a breach negatively affected the judicial decision under appeal .", "Article CARDINAL of the LAW provides that the court which gave the decision appealed against is competent to decide whether the formal requirements for a cassation appeal are satisfied , and to refuse to accept the appeal if this is not the case . If the appeal is admissible , it is forwarded to ORG .", "Pursuant to LAW , as amended on DATE to take effect from DATE , the ORG shall consider a cassation appeal against a judgment at a hearing . However , it is open to ORG to dismiss such an appeal at a session held in camera if it considers that it is manifestly ill - founded ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1", "6-3" ]

[ "6-3-d" ]

[ "The applicant is a NORP citizen , born in DATE and resident in Čadca .", "In DATE the applicant ’s legal capacity was restricted . In DATE ORG súd - “ the ORG ” ) deprived the applicant of legal capacity entirely on the ground that he suffered from an explosive and vexatious form of paranoid psychosis . ORG noted that the applicant had been undergoing out - patient psychiatric treatment for DATE and that his personality had been deteriorating due to an increased syndrome of dementia .", "On DATE the ORG started , at the applicant ’s request of CARDINAL DATE , proceedings pursuant to LAW ( CARDINAL ) of LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) with a view to determining whether the applicant ’s legal capacity could be restored . The applicant refused to be examined by several experts and on DATE ORG decided that legal capacity could not be restored to him .", "On DATE ORG ( Najvyšší súd ) quashed the judgment on the ground that ORG had not obtained an expert opinion as required by the law . ORG pointed out that ORG had failed to avail itself of its rights under LAW and that it had disregarded , inter alia , Sections CARDINAL , CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) and CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) of LAW in conjunction with LAW ( CARDINAL ) of LAW . It ordered ORG to examine the case again on the basis of a relevant expert opinion . ORG appointed an expert on DATE .", "As the applicant refused to be examined as an out - patient , the expert informed ORG that an objective assessment of the applicant ’s health required an in - patient examination .", "On DATE ORG ordered that the applicant should be examined in a mental hospital pursuant to LAW ) of LAW and appointed a new expert . The latter was asked to submit an opinion as to whether the applicant ’s health had changed to such an extent that legal capacity could be restored to him .", "On DATE ORG invited the applicant to come to the mental hospital in GPE on DATE . The applicant was warned that he could be brought there pursuant to LAW ) of LAW if he failed to comply . The applicant did not come to the hospital .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal against ORG decision of DATE .", "On DATE the Banská Bystrica Regional Court ( Krajský súd - “ the ORG ” ) informed ORG that the aforesaid decision was premature as it was first necessary to appoint a guardian to represent the applicant .", "On DATE ORG appointed ORG ( ORG úrad ) as the applicant ’s guardian . The applicant ’s appeal against this decision was dismissed by ORG on DATE on the ground that he lacked capacity to lodge it .", "On DATE ORG joined the applicant in the proceedings concerning the latter ’s legal capacity .", "On DATE a representative of the authority appointed as the applicant ’s guardian and the public prosecutor informed ORG that they agreed with the applicant ’s examination in a hospital .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the applicant ’s appeal against ORG decision of DATE as the applicant lacked standing to lodge it . ORG held that an examination in a hospital was necessary within the meaning of LAW ( CARDINAL ) of LAW as the applicant had refused to be examined by an expert .", "On DATE ORG informed ORG that it agreed to legal capacity being restored to the applicant .", "On DATE ORG invited the applicant to come to the mental hospital in GPE on DATE . The applicant was informed that he could be brought to the hospital if he failed to appear . The applicant did not comply with the court ’s request .", "On DATE CARDINAL policemen brought the applicant to the hospital in GPE under an order by the president of ORG . After a short period the applicant started co - operating with the expert . The examination was completed and the applicant was released from the hospital on DATE .", "NORP In his opinion submitted on DATE the expert noted that the applicant , who had undergone a brain operation in DATE and had had several heart attacks , suffered from a vexatious form of paranoid psychosis , from an organic psychosyndrome and from a heart disease . The expert concluded that legal capacity could partially be restored to the applicant and recommended a re - examination after DATE .", "On DATE ORG , following the expert ’s opinion , restricted the applicant ’s legal capacity in that he was not entitled to act before public authorities on his own , to conclude contracts , to assume obligations in writing and to work regularly .", "In his appeal of CARDINAL DATE the applicant requested that legal capacity should be restored to him entirely . He supplemented his appeal on DATE , DATE , CARDINAL and DATE as well as on DATE and DATE . He also requested that his case should be dealt with by another court .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the applicant ’s request to have his case transferred to another court . ORG returned the file to ORG and ordered it to establish whether the applicant challenged ORG judges .", "On DATE ORG transmitted ORG enquiry to ORG which communicated it to ORG . On DATE the latter informed ORG that it was not in a position to provide an answer . On DATE ORG asked ORG for a reply . On DATE ORG addressed the request directly to ORG .", "On DATE ORG sent the file to ORG with the explanation that it had not been possible to obtain the requested information . ORG expressed the view that the applicant had challenged all its judges .", "On DATE ORG decided that ORG judges were not excluded .", "On CARDINAL DATE ORG requested ORG to submit the case - file to it .", "On DATE ORG quashed the first instance judgment of DATE on the ground that ORG had failed to comply with the obligation to hear the expert as required by LAW ( CARDINAL ) of LAW . In view of the time which had elapsed after the delivery of the first instance judgment , ORG considered it necessary to update the expert opinion .", "On DATE ORG decided to obtain a second expert opinion on the applicant ’s mental health and adjourned the proceedings .", "On DATE ORG requested ORG to indicate a medical authority which could prepare a second expert opinion . On DATE the Ministry suggested that the applicant be examined at the psychiatric clinic of ORG in GPE .", "On DATE the head of ORG asked ORG to discharge ORG of the applicant ’s guardianship . On DATE ORG proposed that Mr J. Jašurek , a lawyer practising in Čadca , be appointed guardian instead . In a letter dated DATE the lawyer accepted the proposal .", "On DATE ORG requested ORG , in the context of different proceedings , to submit the file concerning the guardianship of the applicant to it . ORG reiterated its request on DATE .", "On DATE ORG ordered that the applicant be examined at the psychiatric clinic of ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG appointed PERSON as the applicant ’s guardian .", "On DATE the applicant informed the head of the psychiatric clinic of ORG in GPE that he disagreed with an examination .", "On DATE ORG stayed the proceedings until the applicant ’s health permitted his examination in GPE .", "In a report of CARDINAL DATE the doctor treating the applicant stated that the applicant was immobile and that he was not able to undergo an examination of his mental health in GPE .", "On DATE ORG discharged PERSON , at his own request , of his duties as the applicant ’s guardian . It appointed ORG ( ORG úrad ) as the guardian .", "Section CARDINAL of the Civil Code , so far as relevant , reads as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . An individual who , because of a lasting mental disorder , is entirely incapable of carrying out legal acts shall be deprived of legal capacity by a court .", "A court shall restrict the legal capacity of an individual who , because of a lasting mental disorder ... , is not capable of carrying out certain legal acts . The extent of the restriction shall be specified in the court ’s decision .", "A court shall modify or quash the decision on deprivation or restriction of legal capacity when the reasons on which it was based no longer exist . ”", "The relevant provisions are as follows :", "“ A court shall proceed with a case in co - operation with the parties so that a speedy and effective protection of rights be ensured and that the facts in dispute be reliably established . ”", "“ CARDINAL . When a person summoned to an examination or before an expert fails to appear without an excuse , the president of the court ’s chamber can order to bring him or her there subject to prior notice . ”", "Section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) provides that in cases concerning , inter alia , a person ’s legal capacity courts may start proceedings ex officio even if no formal action was brought .", "Under LAW ( CARDINAL ) a court shall , inter alia , appoint an expert after having heard the parties when the decision depends on an assessment of facts requiring special knowledge .", "Pursuant to LAW ( CARDINAL ) , in proceedings concerning a person ’s legal capacity , a guardian is to be appointed to the person concerned by the president of the court ’s chamber . In such proceedings a court shall always hear an expert . Upon the latter ’s proposal a court can order an examination of the person concerned in a hospital for no longer than DATE if it is considered necessary for the determination of his or her state of health ( LAW ( CARDINAL ) ) .", "When a court examines the question whether legal capacity can be restored to a person , it is not bound by the parties’ submissions . It may quash the original decision on deprivation or restriction of legal capacity . The court may also restrict a person ’s legal capacity to such an extent as it deems it necessary even if it was not requested in the action or , as the case may be , in the initiative upon which it started the proceedings ( Collection of judicial decisions and opinions , No . R CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) .", "Courts should apply measures provided for , inter alia , in LAW rather than discontinue the proceedings when a participant remains inactive ( Collection of judicial decisions and opinions , No . R CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) ." ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[ "8" ]

[]

[]

[ "PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and Mr PERSON are NORP nationals who were born in DATE , DATE , DATE , DATE , DATE , DATE , DATE , DATE , DATE and DATE respectively . They live in the départements of Meurthe - et - GPE ( PERSON ) , GPE ( Mr PERSON ) , Bas - Rhin ( Ms Mary ) and ORG ( all the other applicants ) and work for social - security bodies in GPE - Moselle .", "On DATE the representatives of the social - security offices of the GPE region signed an agreement with the regional representatives of the trade unions . Under the agreement , a “ special difficulties allowance ” ( indemnité de difficultés particulières – “ ORG ” ) was introduced for the staff of social - security bodies on the ground that applying the local law of the départements of ORG , ORG and GPE was a particularly complicated task . The agreement specified that the allowance was equal to CARDINAL times the value of CARDINAL salary “ point ” as laid down in the national agreement covering social - security staff .", "The Minister of Employment and ORG approved the agreement in a letter of DATE . The agreement was accordingly implemented as expected .", "Following CARDINAL amendments of DATE and CARDINAL DATE concerning the method of calculating salaries and the classification of jobs , changes which affected the value of the point , the boards of the socialsecurity bodies reduced the ORG , which was set at the equivalent of CARDINAL points in DATE and CARDINAL points in DATE , instead of CARDINAL points as provided in the DATE agreement . Further , the ORG was not taken into account for the purpose of calculating the DATE bonus ( treizième mois ) payable under the national collective agreement .", "In DATE , however , several social - security bodies decided to incorporate the ORG into their basis for calculating DATE allowances , with CARDINAL years’ retrospective effect . ORG , the supervising authority for these public bodies , quashed the decisions authorising the transfer of the funds needed to make these payments to staff .", "Applications were made to CARDINAL industrial tribunals by CARDINAL staff members of the social - security offices concerned , seeking to have the DATE agreement implemented strictly and to be paid the corresponding salaries backdated to CARDINAL DATE ( claims in respect of pay being statutebarred after DATE ) .", "In judgments of CARDINAL DATE and DATE ( Sarrebourg industrial tribunal , miscellaneous activities division ) , DATE ( Sarrebourg industrial tribunal , executive staff division ) and DATE and DATE ( PERSON industrial tribunal , executive staff division ) the officials’ claim for back payment of the ORG on the basis of CARDINAL times the value of the point was dismissed .", "In judgments of DATE and CARDINAL DATE ( PERSON industrial tribunal , miscellaneous activities division ) and DATE ( NORP industrial tribunal , executive staff division ) ORG ( ORG primaire d’assurance maladie – “ NORP ” ) was ordered to pay the officials the amounts sought in back payment of the ORG as calculated on the basis of CARDINAL points .", "In CARDINAL judgments of CARDINAL DATE concerning CARDINAL officials , ORG gave judgment in their favour . The representatives of the State – the prefect of the region and , on the latter ’s authority , ORG appealed on points of law .", "On DATE the Minister of ORG withdrew the ministerial approval given on DATE . On DATE the Minister of ORG revoked that withdrawal of approval .", "In CARDINAL judgments of DATE ORG quashed in part the CARDINAL judgments given by ORG on CARDINAL DATE in the actions brought by the CARDINAL officials . The court considered that the change of classification in DATE had resulted in the disappearance of the reference index in the DATE agreement . It consequently remitted the cases to the court below to determine whether a practice had been established or , if none had been , to determine the value that the reference index would have reached had it been retained .", "ORG directed that the case should be reheard by ORG .", "ORG , with which appeals concerning the ORG had also been lodged , delivered judgments on DATE in which it held , having regard to the terms of ORG judgments of DATE , that the reference index had disappeared and that a practice had been established of paying the ORG at CARDINAL times the value of the point since the amendment of DATE .", "In a judgment of CARDINAL DATE ORG , after rehearing the case pursuant to ORG decision , held that the agreement of CARDINAL DATE was lawful , that it had not lapsed and that no other practice had been established . It consequently ordered that the ORG should be calculated on the basis of PERCENT of the minimum wage , which percentage corresponded to the amount of the ORG as calculated on the basis of CARDINAL points at DATE . ORG said , in particular :", "“ As the DATE agreement has not been denounced and the ORG must continue to be paid , the only issue to be resolved , after the partial quashing of the judgments delivered by ORG , is the new method of calculating the allowance in DATE , which may be based either on a practice or , failing that , on the determination of the value which the reference index would have reached on each due date of the allowance if that index had been retained .", "… The unilateral change made in DATE to the method of calculating the ORG can not have given rise to a practice which , moreover , would itself have been unilaterally changed in DATE in breach of the relevant rules . …", "If the reference index disappears , it is necessary to create a linking index in accordance with the contracting parties’ intention .", "The method adopted by the social - security offices in DATE and DATE , whereby the amount of the ORG was regarded as being fixed and was divided by the new value of the point to obtain the number of points necessary for calculating the ORG , disregards the general growth of salaries and has resulted in a progressive erosion of the ORG , as is shown by studies of the progression of the ORG compared with basic pay which the plaintiffs adduced in evidence .", "In order for the common intention of the parties to be carried out , the allowance must be the same for officials in the CARDINAL départements , irrespective of their category , and the benefits acquired by employees must be retained .", "A comparison of the ORG with the minimum wage is revealing . … In DATE , for instance , the ORG as calculated on the basis of CARDINAL points , the point having a value of ORG , amounted to FRF CARDINAL.CARDINAL , whereas if it had been calculated on the basis of PERCENT of the statutory minimum wage ( SMPG ) , which was then set at ORG CARDINAL , the ORG would have been FRF CARDINAL.CARDINAL .", "… ”", "The Court of Appeal accordingly ordered a fresh hearing to enable the plaintiffs to calculate the amounts of back pay to which they were individually entitled .", "During the passage through ORG of a bill on public health and social welfare , which began on DATE , the government took the initiative of tabling an amendment . The debates on that amendment , which became CARDINAL of the eventual Act , took place mainly on DATE in ORG and DATE in the ORG . Clause CARDINAL of the bill was adopted .", "Section CARDINAL of the Act provided that , subject to any court judgment to the contrary that had become final on the merits , the amount of the ORG introduced by the agreement of CARDINAL DATE for staff of the socialsecurity bodies administering the general social - security scheme and their dependent institutions in the départements of ORG , ORG and GPE would , with effect from DATE , be set at CARDINAL times the value of the point as determined under the pay agreements and paid CARDINAL times a year , notwithstanding any provisions to the contrary in collective or individual agreements that were in force on the date of commencement of CARDINAL .", "An application was made to ORG by a number of members of parliament who considered , in particular , that section CARDINAL of the Act contravened the principle of the separation of powers in that it represented an interference by the legislature with pending court proceedings and that , further , the section in issue , which related to employment law , was unconnected with the purpose of the Act .", "In a decision of CARDINAL DATE ORG held that the legislative provisions complained of were not unconstitutional , on the following grounds :", "“ In setting the amount of the ‘ special difficulties’ allowance at CARDINAL times the value of the point as determined by applying pay agreements of CARDINAL DATE , with retrospective effect from DATE , the legislature intended to stop further conflicting decisions being given by the courts and thereby prevent fresh disputes arising whose outcome might adversely affect the financial stability of the social - security schemes in issue .", "The legislature expressly preserved the position of persons who had obtained a court decision that had become final on the merits . There is nothing in the LAW to warrant the inference that the legislature departed from the principle that criminal provisions must not have retrospective effect . The legislature was entitled , subject to compliance with the aforementioned principles , to make use , as it alone could do in the circumstances , of its power to make retrospective provisions in order to resolve , in the general interest , situations that had arisen from the conflicting court decisions mentioned above . That being so , the impugned provisions are not contrary to any rule , nor do they offend any constitutional principle . … ”", "Section CARDINAL of the LAW no . CARDINAL ) was consequently held to be constitutional . The LAW was promulgated on DATE .", "On DATE ORG , ruling on the appeal brought by the Sarreguemines CPAM , the prefect of the PERSON region and ORG against ORG judgment of CARDINAL DATE , quashed that judgment in part , without ordering a rehearing by another court of appeal , in the following terms :", "“ ... However , LAW of the LAW of DATE sets the amount of the ORG , for each payment period , at CARDINAL times the value of the point resulting from the application of the pay agreements concluded in accordance with the national collective agreement of CARDINAL DATE covering the staff of social - security bodies . In that the judgment under appeal adopts a different method of calculation from the CARDINAL laid down in the aforementioned provision , it must be quashed .", "In accordance with LAW , second paragraph , of LAW , the case should be disposed of by applying the appropriate rule of law .", "For these reasons … :", "Quashes the judgment delivered on DATE by ORG but only in so far as that court held that the ORG should be calculated on the basis of PERCENT of the statutory minimum wage ;", "Holds that it is unnecessary to order a rehearing of the case ;", "Holds that the amount of the ORG must be set , for each payment period , at CARDINAL times the value of the point as determined by applying the pay agreements concluded in accordance with the national collective employment agreement of CARDINAL DATE covering the staff of social - security bodies ;", "… ”", "In a judgment of CARDINAL DATE ORG likewise dismissed , in similar terms , the appeals on points of law brought against ORG judgments of DATE .", "On DATE and DATE PERSON and CARDINAL other officials , represented by an officer from ORG ( Confédération française démocratique du travail – “ ORG ” ) likewise applied to the industrial tribunal seeking payment of arrears of the ORG ( assessed at ORG for the applicant ) and an order that this allowance should in future be calculated on the basis of CARDINAL points as provided in the DATE agreement .", "Before the Metz industrial tribunal the prefect of the region and ORG challenged the officials’ arguments and sought to have the proceedings stayed pending ORG ruling on the appeals in the identical cases that had given rise to ORG CARDINAL judgments of CARDINAL DATE .", "On DATE and CARDINAL DATE the second applicant and CARDINAL other officials , represented by the ORG officer , lodged identical claims with the GPE industrial tribunal .", "In judgments of CARDINAL DATE ( PERSON ) and DATE ( Mr Pradal ) the GPE industrial tribunal awarded the plaintiffs back payment of the allowance and found that the ORG should be calculated on the basis of CARDINAL DATE points , in accordance with the DATE agreement . It held , inter alia :", "“ The agreement lays down that this allowance is equal to CARDINAL times the value of the point , set by the national agreement covering the staff of social - security bodies .", "In the wake of changes made to the latter agreement in amendments of DATE and CARDINAL DATE concerning the method of calculating salaries and the classification of jobs and the effects of those changes on the value of the point , the boards of the bodies that signed the DATE agreement decided to keep the ORG at a constant value by means of adjustments .", "It is established that those adjustments had the effect of reducing the ORG to the equivalent of CARDINAL and then CARDINAL points .", "The terms of the DATE agreement are precise and the basis of CARDINAL points could not be changed unilaterally .", "The social - security bodies should have denounced the agreement if they considered that the adjustments made in DATE and DATE resulted in an excessive burden .", "Such a change must be disregarded unless the parties agreed it in advance , and the silence of the other signatories to the agreement can not be regarded as signifying their approval ( Article L. CARDINAL - CARDINAL of LAW ) ... ” ( wording of the judgment of DATE )", "Acting on the authority of the prefect of the region , ORG appealed against those judgments .", "In judgments of DATE ( Mr Pradal ) and DATE ( PERSON ) DATE ORG upheld the industrial tribunal ’s judgments , holding that the allowance had been changed unilaterally in breach of LAW of DATE , on the following grounds in particular :", "“ In the final analysis , the calculation of this allowance must be based on the value of the point as determined under the amendments of DATE and CARDINAL DATE and those in force on each occasion when the allowance becomes payable .", "By DATE LAW , lawfully concluded agreements are legally binding on those who have made them . They can only be revoked by common consent or on grounds permitted by law . Similarly , by LAW , collective employment agreements are binding on all those who have signed them .", "…", "There is no escaping the fact that the agreement of DATE has not been denounced by any of the parties . It must consequently continue to be implemented and the CARDINAL reductions in the multiplier were imposed in breach of both LAW and the provisions governing collective employment agreements .", "The allowance must consequently be paid on the basis of CARDINAL points , as provided in the aforesaid agreement .", "… ”", "On DATE ORG gave judgment as follows on the appeal brought by the prefect and ORG against ORG judgments of CARDINAL and DATE ( in respect of PERSON and PERSON ) and also against CARDINAL other judgments , of DATE and DATE , CARDINAL officials being concerned in all .", "“ As to the application of LAW of the LAW of DATE ( Law no . CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) on public health and social welfare :", "…", "Section CARDINAL of the Act of DATE ( Law no . CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) , however , which is applicable to pending proceedings , including those pending before ORG , is intended , in the absence of agreement between the parties , to remedy the disappearance of a reference index and thus enable the amount of an allowance to be calculated . This legislative provision , on whose application the parties were able to present argument , does not amount to an intervention by the ORG in proceedings between it and private individuals . It does not call in question final court decisions and has been declared to be constitutional by ORG . It follows that the provision is not contrary to LAW .", "As to the ground , raised of the ORG ’s own motion , notice having been given to the parties :", "Having regard to LAW of the LAW of DATE ( Law no . CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) on public health and social welfare ,", "In reaching its decision that the amount of the so - called special difficulties allowance must be calculated on the basis of CARDINAL points as provided in the agreement of CARDINAL DATE and that the value of the point must be that adopted for the calculation of pay in the collective agreements in force , ORG held that there was no contractual provision which made the retention of the chosen index conditional upon retention of the classification in force at the time of the agreement and that to decide the contrary would be to add to the terms of the agreement , which were perfectly clear and precise , and to alter its nature . It added that the agreement in dispute did not exclude taking into account changes in the value of the point that resulted from the grading reorganisation and that accordingly the value of the point as determined under the amendments of DATE and CARDINAL DATE had to be adopted for calculating the ORG . It noted , further , that the new methods of calculating the ORG that had been adopted following the classification changes in DATE and DATE had not been agreed on by all the signatories to the agreement of CARDINAL DATE and that as the agreed index remained applicable , it was unnecessary to determine whether an alternative practice existed . Lastly , it noted that the agreement of CARDINAL DATE was a collective agreement which could be called in question only if it were revised or denounced , which it had not been .", "Section CARDINAL of the Act of DATE ( Law no . CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) , however , lays down the amount of the so - called special difficulties allowance , for each payment period , at CARDINAL times the value of the point as determined by applying the pay agreements concluded in accordance with the national collective agreement of CARDINAL DATE covering the staff of social - security bodies . In so far as they adopt a method of calculating the amount of this allowance that differs from the CARDINAL laid down in the aforementioned enactment , the judgments under appeal must be quashed .", "In accordance with LAW , second paragraph , of LAW , the case should be disposed of by applying the appropriate rule of law .", "For these reasons :", "Quashes the judgments delivered in these cases on DATE and DATE by ORG but only in so far as that court held that the amount of the so - called special difficulties allowance must be calculated on the basis of CARDINAL points , the value of the point being that adopted for the calculation of pay in the collective agreements currently in force ;", "Holds that it is unnecessary to order a rehearing of the cases ;", "Holds that the amount of the ORG must be set , for each payment period , at CARDINAL times the value of the point as determined by applying the pay agreements concluded in accordance with the national collective employment agreement of CARDINAL DATE covering the staff of social - security bodies ;", "... ”", "On DATE ( PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON ) and DATE ( PERSON ) the applicants applied to the industrial tribunal on the basis of the DATE agreement seeking payment of arrears of the ORG and calculation of that allowance on the basis of CARDINAL points in future . No compromise having been reached at the conciliation hearing on DATE , the case was referred to the adjudication panel on CARDINAL DATE .", "In CARDINAL judgments of DATE the FAC industrial tribunal allowed the applications on the following grounds :", "“ ... The agreement signed on DATE ... introducing the special difficulties allowance ( ORG ) of CARDINAL points is still in force and has acquired the force of law .", "On DATE the ORG gave its approval to the agreement .", "Following changes to the classification of the staff of social - security bodies in DATE and DATE , this allowance was reduced by decision of ORG .", "This department , an advisory body which was not a signatory to the DATE agreement , took that unilateral decision and had it approved by the social - security regional head office and the boards of the local offices .", "Those changes are consequently not binding [ on the plaintiffs ] , especially as in the letter of CARDINAL DATE ORG stated that the agreement must be fully implemented .", "Apart from the changes in the value of the point that were made unilaterally , no subsequent changes were made to the DATE agreement by the signatory parties .", "Clause CARDINAL of the national collective agreement – schedule DATE provides : ‘ This agreement can not in any circumstances constitute a ground for reducing benefits acquired by staff at the date of signature.’", "The DATE agreement consequently remains applicable in its entirety .", "... ”", "The GPE and the prefect of the GPE region , who was represented by ORG , appealed against those judgments on DATE .", "On DATE ORG set the case down for hearing on DATE . On DATE , after the appellants had filed submissions in which they relied on the Act of DATE , the applicants lodged their pleadings in reply .", "In CARDINAL decisions of CARDINAL DATE ORG gave judgment against the applicants on the ground that :", "“ ... pursuant to [ section CARDINAL of the Act of DATE ( Law no . CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) ] , the judgment appealed against must be set aside , as the claim covers a period after DATE . ... ”", "On CARDINAL and DATE the applicants appealed on points of law to ORG . They filed their full pleadings on CARDINAL DATE and a supplementary pleading on DATE . Pleadings in reply were filed on DATE . The reporting judge , who was appointed on DATE , submitted his report on DATE .", "In a judgment of DATE , after a hearing on DATE , ORG declared the applicants’ appeals inadmissible as follows :", "“ ... in matters in respect of which the parties are not required to be represented by a member of the PERSON d’Etat and ORG the appeal on points of law and subsequent procedural steps must be made , taken , handed over or sent by the party himself or by any representative with special authority to act .", "The notices of appeal submitted by the parties do not contain even a summary statement of the grounds of appeal , and the pleadings that do contain such a statement , which were dispatched within the DATE period laid down in LAW , were all drawn up by a representative who produced no special authority to act .", "The appeals are accordingly inadmissible . ... ”", "The national , regional and local health - insurance offices have a public - service mission ( ORG decision no . PERCENT of DATE ) , and this explains both why they are vested with special governmental powers and why they come under the supervision of the minister responsible for social security . They manage the compulsory social - security scheme , with a budget of their own distinct from that of the ORG .", "The minister in charge of social security is responsible for overseeing them , a task in which he is assisted by departments of his ministry , namely a central department and regional departments of health and social affairs , together with a national inspectorate of social affairs . The minister is also represented by the prefects of the départements or regions in their capacity as persons exercising ORG authority and as delegates of the government , the direct representatives of the Prime Minister and each of the other ministers .", "The power of supervision is exercised firstly over persons , it being possible , on certain grounds , to dissolve or suspend the entire board of a social - security office , dismiss or require the resignation of certain members of such a board , and give or withhold consent to the appointment of managerial staff , as well as draw up lists of suitable candidates . The power of supervision also extends to decisions , the regional ministerial departments having the power to quash or suspend , on certain grounds , decisions of boards or directors of local social - security bodies and also to oppose decisions of national bodies . Certain special decisions of socialsecurity offices are also subject to an approval procedure , namely constitutional and procedural rules and collective agreements laying down staff regulations and the rules governing retirement .", "Lastly , social - security bodies are under the supervision of the Minister for ORG and ORG , being subject to monitoring by regional ORG officials and ORG and also to audits by the national ORG .", "The relevant section of the LAW reads as follows :", "“ Subject to any court decisions to the contrary that have become final on the merits , the amount of the so - called special difficulties allowance introduced by the agreement of CARDINAL DATE for staff of the social - security bodies administering the general social - security scheme and their dependent institutions in the départements of ORG , ORG and GPE shall , with effect from DATE and for each payment period , be set at CARDINAL times the value of the point as determined by applying the pay agreements concluded in accordance with the national collective employment agreement of CARDINAL DATE covering the staff of social - security bodies , notwithstanding any provisions to the contrary in collective or individual agreements in force on the date of publication of this Act . It shall be paid CARDINAL times a year . With effect from the same period , the DATE bonus shall be increased so as to reflect the amount of the so - called special difficulties allowance awarded in respect of DATE . ”" ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicants were born in DATE respectively , and live in the city of GPE .", "The facts of the case , particularly concerning the events which occurred DATE , are disputed by the parties .", "The facts as presented by the applicants are set out in Section B below ( paragraphs CARDINAL ) . The Government ’s submissions concerning the facts are summarised in Section C below ( paragraphs CARDINAL ) . The documentary evidence submitted by the parties is summarised in Section D ( paragraphs CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) .", "Mr PERSON is the first applicant ’s elder brother and is the husband of the third applicant , PERSON . Mr PERSON is the second applicant ’s cousin and is the husband of the fourth applicant , PERSON .", "On DATE PERSON and PERSON left their homes in GPE for GPE , a town within the administrative jurisdiction of the city of PERSON . Nothing was heard from them until DATE when PERSON , a relative , received an anonymous telephone call . The caller told PERSON that PERSON and PERSON had been killed in an operation conducted by village guards and soldiers in the NORP area ( PERSON ) near the Geçitli hamlet , within the boundaries of GPE . The person then hung up . After the call , the relatives of PERSON and PERSON went to the local branches of ORG in GPE and PERSON to ask for assistance .", "A group of CARDINAL relatives went to the ORG ’s office in GPE . The Prosecutor confirmed what had been said by the anonymous caller . The Prosecutor further stated that the place where the incident had taken place was in a dangerous area and that he could not therefore hand the bodies over to them . He told the relatives to talk to the commander of ORG . The identity cards of the members of the group who subsequently went to the Regiment were taken by the soldiers and they were kept waiting at the barracks for the rest of DATE . The group was later escorted by soldiers to the outskirts of GPE and told not to return or they would suffer the same fate as their relatives .", "On DATE the Diyarbakır Branch of ORG by letter informed ORG , ORG of ORG , the Governor of LOC , the Secretary of ORG , the Şırnak Governor , ORG in Şırnak , the offices of the Prosecutor and the Governor in GPE , of the deaths of PERSON and PERSON . They requested the authorities to investigate this incident and to find the perpetrators . They further requested that official identifications of the bodies and autopsies be carried out .", "Amnesty International was also informed and requested to make an urgent appeal .", "The applicants claim that neither PERSON , who was born in DATE , nor PERSON , who was born in DATE , had any connections with the ORG . Moreover , PERSON had been suffering from health problems .", "On DATE a military operation was initiated by ORG Commander ( PERSON ) in the PERSON - Faraşin area .", "At TIME on DATE , i.e. on DATE of the operation , the gendarme soldiers were confronted by a group of terrorists in the vicinity of Dereyatağı . When the terrorists refused to surrender an armed clash ensued .", "A search was conducted in the area by the soldiers after the clash had ended . In the course of the search the bodies of CARDINAL terrorists were found together with a PERSON rifle , CARDINAL cartridges , CARDINAL rockets and CARDINAL empty bullet shells .", "NORP The search of the vicinity continued TIME and during this search the body of a third terrorist was found . The booby trap on this third body was made safe by the soldiers .", "It was established by the soldiers that the remaining terrorists had escaped towards the city of GPE .", "According to a record of the operation drawn up by the soldiers , it had been impossible to transport the bodies of the terrorists since the area was very mountainous , the distance between the location of the bodies and the city centre too great , and the soldiers had no vehicles at their disposal . A decision had therefore been taken to leave the corpses in the area and they had been covered with stones to protect them from wild animals . It was also impossible for the soldiers to take photographs of the bodies since they had no cameras with them .", "Following the incident , the weather conditions allowed the authorities to visit the site on DATE , DATE , DATE , CARDINAL DATE , CARDINAL DATE , DATE and , finally , on DATE . On those dates the authorities visited the site in order to take photographs of the bodies and to carry out autopsies . However , despite extensive searches , the bodies , allegedly those of PERSON and PERSON , could not be found . It was assumed that the bodies had decomposed or been taken by terrorists .", "It has not yet been established whether the bodies found after the operation on DATE were those of the applicants’ relatives . Furthermore , contrary to what was alleged by the applicants , ORG did not make any claim that it was not possible to hand over the bodies to the relatives .", "The following information appears from the documents submitted by the parties .", "According to the record of the operation drawn up on DATE by the gendarme soldiers who took part in an operation on DATE , the bodies of CARDINAL terrorists were found in the operation area . Quantities of food and ammunition were also found . The report further listed the amount of ammunition used by the soldiers . According to this list , the gendarme soldiers from ORG had used a total number of CARDINAL bullets , CARDINAL hand grenades and QUANTITY . The soldiers from LOC had used a total of CARDINAL bullets .", "On DATE the ammunition left by the ORG was handed over to the ORG office .", "On DATE this record of the operation was forwarded to the ORG ’s office in GPE , together with the ammunition that had been found .", "On DATE PERSON , PERSON and PERSON submitted CARDINAL petitions to ORG office and informed the Prosecutor about the anonymous telephone call that had been received by PERSON , who had been told about the killing of PERSON and PERSON . They asked the Prosecutor to assist them in obtaining the bodies of their relatives . On DATE , ORG forwarded these petitions to the ORG office in whose jurisdiction the incident had taken place .", "On DATE the Beytüşşebap Prosecutor asked the ORG office to clarify the accuracy of the allegations contained in the petitions .", "On DATE the Beytüşşebap Prosecutor questioned PERSON , PERSON and PERSON in connection with their petitions . The CARDINAL men gave a description of their disappeared relatives and stated that neither Ebuzeyt nor Halit had ever been involved in any ORG activity . They also stated that GPE , where their relatives had allegedly been killed , had been evacuated and that no one was living there . PERSON further stated that his brother PERSON might have gone to that area to smuggle NORP and NORP persons into GPE .", "On DATE the Beytüşşebap Prosecutor questioned PERSON , the gendarme captain in charge of the military operation , and PERSON , a sergeant - major who also took part in the operation . Captain PERSON stated that , as he and the soldiers under his command had approached the Geçitli hamlet on DATE , they had been informed by radio that an armed man was walking towards the lower part of the village . Captain PERSON had also seen an armed man near the NORP area . Captain PERSON stated , inter alia , the following :", "“ I then ordered my soldiers to be quick and not to lose sight of the armed men . It was around TIME As far as I know , the village where these QUANTITY men were seen had been uninhabited DATE . The area is not suitable for grazing animals . It is an area used by the terrorist organisation . The firing began TIME after I alerted my soldiers . After the firing had stopped I saw CARDINAL of the bodies . There was a PERSON rifle next to the body . The body belonged to a man over DATE of age . There were no documents on the body to help identify the person . When I examined the rifle it became apparent that it had recently been fired . We also found CARDINAL empty cartridges in the area . I was informed by the soldiers that there was another body at the upper part [ of the village ] but I did not personally see that body . We aborted the search as it was getting dark and moved to a more secure area . When we resumed the search TIME , I saw the other body . It was that of a man of DATE . There were no weapons near the body . Also , there were no identification documents on the body . We then saw the third body of a man of DATE . His body had been badly damaged , possibly by a rocket missile . I thought it possible that he had killed himself . There was a booby trap on this body and we made it safe . We covered the bodies with stones as we did not have any equipment with which we could dig graves for them . The area where we left the bodies is QUANTITY from here . We did not have any vehicles at our disposal . There are also landmines on the roads in that area . ”", "Sergeant - major PERSON gave a similar statement to the Prosecutor .", "On DATE the Beytüşşebap Prosecutor asked the PERSON Governor to clarify whether anyone was living in the FAC area near the GPE and whether the area was being used by villagers to graze their animals .", "On DATE the Prosecutor also asked for copies of registry documents relating to the CARDINAL disappeared persons to be forwarded to him .", "Again on DATE , the Prosecutor asked the ORG office about the possibility of the bodies being brought down from the area where they had been killed . In the alternative , the ORG asked for body and hair samples to be obtained from the bodies for identification purposes .", "On an unspecified date in DATE General PERSON instructed the forces under his command to find the bodies in order to obtain body samples .", "Captain PERSON informed the Beytüşşebap Prosecutor on DATE of an attempt made by him and his soldiers DATE to recover the bodies . Their attempt to reach the area had been hampered by fog and heavy rain .", "On DATE PERSON , a first lieutenant and commander of ORG , informed the Prosecutor that bringing the bodies back could only be achieved if the security forces organised an operation . Given the limited number of soldiers under his command , it was not possible for him to carry out such an operation alone . If it was not possible to organise such an operation , then it might be possible to obtain body and hair samples from the corpses .", "On DATE the PERSON Governor informed the Prosecutor that the Geçitli hamlet of PERSON had been evacuated in DATE and that no one had lived there since . Furthermore , the villagers were not allowed to take their animals out to graze in the area .", "On DATE the ORG asked the Prosecutor in the town of ORG , in whose jurisdiction the CARDINAL disappeared persons used to live , to establish the date on which the latter had left their homes . He also asked whether any official complaints had been lodged in relation to the disappearance . The Prosecutor finally asked his colleague in ORG to question PERSON , the son of the disappeared PERSON .", "On DATE a statement was taken from PERSON by ORG . PERSON stated that his mother – that is the fourth applicant PERSON – had told him that his father and PERSON had left for PERSON where they had relatives . He thought that his father had possibly been shot by the soldiers for having entered a military area . He stated that his father had left the PERSON area because of his fear of the ORG and it was therefore improbable that his father was a terrorist or that he had carried weapons . His father had never been arrested in the past ; in fact , he had never set foot in a police station . Even assuming that his father was a terrorist , this would not justify the refusal of the gendarmerie to hand over his father ’s body . At the PERSON gendarmerie commander ’s office he had been told that the bodies could not be handed over because the deceased were terrorists . He had also been told that he would be shot if he attempted to recover the bodies himself .", "On DATE the Beytüşşebap Prosecutor asked the CARDINALrd ORG Commander ’s office ( CARDINAL . ORG ) whether it would be possible to recover the bodies or , in the alternative , to obtain body samples from them .", "According to a report drawn up on DATE by a gendarme sergeant - major , another attempt to recover the bodies had been made on DATE by CARDINAL fully equipped gendarme teams , joined by CARDINAL commando units . This operation had to be aborted the following day as it was too cold , foggy and wet .", "On DATE the CARDINALrd ORG Commander ’s office replied to ORG request that the bodies could only be recovered by means of an operation conducted in the area . The Prosecutor was also informed in the same letter that work on the feasibility of such an operation had already begun .", "On DATE PERSON , a relative of the CARDINAL disappeared men , said in a statement made to the police that the family had made applications to the Beytüşşebap Prosecutor ’s office as well as to the ORG Commander ’s office ( Şırnak PERSON ) .", "According to a report drawn up on DATE by a gendarme major , a third attempt to recover the bodies had been made on DATE . It too had had to be aborted as the area was covered with snow .", "Similar attempts were made on DATE , DATE and DATE and , finally , on DATE . The snow had by then reached a height of QUANTITY and there was also a risk of avalanches , with the result that these operations had to be aborted .", "A meeting was held on DATE by ORG ( İnsan Hakları PERSON ) . The ORG , which was presided over by the provincial Governor , consisted of the local mayor , the provincial gendarmerie commander , the police chief of the province as well as a number of civil servants . According to the minutes of the meeting , the ORG , having examined the evidence in the file , reached the conclusion that no innocent civilians had been killed in the operation . The ORG further noted that the preliminary investigation was still continuing and that autopsies could not be carried out due to the lack of transportation facilities and geographic difficulties . The ORG stated that efforts to recover the bodies would continue .", "On DATE PERSON , son of the disappeared PERSON , said in a statement made at ORG office that the family had not made any official complaints in relation to the disappearance of their relatives .", "On DATE the Beytüşşebap Prosecutor asked the PERSON gendarmerie commander ’s office to forward him copies of the documents concerning the evacuation of the PERSON village . The ORG also asked whether it could have been possible for the CARDINAL disappeared men to have gone to the NORP area on foot . The Prosecutor finally asked for copies of documents concerning the clashes between the security forces , the village guards and terrorists in the area and also of documents concerning the cultivation of cannabis in the vicinity .", "DATE the PERSON gendarmerie replied to the Prosecutor ’s request that the Geçitli hamlet had been evacuated due to the actions of the ORG and on the request of the villagers . There was no reason , therefore , for PERSON and PERSON to go to the area .", "On DATE the PERSON gendarmerie commander ’s office further informed ORG that the villagers had left the village of their own free will because of ORG terrorist activities . The Prosecutor was also informed that the CARDINAL persons could have taken the bus from GPE to the town of GPE , but that there were no roads to the village and the area was not safe . The Prosecutor was finally informed that there had been DATE attacks by the ORG in the area DATE .", "On DATE the ORG drew up a report ( fezleke ) in which he set out the developments in his investigation and forwarded it to ORG on DATE . The Prosecutor asked the ORG to grant authorisation for the prosecution of PERSON , the commander of ORG , for his alleged professional negligence in the failure to produce the bodies for an autopsy .", "On DATE another attempt was made by the gendarmerie to reach the area in order to find the bodies . This time the soldiers were able to reach the area but , despite carrying out a search on CARDINAL and CARDINAL May , they were unable to find the bodies .", "On DATE ORG granted the authorisation requested by ORG ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) .", "On CARDINAL DATE the Prosecutor in PERSON sent a letter to his colleague in PERSON , requesting him to ask the gendarmerie to make yet another attempt to find the bodies . ORG was also asked to summons PERSON to the ORG ’s office in GPE .", "On DATE PERSON was served the summons to appear before ORG .", "On DATE ORG drew the attention of his colleague in PERSON to PERSON failure to appear before him and urged his colleague to find him .", "PERSON , who was found by ORG on DATE , informed the latter of his intention to go to ORG office as soon as possible .", "On DATE ORG sent a letter to ORG , saying that he had carried out an investigation into the actions of PERSON and had concluded that PERSON had not been negligent in the failure to find the bodies . According to the Prosecutor , finding the bodies would have required a major operation and it was impossible for PERSON to carry out such an operation with the limited number of soldiers under his command . It appears from this letter that PERSON had been questioned by ORG .", "On DATE the Beytüşşebap Prosecutor handed over the investigation file to his colleague in Şırnak .", "On DATE ORG decided not to prosecute PERSON on the ground that an investigation had already been carried out and ORG had been informed .", "On DATE ORG in GPE sent a letter to ORG setting out their answers to questions put by the ORG as to whether and what serious attempts had been made to recover the bodies during DATE and DATE and whether the ammunition recovered had been examined for fingerprints . According to ORG letter , CARDINAL attempts had been made DATE and DATE but the bodies had not been found . It was possible that the bodies had decomposed naturally or that they had been taken away by the terrorist organisation . The area where the bodies had been left was QUANTITY in altitude and , because of the weather conditions , it had not been possible to reach the area by helicopter . The distance to the area had rendered it difficult for the soldiers to bring back the ammunition that had been found , and an examination of the ammunition carried out at the military base had not revealed any prints .", "The relevant part of LAW provides as follows :", "“ An official examination of a corpse must be made in the presence of a physician . An autopsy shall be performed in the presence of a judge and , in those cases where it is necessary to avoid prejudicial delay , the autopsy shall be performed by CARDINAL physicians in the presence of the public prosecutor , CARDINAL of the physicians being a forensic practitioner . ...", "When it is deemed necessary [ during a preliminary investigation ] to carry out an autopsy on a body which has already been buried , the permission of the public prosecutor is required and the necessary action will be taken by the [ prosecutor ] . ”", "Article CARDINAL of LAW provides as follows :", "“ Unless there are reasons requiring otherwise , the formal identification of a body is carried out prior to an autopsy by showing the body to the people who knew the deceased and , if a suspect has already been apprehended , the body is also shown to him or her . ”", "DATE . Article CARDINAL of LAW provides as follows :", "“ If there is evidence to suggest that a deceased has not died of natural causes , the police officers or other public officials who have been informed of that fact are required to advise the public prosecutor or a criminal court judge . The body can only be buried after a written burial licence has been issued by the public prosecutor or by a criminal court judge . ”", "A description of other relevant domestic law may be found in PERSON v. GPE ( judgment of DATE , Reports of judgments and Decisions CARDINAL-IV , pp . DATE , § § DATE ) ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "On DATE the applicant reported to the police that his driving licence had been stolen in DATE . On DATE the applicant was issued with a new driving licence . He had applied for it only shortly before , i.e. in DATE .", "During DATE , between CARDINAL DATE and DATE , ORG ( FAC het LANGUAGE – “ the NORP ” ) registered a total of CARDINAL motor vehicles in the applicant ’s name in the vehicle registration system ( kentekenregister ) , but without his consent . It would appear that these registrations were effected upon presentation of the applicant ’s stolen driving licence .", "As a consequence of these vehicles being registered in his name , the applicant received large numbers of motor vehicle tax assessments ( aanslagen motorrijtuigenbelasting / houderschapsbelasting ) , he was on many occasions prosecuted on the basis of ORG ( Wet aansprakelijkheidsverzekering motorrijtuigen ) and fined by the public prosecutor ( officier van justitie ) on the basis of ORG ( Wet administratiefrechtelijk handhaving verkeersvoorschriften ) in respect of offences committed with the cars . Having been ordered by the competent court to pay these fines , he was detained for failure to comply with these orders ( gijzeling ) pursuant to LAW . The applicant ended up paying fines imposed on him on the basis of these motor vehicle registrations in respect of offences not committed by him . On several occasions the applicant was held liable by ORG ( PERSON ) for damage caused by uninsured vehicles registered in his name . The applicant ’s welfare benefits were stopped , as his financial means were considered to be quite adequate in view of the sheer number of vehicles registered in his name .", "The applicant alleges that on DATE he requested the ORG to annul all the vehicle registrations , bar the one relating to his own car and was met with a refusal . Likewise , he alleges that he made several unsuccessful attempts in DATE to rectify the situation by , inter alia , writing complaints to ORG who had imposed fines on him . The Government state that no official record exists to support these allegations .", "The applicant furthermore appealed , on DATE , to ORG ( gerechtshof ) against the refusal of ORG ( Openbaar Ministerie ) to prosecute those responsible for the malicious vehicle registrations in his name . In its decision of DATE , ORG considered , as relevant to the case before the ORG , that although the police could admittedly have proceeded more effectively with the investigation , too much time had passed ( the events in issue , i.e. the malicious registration of motor vehicles , had taken place DATE ) to expect any viable investigation to be conducted by the authorities concerned . ORG therefore dismissed the appeal , but it nevertheless noted that it was in favour of the course of action as advised by ORG , namely a complete remission in a single administrative act ( eenmalige sanering ) of all ( administrative ) sanctions imposed on the applicant which were an effect of the malicious registrations . According to the applicant ’s representative , no such remission took place . Moreover , ORG ) initially prevented the applicant from being eligible for debt rescheduling under LAW ( Wet Schuldsanering Natuurlijke Personen ) .", "On DATE the applicant again requested the ORG to annul , with retroactive effect , the motor vehicle registrations in question .", "On DATE the ORG partially granted the request , cancelling CARDINAL registrations as of that date . The remaining registrations were no longer in the applicant ’s name at that time . The ORG expressly stated that it was unable to cancel the registrations retroactively , as had been requested by the applicant , as that would be detrimental to the reliability of the motor vehicle registration system .", "The applicant lodged an objection on DATE , arguing , in particular , that the motor vehicle registration system was already flawed owing to the existence of the impugned registrations ; that not granting the desired retroactive effect would have substantial financial consequences for him ; and that the ORG , in DATE , had offered to annul the stolen driving licence for purposes of motor vehicle registrations on condition that the applicant apply for a new licence , which condition the applicant had been unable to meet at that time for financial reasons .", "The applicant ’s objection was dismissed on DATE . The ORG decided that cancellation of registrations with retroactive effect would lead to legal uncertainty and would entail the ORG ’s interference with competencies of other authorities , e.g. ORG or ORG , in that it could affect the legality of decisions which those authorities had made or might make on the basis of the contents of the motor vehicle registration system .", "The applicant appealed against the ORG ’s decision to ORG ( rechtbank ) , arguing in particular that he had , already in DATE , made a similar request to the ORG and had reported the fraudulent use of his driving licence to the police , yet to no avail . The applicant also submitted that the motor vehicle registration system , as it was at the relevant time , had been sensitive to fraud , a risk which , in the applicant ’s view , should not be for the general population to bear . He argued furthermore that the requirement which existed in DATE to have to apply for a new driving licence in order to disallow motor vehicle registrations with a stolen CARDINAL was unjust and discriminatory .", "ORG concurred with the ORG ’s decision and considered that no exceptional circumstances existed warranting a deviation from the standard practice not to grant retroactive effect . It noted in that respect that , although he had lodged complaints in DATE , the applicant had allowed DATE to pass before starting the proceedings at issue .", "On DATE the applicant appealed against ORG judgment to ORG of ORG ( Afdeling Bestuursrechtspraak van de Raad van State – “ the Administrative Jurisdiction Division ” ) . The applicant argued , in relevant part , that his rights under LAW were being violated due to the unlawful registrations of motor vehicles in his name and that the vehicle registration system was flawed in that it allowed such large - scale fraud to occur so easily .", "ORG gave its decision on DATE . Its reasoning included the following :", "“ As ORG has held [ in an earlier case ] , it can not be found that the ORG ’s policy of denying in principle retroactive effect to decisions ... to cancel the registration of a vehicle is not reasonable . The purity of the vehicle register and legal certainty of the registration of vehicles justify such a policy , as ORG has rightly held . ORG has rightly held that the ORG was not obliged to consider the applicant ’s submissions in this matter a ground to deviate from this policy and retroactively cancel the registration of the said motor cars with effect from the date requested by the applicant . That being so , the applicant ’s complaint that ORG decision is incomprehensible and improperly reasoned must fail .", "As regards the [ applicant ’s ] argument that LAW ( Kentekenreglement ) violate , inter alia , Directive CARDINAL of ORG and of ORG on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data ( ORG , CARDINAL/CARDINAL/CARDINAL ; hereafter : the Directive ) , ORG finds as follows . Contrary to what the [ applicant ] suggests , it can not be deduced from the fact that the guideline includes a right of correction that the processor of those personal data is obliged to do so sua sponte and unasked and might not make the desired correction dependent on a request to that effect . In addition , contrary to what the [ applicant ] suggests , the processing of personal data pursuant to the Directive is also permitted without the permission of the person concerned if such processing is necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the exercise of official authority . In the opinion of ORG , the use of a driving license involves recording the data of that driving license in a data filing system and processing them in the performance of the duty to secure compliance with legal obligations such as those here in issue . The [ applicant ’s ] complaint fails .", "Nor does ORG agree with the [ applicant ] that LAW violate the right to liberty and security of person , laid down in LAW . Regardless of whether these provisions can be relevant to the decision - making process based on LAW – these regulations do not , after all , provide for the deprivation of liberty referred to by the [ applicant ] – these provisions contain an exception to the right to liberty and security of person in order to secure the fulfilment of an obligation prescribed by law . In this connection , ORG notes in addition that this exception is also covered by the circumstance , referred to by the [ applicant ] , that he was deprived of his liberty because he had not taken the measures needed to correct the [ registration of vehicles wrongly registered in his name ] . ”", "No further appeal lay against this decision .", "The DATE Road Traffic Act ( Wegenverkeerswet DATE ) entered into force on DATE . At the relevant time , as pertinent to the case before the ORG , it provided as follows :", "...", "A person to whom a registration number ( kenteken ) for a vehicle or trailer is issued will be treated , subject to evidence to the contrary , as the owner or registered user ( houder ) of that vehicle or trailer for the purposes of the provisions laid down by or pursuant to this LAW . ...", "The Government Road Transport Agency shall keep a vehicle registration system listing the registration numbers issued .", "NORP The vehicle registration system shall contain data concerning vehicles and trailers for which a registration number has been issued and the name of the person to whom such registration numbers have been issued , as well as data concerning other vehicles and trailers in so far as such data :", "( a ) are necessary for the proper implementation of this LAW and for the enforcement of the regulations laid down by or pursuant to this LAW , or", "( b ) are necessary for the proper implementation of LAW DATE , the Car and LAW DATE , ORG or other statutory provisions concerning vehicles and trailers , and for the enforcement of the regulations laid down by or pursuant to these statutory provisions . ...", "Without prejudice to section CARDINAL and section CARDINAL , subsection CARDINAL , a driving licence will cease to be valid :", "( a ) when a new or replacement driving licence is issued ;", "( b ) when it is exchanged for a driving licence issued to the holder by a competent authority outside the GPE for the category or categories of motor vehicle to which the exchange relates ;", "( c ) during a period in which the holder is disqualified from driving vehicles ;", "( d ) if unauthorised changes are made to it ;", "( e ) upon the death of the holder ; and", "( f ) when it is declared invalid for the category or categories to which the declaration of invalidity relates . ... ”", "At the relevant time , LAW , in their relevant part , provided as follows :", "The registration in the register will lapse as soon as :", "...", "( h ) Our Minister has declared the registration certificate to be invalid ... ;", "...", "( k ) Our Minister has declared the registration to have lapsed on the grounds of a request as referred to in paragraph CARDINAL .", "A person who is , in his view , wrongly listed in the register as the holder of a registration certificate may request Our Minister to arrange for the registration to be cancelled . Our Minister will arrange for the registration to be cancelled if he considers that sufficient grounds exist for this . ”", "At the relevant time , LAW ( Proof of Identity ) Order ( PERSON legitimatievoorschriften kentekenbewijzen en kentekenplaten ) , in its relevant part , provided as follows :", "The following identity documents shall be presented with an application for part II of a registration certificate if the application is submitted by a natural person :", "( a ) a valid driving licence ... ”", "At the relevant time , ORG ( PERSON ) , in its relevant part , provided as follows :", "If it has been established that a vehicle for which a registration number has been issued was involved or instrumental in the action [ i.e. , for present purposes , the offence ] and the identity of the driver of the vehicle can not immediately be established , the administrative fine will be imposed on the person listed in the vehicle registration system as the holder of the registration certificate at the time of the action . The provisions of section CARDINAL will be drawn to his attention .", "NORP The person to whom a decision is addressed may challenge the imposition of the administrative sanction by applying to the public prosecutor in the district court area in which the action took place . If it can not be determined in which district court area the action took place , the application may be made to the public prosecutor in the district court area in which the person concerned has his place of residence . ...", "If , in the case of LAW , the holder of the registration certificate as listed in the vehicle registration system plausibly shows that the vehicle was used by another person against his will and that he could not reasonably have been expected to prevent this use , if he produces a written contract of hire entered into for a term not exceeding DATE showing who was the hirer of the vehicle at the time of the action or if he produces a notice of indemnity issued pursuant to LAW DATE showing that at the time of the action he was no longer the owner or keeper of the vehicle concerned , the public prosecutor will quash the decision . In such a case the public prosecutor may impose an administrative sanction on the person who performed the action , the person who was the hirer of the vehicle or the person to whom the vehicle was transferred . [ Section CARDINAL ] will then apply by analogy .", "A person who has challenged the imposition of the administrative sanction may apply to ORG ( kantonrechter ) within whose area the action took place or , in the case referred to in section CARDINAL , subsection CARDINAL , second sentence , to ORG within whose area the person concerned has his place of residence , for judicial review of the decision of the public prosecutor .", "The application for review may be lodged on the grounds that :", "( a ) the action did not occur or , other than in the case of LAW , the person to whom the decision is addressed did not perform the alleged action ;", "( b ) the public prosecutor should have decided that the circumstances in which the action occurred did not warrant the imposition of an administrative sanction or that , in view of the circumstances of the person concerned , the administrative sanction should have been set at a lower amount ;", "( c ) NORP the public prosecutor wrongly failed to quash the decision by virtue of section CARDINAL . ...", "NORP If the amount [ of the administrative fine ] has not been recovered DATE or not recovered in DATE in accordance with sections CARDINAL and DATE , the public prosecutor may , DATE after a final and unappealable decision has been given in respect of the imposed administrative fine , apply to ORG in the area in which the person subject to the fine has his address for an order authorising him to apply one or more of the following coercive measures for each action in respect of which an administrative sanction has been imposed :", "( a ) taking the vehicle which was involved in the action out of commission ( or , if it can not be found , a similar vehicle in the possession of the person on whom the administrative sanction has been imposed ) for a maximum of DATE ;", "( b ) confiscating the driving license of the person on whom the administrative sanction has been imposed for a maximum of DATE ;", "( c ) committing the person on whom the administrative sanction has been imposed to a remand centre for a maximum of DATE .", "...", "No decision will be made on the application until after the person on whom the sanction has been imposed has been heard by ORG or has in any event been properly summonsed to appear . No appeal or other remedy lies against the decision . ... ”", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL)(h ) of the DATE Road Traffic Act , enacted by LAW of DATE , Staatsblad ( Official Gazette ) DATE , no . CARDINAL , provides that a driving license will cease to be valid when it is reported missing . It entered into force on DATE .", "Also on DATE a new model driving licence was introduced . It includes a number of security features aimed at countering misuse which the previous models lacked .", "As relevant to the case before the ORG , Directive CARDINAL of ORG and of ORG on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data ( ORG , DATE ) provides as follows :", "Definitions", "For the purposes of this Directive :", "( a ) ORG shall mean any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person ( ‘ data subject’ ) ; an identifiable person is one who can be identified , directly or indirectly , in particular by reference to an identification number or to one or more factors specific to his physical , physiological , mental , economic , cultural or social identity ;", "( b ) ’processing of personal ORG ( ‘ ORG ) shall mean any operation or set of operations which is performed upon personal data , whether or not by automatic means , such as collection , recording , organization , storage , adaptation or alteration , retrieval , consultation , use , disclosure by transmission , dissemination or otherwise making available , alignment or combination , blocking , erasure or destruction ;", "( c ) NORP ’personal data filing system’ ( ‘ filing system’ ) shall mean any structured set of personal data which are accessible according to specific criteria , whether centralized , decentralized or dispersed on a functional or geographical basis ;", "( d ) ’controller’ shall mean the natural or legal person , public authority , agency or any other body which alone or jointly with others determines the purposes and means of the processing of personal data ; where the purposes and means of processing are determined by national or Community laws or regulations , the controller or the specific criteria for his nomination may be designated by national or Community law ;", "( e ) ORG shall mean a natural or legal person , public authority , agency or any other body which processes personal data on behalf of the controller ;", "( f ) ’third party’ shall mean any natural or legal person , public authority , agency or any other body other than the data subject , the controller , the processor and the persons who , under the direct authority of the controller or the processor , are authorized to process the data ;", "( g ) ’recipient’ shall mean a natural or legal person , public authority , agency or any other body to whom data are disclosed , whether a third party or not ; however , authorities which may receive data in the framework of a particular inquiry shall not be regarded as recipients ;", "( h ) ’the data subject ’s consent’ shall mean any freely given specific and informed indication of his wishes by which the data subject signifies his agreement to personal data relating to him being processed .", "Member GPE shall provide that personal data must be :", "( a ) processed fairly and lawfully ;", "( b ) NORP collected for specified , explicit and legitimate purposes and not further processed in a way incompatible with those purposes . Further processing of data for historical , statistical or scientific purposes shall not be considered as incompatible provided that Member GPE provide appropriate safeguards ;", "( c ) adequate , relevant and not excessive in relation to the purposes for which they are collected and/or further processed ;", "( d ) accurate and , where necessary , kept up to date ; every reasonable step must be taken to ensure that data which are inaccurate or incomplete , having regard to the purposes for which they were collected or for which they are further processed , are erased or rectified ;", "( e ) kept in a form which permits identification of data subjects for no longer than is necessary for the purposes for which the data were collected or for which they are further processed . Member GPE shall lay down appropriate safeguards for personal data stored for longer periods for historical , statistical or scientific use .", "It shall be for the controller to ensure that paragraph CARDINAL is complied with .", "Member GPE shall provide that personal data may be processed only if :", "( a ) the data subject has unambiguously given his consent ; or", "( b ) processing is necessary for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is party or in order to take steps at the request of the data subject prior to entering into a contract ; or", "( c ) processing is necessary for compliance with a legal obligation to which the controller is subject ; or", "( d ) processing is necessary in order to protect the vital interests of the data subject ; or", "( e ) processing is necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority vested in the controller or in a third party to whom the data are disclosed ; or", "( f ) processing is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the controller or by the third party or parties to whom the data are disclosed , except where such interests are overridden by the interests for fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject which require protection under LAW ) .", "Right of access", "Member GPE shall guarantee every data subject the right to obtain from the controller :", "( a ) without constraint at reasonable intervals and without excessive delay or expense :", "- confirmation as to whether or not data relating to him are being processed and information at least as to the purposes of the processing , the categories of data concerned , and the recipients or categories of recipients to whom the data are disclosed ,", "- communication to him in an intelligible form of the data undergoing processing and of any available information as to their source ,", "- knowledge of the logic involved in any automatic processing of data concerning him at least in the case of the automated decisions referred to in LAW ) ;", "( b ) as appropriate the rectification , erasure or blocking of data the processing of which does not comply with the provisions of this Directive , in particular because of the incomplete or inaccurate nature of the data ;", "( c ) notification to third parties to whom the data have been disclosed of any rectification , erasure or blocking carried out in compliance with ( b ) , unless this proves impossible or involves a disproportionate effort . ”" ]

[ "8" ]

[ "8-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "On DATE the applicant was arrested on suspicion of having committed armed robberies .", "On DATE an investigating judge of ORG ( Županijski sud u GPE ) opened an investigation in connection with a suspicion that the applicant and CARDINAL other persons , acting as an organised criminal group , had committed more armed robberies , aggravated murders and attempted aggravated murders .", "During the investigation the applicant was detained under LAW § CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW ( risk of reoffending and gravity of charges ) .", "On DATE the State Attorney ’s Office for ORG ( PERSON odvjetništvo , Ured za suzbijanje korupcije i organiziranog kriminaliteta ; hereinafter : the “ ORG Attorney ’s Office ” ) indicted the applicant and CARDINAL other persons in ORG on charges of conspiracy to commit armed robbery and aggravated murder .", "The applicant ’s pre - trial detention was extended and he remained in detention throughout the trial .", "On DATE a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG extended the maximum statutory limit of the applicant ’s detention under LAW ) of LAW for DATE . This decision was based on section DATE ) of ORG , which provides for a possibility to extend the maximum duration of pre - trial detention for DATE in cases of corruption and organised crime .", "On DATE the ORG found the applicant guilty of armed robbery and aggravated murder , and sentenced him to DATE imprisonment . On DATE the trial panel of ORG ordered that the applicant be committed to prison under LAW § CARDINAL of the Code of Criminal Procedure . The relevant part of the decision reads :", "“ The detention of the accused , ORG , has been extended by decision of this court ... on DATE .", "The accused has been sentenced to long - term imprisonment of DATE .", "Under LAW paragraph CARDINAL of LAW , detention shall always be ordered when a sentence of CARDINAL or more years’ imprisonment is imposed .", "... “", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal with ORG ( PERSON ) against the first - instance judgment .", "On DATE a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG extended the applicant ’s detention for DATE , basing its decision on LAW . The relevant part of the decision reads :", "“ By the first - instance judgment of this court of DATE ... the accused , PERSON , was found guilty of offences under LAW of the [ LAW ] and was sentenced to long - term imprisonment of DATE ...", "By order of this court ... of DATE under LAW of LAW , the accused , PERSON , has been detained since DATE .", "...", "Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW provides that in cases where a non - final judgment has been adopted the maximum period of detention , until the judgment becomes final , may be extended by CARDINAL of the term when the maximum period of detention is DATE , if [ the offence at issue ] carries a long - term prison sentence .", "Since under the above - mentioned Article the maximum period of detention under LAW ) of LAW against the accused , PERSON , may be extended for DATE , it has been decided as noted in the operative part of this decision . ”", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal against the above decision , arguing that he had not been given an opportunity to be heard when his detention had been extended and that the decision to extend his detention was not sufficiently reasoned .", "ORG dismissed the applicant ’s appeal on DATE . The relevant part of the decision reads :", "“ The accused has been detained since DATE . Under LAW ) of LAW the maximum period of his detention expired on CARDINAL DATE . Thereafter the first - instance court extended his detention under section DATE ) of ORG ... for DATE until DATE . By the impugned decision the detention was extended under LAW for DATE , namely DATE . Therefore under this provision he may be detained until DATE [ DATE ] . ”", "On DATE ORG dismissed the applicant ’s appeal against the first - instance judgment as ill - founded .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a further appeal with ORG against its judgment of DATE .", "On DATE a CARDINAL - judge panel of ORG extended the applicant ’s detention under LAW of LAW for DATE . The relevant part of the decision reads :", "“ By the judgment of ORG ... of DATE the first - instance judgment ... of this court of DATE in which the accused , PERSON , was found guilty was upheld in part ...", "The accused PERSON is detained by order ... of the panel of ORG of DATE by which his detention under LAW ) of LAW was extended for DATE . He can therefore be detained until DATE .", "Given that the accused personally and through his defence lawyer ... lodged appeals against the judgment of ORG ... of DATE , and in view of the provision of LAW and the fact that his detention expires on DATE , [ this ] panel has found that the conditions for extending his detention under LAW of LAW have been met . ”", "The applicant lodged an appeal against the above decision on CARDINAL DATE . He argued that his detention after DATE had been unlawful since under LAW the detention should have lasted for a maximum of DATE following the adoption of the judgment against which an appeal was allowed . He pointed out that the judgment of ORG , against which an appeal was allowed , was adopted on DATE and that therefore his detention should have lasted only until DATE .", "ORG dismissed his appeal on DATE . The relevant part of the decision reads :", "“ The case file reveals that the accused PERSON has been detained since DATE . On DATE the ORG extended his detention for DATE and the detention under that decision lasted until DATE . The second - instance judgment in this case was adopted on DATE . Under LAW of LAW , from the date of adoption of the second - instance judgment against which an appeal is allowed , as in the present case , the accused may be detained until the judgment becomes final but not for DATE . However , the case file reveals that the first - instance judgment , and the second - instance judgment against which an appeal is allowed ( and [ the appeal ] was lodged in this case ) were adopted within the period of detention under LAW of LAW . Under LAW of LAW and according to the conclusions of the meeting of ORG on DATE , the maximum period of detention can be extended after the period under LAW . In this case this means beyond DATE and not , as suggested by the accused , after the date of the second - instance judgment . Thus all the accused , regardless of DATE second - instance judgment , are in the same position . ”", "On DATE the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint with ORG ( Ustavni sud PERSON ) against ORG decision , reiterating that his detention after DATE had been unlawful .", "On DATE ORG , acting as the final court of appeal , dismissed the applicant ’s appeal against the judgment of DATE and his conviction thus became final .", "On DATE ORG , endorsing the arguments of ORG , dismissed the constitutional complaint against ORG decision of CARDINAL DATE .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint with ORG against ORG judgment of DATE by which his conviction became final .", "The proceedings before ORG are still pending .", "The relevant provisions of LAW ( Zakon o kaznenom postupku , ORG nos . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , DATE , CARDINAL , CARDINAL , CARDINAL and CARDINAL ) provide as follows :", "“ ...", "( CARDINAL ) When judgment is pronounced , detention shall be ordered if the accused is sentenced to CARDINAL or more years’ imprisonment . ”", "“ ( CARDINAL ) Until the adoption of a first - instance judgment , pre - trial detention may last for a maximum of :", "DATE for offences carrying a statutory maximum sentence of CARDINAL PERSON imprisonment ;", "DATE for offences carrying a statutory maximum sentence of CARDINAL years’ imprisonment ;", "DATE for offences carrying a statutory maximum sentence of CARDINAL years’ imprisonment ;", "DATE for offences carrying a sentence of DATE imprisonment ;", "DATE for offences carrying a sentence of long - term imprisonment .", "( CARDINAL ) In cases where a judgment has been adopted but has not yet become enforceable , the maximum term of pre - trial detention may be extended for CARDINAL of the term referred to in CARDINAL of paragraph CARDINAL of this provision until the judgment becomes final , and for CARDINAL of the term referred to in DATE and CARDINAL of paragraph CARDINAL of this provision .", "( CARDINAL ) Where a first - instance judgment has been quashed on appeal , following an application by the ORG Attorney and where important reasons exist , ORG may extend the term of detention referred to in DATE of paragraph CARDINAL of this provision for DATE and the term referred to in DATE and CARDINAL of paragraph CARDINAL of this provision for DATE .", "( CARDINAL ) Following the adoption of an appellate judgment against which an appeal is allowed , detention may last until the judgment becomes final , for a maximum period of DATE .", "( CARDINAL ) A defendant placed in detention and sentenced to a prison term by a final judgment shall stay in detention until he is committed to prison , but for no longer than the duration of his prison term . ”", "The relevant provision of ORG o Uredu za suzbijanje korupcije i organiziranog kriminaliteta - USKOK , ORG nos . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , DATE , ORG , DATE , CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) is worded as follows :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) Custody under LAW shall be extended to TIME .", "( CARDINAL ) The total duration of pre - trial detention in the above proceedings , in the case of extended investigation ( Article CARDINAL , paragraph CARDINAL of LAW ) may be DATE .", "( CARDINAL ) If the pre - trial detention during the investigation had been extended under paragraph CARDINAL above , the total duration of the pre - trial detention under LAW shall be extended for DATE . ”", "The relevant part of the guidelines adopted at a meeting of ORG on DATE ( published on ORG website under no . PERSON IVk-CARDINAL/CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) reads :", "“ ...", "Where a first - instance judgment and a second - instance decision quashing the first - instance judgment have been adopted within the time prescribed for detention under LAW of the ORG , the overall duration of detention may be extended under LAW of the ORG and after the expiry of that period also under LAW of the ORG .", "The overall duration of detention under LAW of the ORG is to be extended only after the time - limit prescribed in LAW ORG has expired , irrespective of whether the first - instance court has adopted a fresh judgment in the retrial proceedings .", "The maximum period of detention where a judgment has been adopted but has not yet become enforceable is to be fixed according to the criminal offence of which the accused was found guilty , even where the ORG Attorney has filed an appeal on any grounds .", "Where a first - instance judgment or a second - instance judgment against which an appeal is allowed have been adopted within the time - limits set by LAW ORG , the overall duration of detention may be extended under LAW of the ORG . After the time - limit set by that Article expires , detention may be extended under LAW of the ORG .", "Where a first - instance judgment or a second - instance judgment against which an appeal is allowed have been adopted within the time - limits set by LAW ORG , the overall duration of detention may be extended under LAW of the ORG . After the time - limit set by that Article expires , detention may be extended under LAW of the ORG , after the expiration of the time - limit under LAW of the ORG .", "Where a second - instance decision against which an appeal is allowed has been adopted within the time - limit set by LAW ORG , the overall duration of detention may be extended under LAW of the ORG , after the expiration of the time - limit set by LAW ORG .", "Where a second - instance decision against which an appeal is allowed has been quashed within the time - limit set by LAW ORG , the overall duration of detention may be extended under LAW of the ORG , after the expiration of the time - limit set by LAW ORG .", "Where a second - instance decision against which an appeal is allowed has been quashed within the time - limit set by LAW ORG , the overall duration of detention may be extended under LAW of the ORG .", "... ”", "ORG practice as regards interpretation of Article CARDINAL of the Code of Criminal Procedure is reflected in decisions nos . II Kž-CARDINAL/CARDINAL - CARDINAL and II Kž-CARDINAL/CARDINAL - CARDINAL .", "The relevant part of decision no . II Kž-CARDINAL/CARDINAL - CARDINAL of CARDINAL DATE reads as follows :", "“ ORG , as the court of second - instance , considers that the first - instance court correctly established that in the present case the conditions for the extension of the overall detention of the accused ... under LAW had been satisfied , and thus extended his overall detention for a further DATE .", "In a non - final judgment of ORG of DATE ... the accused ... was found guilty ... and sentenced to DATE imprisonment . That judgment ... was upheld by a judgment of ORG on DATE ... against which the accused lodged an appeal . In view of the sentence given , the detention of the accused is obligatory under LAW of LAW .", "The accused was detained DATE and DATE ( DATE ) and also since DATE . The maximum period of detention [ applicable to him ] , of DATE under LAW ) of LAW , was due to expire on DATE . Given that the accused was , inter alia , convicted of the criminal offence of aggravated murder ... [ which is ] punishable by DATE imprisonment , a court may , under LAW , extend his overall detention for DATE [ of the term referred to in DATE and CARDINAL of paragraph CARDINAL of Article CARDINAL of LAW ] , that is to say for DATE .", "Therefore , ORG finds that the extension of the accused ’s detention for DATE by the first - instance court was well founded and lawful ...", "...", "The accused ’s submissions based on LAW in which he argued that his detention should be lifted because DATE had passed since the second - instance judgment was adopted are also unfounded . ORG considers that where , as in the present case , a first - instance judgment and a second - instance judgment against which an appeal is allowed have been adopted within the time - limit for detention under LAW , the overall duration of detention may be extended LAW CARDINAL § CARDINAL of the Code of Criminal Procedure , and after that time - limit expires , it may be extended further under LAW . ”", "The relevant part of decision no . II Kž-CARDINAL/CARDINAL - CARDINAL of DATE reads as follows :", "“ After the adoption of the first - instance judgment , the detention was extended under LAW ... until DATE . The second - instance judgment against which an appeal is allowed was adopted on CARDINAL DATE .", "Under LAW , from the date when the second - instance judgment against which an appeal is allowed was adopted , as in the present case , detention may last until the judgment becomes final but not for DATE . Since the first - instance judgment and the second - instance judgment against which an appeal is allowed were adopted within the time - limits for detention set out in LAW , the detention can be extended under LAW of LAW only after the period of detention under LAW CARDINAL of LAW has expired , which in this case means after DATE .", "Therefore since the detention of the accused ... under LAW of LAW can last until DATE , detention under LAW of LAW was extended from that date until the judgment becomes final but not for DATE , namely until DATE . ”" ]

[]

[]

[]

[ "5" ]

[ "5-1" ]

[]

[ "The applicant is a freelance tax consultant .", "On DATE the Inspector of Direct Taxes sent the applicant an assessment of supplementary income tax ( naheffingsaanslag ) for DATE . In accordance with the applicable provisions ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) a fiscal penalty was additionally imposed to an amount equal to that of the assessment . The penalty came to MONEY ( NLG ) .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal against this assessment with ORG of ORG ( gerechtshof ) . By letter of DATE the registrar of that court asked the applicant to pay a court registration fee of NLG CARDINAL pursuant to section CARDINAL of ORG ( GPE administratieve rechtspraak belastingzaken ) .", "The applicant ’s appeal was declared inadmissible by the President of ORG on DATE on the ground that the court registration fee had not been paid .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an objection ( verzet ) against this decision with ORG . He submitted that he had sent an order to his bank for the payment by bank transfer of the court registration fee , but that that order had not been carried out . In his view this error on the part of the bank could not be held against him .", "Having held a hearing on DATE , ORG declared the applicant ’s objection unfounded on DATE . It held that , as the applicant had himself chosen to make use of the services of a bank , it had been up to him to see to it that his order was correctly carried out .", "The applicant lodged an appeal on points of law with ORG ( PERSON ) on DATE . He submitted that ORG had erred in law by holding him responsible for a mistake made by his bank in carrying out his transfer order . In the alternative , he submitted that the imposition of a fiscal penalty amounted to a penal sanction , and that it was inappropriate to levy a court registration fee in any case concerning the determination of a “ criminal charge ” .", "The Deputy Minister of Finance ( Staatssecretaris van Financiën ) filed a written statement of defence ( vertoogschrift ) .", "One of the advocates - general to ORG submitted an advisory opinion on DATE . He did not address the applicant ’s primary submission , apart from expressing the view that the decision of ORG had been correct , but gave extensive reasons why the alternative submission should be rejected .", "The applicant did not receive a copy of the advisory opinion until ORG delivered its judgment .", "ORG dismissed the applicant ’s appeal on DATE .", "It held that a failure on the part of a bank to carry out an order for the transfer of a court registration fee could not be held against the person who had given such an order if the latter saw to it that the payment was made as soon as possible after he could reasonably be expected to be aware of such failure . Nevertheless , it appeared that the applicant had not paid the court registration fee at all and his primary submission had therefore to be rejected .", "It further held that the court registration fee in question was not such as to constitute any real impediment to a taxpayer ’s right of access to a court , and that in appropriate cases a reduction of the fee in question could be granted . The applicant ’s alternative submission was therefore also rejected .", "Pursuant to section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW ( Algemene wet inzake rijksbelastingen ) a demand for supplementary tax is made if a tax for which the taxpayer is under an obligation to file a declaration ( die op aangifte behoort te worden voldaan of afgedragen ) is not paid in its entirety or not paid at all .", "In such cases a fiscal penalty is additionally imposed to an amount equal to the amount due in tax ( section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) ) .", "It is open to a taxpayer to submit an administrative objection ( bezwaarschrift ) to the competent tax inspector ( section CARDINAL ) .", "An appeal against the latter ’s decision lies to ORG ( section CARDINAL ) .", "It is , however , also open to the taxpayer to lodge an appeal directly to ORG without first submitting an administrative objection to the tax inspector ( section PERSON ) ) . This was the course followed by the applicant in the present case .", "A taxpayer who lodges an appeal with ORG is required to pay a court registration fee , which at the relevant time amounted to NLG CARDINAL ( section CARDINAL ) of ORG ) . This fee is reduced by NLG CARDINAL if the financial interest is very small ( section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) ) , or if the taxpayer is indigent ( section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) ) .", "The entire fee is paid back to the taxpayer if his appeal is upheld in whole or in part ( section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) ) .", "An appeal on points of law against the decision of ORG lies to ORG ( section CARDINAL ) . Such an appeal may be lodged by the competent tax inspector or other tax authority as well as by the taxpayer .", "The defendant party – tax authority or taxpayer , as the case may be – may submit a written statement of defence ( section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) ) .", "ORG does not hold an oral hearing unless it is asked to do so by one of the parties . Such a request may be made in either the statement of points of appeal or the statement of defence , or after the filing of those statements , by the party which has lodged the appeal on points of law ; in the latter case the time - limit for so doing is DATE after the statement of defence was sent to the party concerned ( section PERSON ) ) .", "NORP If PERSON expresses the wish to be heard , the case file is sent to him after the hearing , or after the filing of the written statements if no hearing is held ( section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) ) . He must submit his advisory opinion in writing ( section CARDINAL ) ) .", "It is not provided that the taxpayer must be supplied with a copy of the advisory opinion before the delivery of the judgment of ORG .", "ORG deliberates in camera . Although there is no legal provision prohibiting the Procurator - General from attending ORG deliberations , in practice he never attends .", "ORG may quash the decision appealed against on the grounds adduced or on other grounds ( section CARDINAL ) . In that event it decides on the merits of the case , substituting for the decision of ORG the decision on the merits which the latter ought to have given . Only if the decision on the merits depends on important facts which have not been established at an earlier stage of the proceedings does ORG refer the case back to ORG which gave the decision appealed against or CARDINAL of the other courts of appeal ( ibid . ) .", "The duties and position of the Procurator - General ’s department ( openbaar ministerie ) are defined in ORG ( Wet op de rechterlijke organisatie ) .", "The Procurator - General ’s department consists of the Procurator - General and advocates - general of ORG , the procurators - general and advocates - general of the courts of appeal and the public prosecutors of the regional and district courts ( section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of ORG ) . The advocates - general of ORG act as deputies of the Procurator - General of that court and are subordinate to him ( sections CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) , CARDINAL and DATE ) ) .", "The Procurator - General ’s department must be heard by the courts in so far as the law so prescribes ( section CARDINAL ) . The advisory opinion of PERSON or an advocate - general to ORG takes the form of a learned treatise containing references to relevant case - law and legal literature and a recommendation , which is not binding on ORG , to uphold or reject points of appeal ." ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , PERSON , is a NORP national who was born in DATE and lives in PERSON . She was represented before the ORG by Mr PERSON , a lawyer practising in PERSON .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the applicant , may be summarised as follows .", "The applicant worked , on a temporary basis , as a teacher in a ORG - run school PERSON in PERSON ( “ the school ” ) . In DATE , when her contract expired , the school advertised a vacancy announcement for several posts . The school recruited PERSON for the post for which the applicant also had applied . She complained to several inspection bodies alleging procedural irregularities . These bodies issued instructions , on the basis of which the school annulled the results of the competition .", "On DATE the applicant brought a civil action requesting payment of damages for having been discriminated on political grounds . She alleged that PERSON , the successful candidate , had not had the required qualifications for the post . The claim was based on sections CARDINAL , DATE and CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) of LAW ( see “ Relevant domestic law ” below ) .", "ORG ( “ the first - instance court ” ) heard oral evidence from the applicant , witnesses PERSON , PERSON . , PERSON and ORG , as well as Mr PERSON , the school ’s director .", "In her statement , the applicant referred to a meeting with Mr PERSON in DATE when allegedly he admitted to her that he had been under considerable pressure from other fellow - members of his political party and that he was not able to take any decision by himself . At a next meeting , PERSON PERSON confirmed that he had not taken the recruitment decision by himself .", "PERSON , a former teacher in the school and unsuccessful candidate for one of the advertised posts , stated that during a meeting held in DATE , Mr PERSON said that a new contract would not be concluded with some acting teachers since the decision had not been made by himself , but by those who had appointed him director . On that occasion , he also stated that Ministers and Deputy Ministers had called and suggested him to appoint other candidates . She further referred to a discussion that she had on DATE with Mr PERSON , together with CARDINAL other unsuccessful candidates . On that meeting , Mr PERSON allegedly told them that given their qualifications he “ had cried for them ” , but that his political party had pressed him to dismiss them , and that CARDINAL people had voted against their recruitment . Mr E.L. and PERSON , who were also former teachers in the school and unsuccessful candidates , confirmed PERSON statement .", "PERSON , the applicant ’s mother - in - law , stated that Mr PERSON told her that he had not made the selection , but that he had brought the list of candidates to the attention of his political party , which in fact , had taken the decision . None of CARDINAL people present at that meeting had voted in favour of the applicant .", "Mr PERSON contested the statements described above . He stated that he had selected the successful candidate by himself and that no political party had been involved in the selection process . He further argued that the applicant and witnesses had invented the whole story with the aim to achieve a common objective . Lastly , he confirmed that on the basis of the instructions given by the inspection bodies , he had annulled the results of the competition .", "On DATE the first - instance court dismissed the applicant ’s claim as unsubstantiated . It found that the political affiliation of candidates was not specified as a post requirement in the vacancy announcement . Furthermore , the inspection bodies , on the basis of the complaints submitted by the applicant and other unsuccessful candidates , issued instructions which prompted the annulment of the announcement . The court rejected the ORG statements as unsubstantiated since the vacancy announcement had not required that candidates be of any political affiliation .", "The applicant appealed against this decision arguing that the first - instance court had not provided adequate reasons for having ignored the ORG statements that provided clear evidence that she had not been appointed due to political reasons . She asked the court why , despite the fact that she had been the only candidate who had satisfied the post requirements and had previous working experience , the school had appointed PERSON , who had not had the necessary qualifications for the post .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the applicant ’s appeal and confirmed the lower court ’s decision . It found no grounds to depart from the facts established by the first - instance court and the reasons given . It confirmed that the announcement , on the basis of the instructions given by the inspection bodies , had been annulled . The applicant was served with this decision on DATE .", "Under LAW of LAW , ORG has jurisdiction to protect human rights and freedoms concerning inter alia the prohibition of discrimination on political grounds .", "Section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) of the DATE Act provides that a candidate for a post can not be discriminated against on the basis of his or her race , colour , sex , age , health , religious , political or other opinion .", "Section CARDINAL of the CARDINAL Act defines direct and indirect discrimination .", "Section DATE Act provides that the unsuccessful candidate can claim compensation in case of discrimination .", "Under LAW , if the candidate produces evidence of practice contrary to LAW CARDINAL of this Act , the burden of proof is on the employer to prove that there was no discrimination .", "Section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) of the DATE Act provides that the unsuccessful candidate claiming to have been discriminated against can claim compensation in proceedings before the competent court .", "Section CARDINAL of the Rules of Procedure provides that a person who considers that any of his or her rights or freedoms , set forth in LAW of the LAW , has been violated by an individual decision or action may seek redress before ORG within DATE from the adoption of the final decision or from DATE he or she had knowledge of the action taken , but DATE from DATE of its occurrence .", "Section CARDINAL provides that in its decision for the protection of rights and freedoms , the Constitutional Court shall determine the way of eliminating the consequences from applying the individual decision or action , with which those rights and freedoms had been violated .", "In its decision of DATE , ORG dismissed a constitutional appeal ( барање за заштита на слободите и правата ) submitted by CARDINAL individuals under LAW . The complainants claimed that they had been dismissed from work due to their ethnic origin and political affiliation . The court , after having interviewed them and held a public hearing , dismissed their appeal as manifestly ill - founded . It appears that the complainants did not claim damages in civil proceedings under sections LAW CARDINAL ) of LAW ) ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , a NORP national , was born in DATE and lives in PERSON in NORP GPE .", "He arrived on NORP soil in DATE at DATE and remained there until DATE , when he returned to GPE .", "NORP In DATE , holding a tourist visa , the applicant returned to NORP in NORP GPE , where he went to primary school in DATE and then to secondary school . As he had no valid residence permit and could not apply for CARDINAL until he came of age , he had to leave school in DATE , at the age of CARDINAL .", "In DATE he was stopped for a drug offence . By an order of CARDINAL DATE he was placed under court supervision and barred from leaving NORP GPE . On DATE the ORG gave him a DATE suspended sentence and CARDINAL years’ probation .", "On DATE the applicant was stopped for a road check and , being unable to present any valid papers , was taken into custody .", "A removal order and an administrative detention order were issued against him that DATE at TIME", "On DATE , at TIME , the applicant lodged an appeal against the removal order with ORG , for abuse of authority , arguing that the order was illegal under LAW regulating the entry and residence of aliens and asylum seekers ( see the section on “ Relevant Domestic Law ” ) . A hearing was scheduled for DATE . An urgent application was filed at the same time as the appeal , asking the court to suspend the enforcement of the removal order while it examined the validity of the measure . In support of his application for a suspension the applicant relied on LAW , arguing that he had entered NORP territory before DATE , that he had lived there on a habitual basis ever since , that both his parents had residence permits , and that CARDINAL of his brothers had acquired NORP citizenship and the other three would be entitled to apply for it at DATE as they had been born on NORP soil .", "NORP On DATE at TIME the applicant was removed to GPE .", "The same evening ORG declared his urgent application for a suspension of his removal devoid of purpose as he had already been deported .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an urgent application with ORG requesting that the Prefect of NORP GPE be instructed to organise his return there within TIME because of the interference with his family life . The application was rejected on DATE as the court had not yet reached a decision concerning the validity of the removal order , and the applicant ’s return would amount to a permanent measure whereas the urgent - applications judge could only order interim measures .", "On an unspecified date the applicant returned to NORP GPE illegally , by his own means , to live with his family .", "In a judgment of CARDINAL DATE ORG found the removal order illegal on the grounds that the applicant had shown that he had been habitually resident in GPE since DATE and could therefore not be deported . The court refused to have the applicant issued with a residence permit , but ordered the Prefect of NORP GPE to re - examine his administrative situation within DATE .", "On DATE the authorities in NORP GPE issued the applicant with a “ visitor ’s ” permit , which was valid for DATE but did not allow him to work .", "An investigation revealed that the authorities had issued the “ visitor ’s ” permit by mistake . The applicant was accordingly issued , in DATE , with a new residence permit for “ private and family life ” , backdated to DATE and allowing him to work .", "That residence permit was not renewed upon expiry because of a problem with the documents required for its renewal . In DATE , however , the applicant was eventually issued with a residence permit valid from DATE to DATE .", "“ The following persons shall not be required to leave NORP territory or removed therefrom under the provisions of this chapter :", "...", "CARDINAL Aliens who can prove by any means that they have been habitually resident in GPE at least since DATE . ”", "“ For the purposes of this part [ concerning expulsion measures ] , the following provisions shall apply in NORP GPE and PERSON :", "...", "CARDINAL Without prejudice to the provisions of the preceding paragraph , an alien who has been ordered to leave NORP territory or against whom a removal order has been issued and who refers the matter to the administrative court may , at the same time , apply for a stay of execution .", "Consequently , the provisions of Articles L. CARDINAL - CARDINAL and L. CARDINAL - CARDINAL to L. CARDINAL - CARDINAL [ whereby a removal order issued by the prefecture may be challenged before the administrative court within TIME , with suspensive effect on the removal order ] shall not apply in NORP GPE or ORG . ”", "“ The provisions of Article L. CARDINAL - CARDINAL shall apply in the département of GPE and in FAC , for DATE from the publication of PERSON no . DATE of DATE on immigration and integration . ”" ]

[]

[]

[]

[ "13", "8" ]

[]

[]

[ "By contracts signed in DATE , in respect of donations inter vivos , the applicants became the owners of CARDINAL plots of land on the island of GPE . This island , situated close to the mouth of LOC , is part of the city of GPE , to which it is connected by a road bridge and a railway line . It mainly consists of port facilities , with a small residential area in its southern part .", "The first applicant acquired a plot of land of QUANTITY . m under a contract of donation with PERSON dated DATE . The transfer of title was entered in the land register by ORG of the city of GPE ( PERSON pilsētas PERSON nodaļa ) on DATE . The second applicant became the owner of :", "( a ) a plot of land measuring QUANTITY . m , under a contract of donation with PERSON dated DATE ( entered in the land register on DATE ) ;", "( b ) a plot of land measuring QUANTITY m , under a contract of donation with Mr O. dated DATE ( entered in the land register on DATE ) ;", "( c ) a plot of land measuring QUANTITY m , under a contract of donation with the same Mr O. dated DATE ( entered in the land register on DATE , CARDINAL DATE ) ; and", "( d ) a plot of land measuring QUANTITY . m , under a contract of donation with PERSON dated DATE ( entered in the land register on DATE ) .", "The clauses of the contracts in question were practically identical . The contract entered into by the first applicant stipulated that the second applicant was acting as the donor ’s representative . Similarly , it was stated in the first CARDINAL contracts entered into by the second applicant ( see points ( a ) , ( b ) and ( c ) of the previous paragraph ) that the first applicant was acting on behalf of the donors .", "The donors were all the heirs of the legitimate owners of the land in question , which had been expropriated by GPE after DATE . They had recovered ownership in the context of the “ denationalisation ” process in DATE . According to the applicants’ explanations , which were not contested by the Government , the donations had been made in return for certain personal services that the applicants had rendered to the donors . PERSON NORP had thus given her land to the second applicant by way of remuneration for having helped her to complete the formalities to obtain restitution of her CARDINAL properties located throughout GPE . PERSON had apparently been a longstanding friend of the second applicant , whilst the donor of the other CARDINAL plots , PERSON , had given them to him as a token of gratitude because he had covered the cost of expensive heart surgery . As to the first applicant , he had become the owner of his land in return for undisclosed services rendered .", "Each of the above - mentioned contracts stipulated that the value of the plots of land in question was fixed at CARDINAL NORP lati ( ORG ; CARDINAL euros ( ORG ) ) , except for the plot of QUANTITY . m , which was valued at ORG CARDINAL,CARDINAL ( about EUR CARDINAL,CARDINAL ) . The parties agreed that the said value was not the cadastral value of the land in question ( that is to say , the reference value for the calculation of land tax ) , but an indicative sum solely for the purposes of calculating the registration tax , which at the time represented PERCENT of the property ’s value . Indeed , according to the applicants’ explanations , which have not been challenged by the Government , cadastral values did not exist at the relevant time and the sole basis of calculation for the tax was the property ’s sale price , in accordance with the applicable law ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) .", "In addition , the applicants paid ORG in notary ’s tax . However , they were not obliged to pay income tax in respect of the transactions , as gifts between individuals were not liable for such tax . Furthermore , in accordance with the law applicable at the time ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) , they were exempted from the payment of land tax ( zemes nodoklis ) for DATE following the acquisition , that is to say , until DATE .", "The parties disagreed as to the actual value of the plots of land in question at the time of their expropriation . The ORG explained that the use of the land had begun during the NORP era , in DATE , at the time of the construction of the port infrastructure – storage containers and open - air freight platforms – which can be found there DATE . In their submission , those port facilities are outside the general property market , with the result that an estimation of their possible market value would be impossible and devoid of purpose .", "In the applicants’ submission , the CARDINAL plots of land contained no infrastructure except for concrete blocks . They explained that the latter enabled the land to be used for the storage of shipping containers , but that no other equipment such as railway lines , cranes or warehouses had been installed there . Inventory records of CARDINAL of the plots of land , to which the applicants referred , indicate that the value of these concrete blocks is ORG QUANTITY .", "According to the statistical information supplied by the Government , and accepted as accurate by the applicants , PERCENT of specialised container traffic in and out of GPE by sea in DATE passed through the part of the island where the land at issue is located . Nor have the applicants disputed the fact that the first decisions concerning the port area of ORG were taken during the constitutional transition period , DATE , by ORG ( the then legislative assembly ) . In DATE the authorities initiated proceedings for the purpose of fixing the port ’s boundaries and determining the infrastructure to be transferred from the former GPE to the independent NORP State .", "On DATE ORG no . CARDINAL fixing the perimeter of GPE ( GPE par Rīgas ostas robežu noteikšanu ) . In accordance with that ORG , all the plots of land owned by the applicants were included within the port ’s perimeter . That inclusion was confirmed by ORG ( PERSON tirdzniecības brīvostas likums ) , enacted on DATE . Under that LAW , all the privately owned land situated within the port ’s boundaries became subject to a servitude for the benefit of the public corporation responsible for the port ’s management . In return , the corporation was to pay the owners DATE compensation of not PERCENT of the cadastral value of the plots of land in question .", "NORP In DATE the applicants requested ORG of ORG ( ORG dienesta Nekustamā īpašuma vērtēšanas centrs ) to determine the cadastral value of their respective plots of land for DATE . In CARDINAL letters of DATE , the ORG certified that the value amounted to ORG ( about ORG CARDINAL ) for the land belonging to Mr PERSON ; as to that of PERSON PERSON , the cadastral value of the various plots amounted to ORG CARDINAL , ORG CARDINAL,CARDINAL , ORG CARDINAL,CARDINAL and ORG CARDINAL respectively , representing a total of ORG CARDINAL ( about EUR CARDINAL,CARDINAL,CARDINAL ) .", "On DATE the administration of ORG of GPE applied , in turn , to ORG , requesting it to calculate the amount of compensation that would have to be paid to the applicants in the event of expropriation of their land , in accordance with LAW decision on the conditions of entry into force of the PERSON on the expropriation of real estate in the public interest ( the “ LAW ” , enacted in DATE ) . That DATE which was applicable inter alia to the applicants – limited the amount of the compensation to be paid to the owners of certain land that was to be expropriated ; the compensation could not exceed the cadastral value of the land as fixed on DATE , multiplied by a conversion coefficient .", "On DATE the ORG issued CARDINAL certificates stating that the first applicant would receive ORG ( about ORG CARDINAL ) for his CARDINAL sq . m plot of land , and the second ORG CARDINAL,CARDINAL.CARDINAL ( about EUR CARDINAL ) for his plots of land , of which the total surface area came to QUANTITY m.", "By Regulation no . CARDINAL of CARDINAL DATE , which was adopted in the context of delegated legislative authority ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) and which entered into force on DATE , the ORG ordered the expropriation of all the land in question for the benefit of the ORG . On DATE the measure was confirmed by ORG , which enacted a special law for that purpose ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . Under that law Mr PERSON and PERSON were to be paid compensation for the expropriation , which would be deemed completed once the sums had been paid into their current accounts .", "On DATE the NORP ORG ( Latvijas PERSON un zemes banka ) opened current accounts in the names of each of the applicants . On DATE the bank officially certified that the above - mentioned sums of ORG and ORG CARDINAL,CARDINAL.CARDINAL , awarded to the applicants by way of compensation , had actually been paid into the CARDINAL accounts . The applicants , however , refused to make use of those sums in any way . Following the payments , by CARDINAL orders of CARDINAL and DATE ORG ( zemesgrāmatu tiesnesis ) ordered that the title to the expropriated land be registered in the name of the ORG . No tax was levied on the above - mentioned sums .", "In DATE the second applicant brought CARDINAL sets of proceedings to obtain rent arrears for the use of his land . In the first set of proceedings , against ORG and ORG , he requested the payment of sums due under the lease for the period from CARDINAL DATE to DATE . In a judgment of CARDINAL DATE , upheld in cassation proceedings on DATE , ORG ordered ORG to pay the second applicant ORG ( about EUR CARDINAL ) for the use of his land during the period in question .", "The second applicant subsequently filed a new claim against FAC , seeking the payment of rent arrears for the period after DATE , together with compensation for the servitude imposed on his property . On DATE ORG of ORG partly upheld his claim , awarding the applicant the sum of ORG ( about ORG CARDINAL ) on that basis , after fixing the amount of the rent at PERCENT of the cadastral value of the land at the material time . In fixing that amount ORG particularly took into account the fact that the second applicant had not invested in any development of the land in question . It further indicated that the applicant ’s title to the property had ceased on DATE , when the expropriation had become effective . In a judgment of CARDINAL DATE the ORG of ORG upheld the judgment of ORG .", "The first applicant , PERSON , brought similar proceedings . In a judgment of DATE ORG ordered ORG to pay him ORG CARDINAL ( QUANTITY ) in rent arrears for DATE .", "In DATE the applicants sued ORG ministrija ) before ORG . In their pleadings they requested the annulment of the cadastral registration of the ORG ’s title , and the restoration , in the land registers , of the previous entries attesting to their ownership of the land in question .", "NORP In support of their claim , the applicants alleged that LAW provided for a uniform procedure which had not been observed in their case . According to that procedure , after the enactment of the special LAW DATE , ORG was required first to start negotiations with them with a view to reaching a friendly settlement as to the amount of the compensation ( section CARDINAL of LAW ) ; if those negotiations failed , ORG would have to refer the matter to the competent court for settlement of the dispute ( section CARDINAL ) . The applicants particularly emphasised that they were not satisfied with the sums paid by way of compensation and that they were deprived of their right to challenge those sums before a court . In this connection , the applicants pointed out that the orders of ORG had been made in the absence of any prior final judgment concerning the amount of the compensation ; they thus argued that the orders did not comply with CARDINAL of LAW . The applicants submitted that the expropriation in general and the transfer of title in particular had been carried out in breach of that LAW , thus directly entailing a violation of LAW No . CARDINAL .", "In a judgment of CARDINAL DATE ORG dismissed the applicants’ claims . According to the judgment , the expropriation was not based on LAW , as the applicants had claimed , since the measure in question had been decreed in the context of the NORP land reform , and thus the special PERSON of DATE was to be applied . Section CARDINAL of the special PERSON provided that the mere existence of the law and the payment of compensation for the expropriation sufficed for the statutory transfer of title to the ORG . Noting in the present case that the corresponding sums had been paid into the applicants’ accounts , ORG found that both of those elements were present , and that by registering the ORG as the new owner of the land in question , ORG had acted in accordance with the law .", "Moreover , ORG pointed out that section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of the PERSON of DATE ( on the calculation of compensation ) referred to LAW decision on the conditions of entry into force of LAW and that this decision had been declared compliant with LAW No . CARDINAL by ORG .", "The applicants appealed before ORG of ORG . They emphasised at the outset that they did not object to the expropriation as such , provided the statutory formalities were observed and the amount of the compensation was reasonable . In their view , this had not been the case , as , in particular , no expert ’s report had been ordered for the purpose of determining the actual value of the disputed land ( section CARDINAL of LAW ) . The applicants did not challenge ORG finding that the PERSON of DATE constituted a lex specialis in relation to the general law ; they argued , however , that the said law could not be construed as derogating from the normal expropriation procedure and that , consequently , by recognising the ORG ’s title without having received a copy of a judgment determining the amount of the compensation , ORG had acted illegally .", "In a judgment of DATE ORG dismissed the ORG appeal , essentially endorsing the reasoning and findings of the judgment in question . Addressing the applicants’ objection to the compensation awarded , it pointed out that the amounts had been determined in accordance with LAW above - mentioned ORG decision . If the applicants had considered that the calculation by the ORG ’s ORG had been erroneous and that the relevant coefficients had been incorrectly applied , they could have challenged the calculation in separate proceedings , but they had not done so .", "The applicants lodged a cassation appeal with the ORG of ORG . In their appeal , they submitted that the direct and immediate object of their claim was not to challenge the calculation of the compensation as such , but rather the fact that they had not been able to have the amount fixed through fair judicial proceedings , as required by LAW . If such proceedings had taken place , they would have been able to provide the court with evidence of their investments in respect of the land in question ; they pointed out that they were not entitled to initiate such proceedings themselves , as LAW reserved that right for the ORG authorities .", "In a judgment of DATE the ORG dismissed the ORG appeal on the same grounds as ORG .", "In the meantime , on CARDINAL DATE , the ORG had granted the use of all the plots of land in question to a private transport company , B. , from which it has been receiving rent to date .", "On DATE ORG of ORG notified the first applicant of a tax reassessment , requesting him to pay the sum of ORG CARDINAL in land tax in respect of the land that had belonged to him , plus penalties , for the period from DATE to DATE , the date of the expropriation . The first applicant challenged this before LOC , which upheld his claim and annulled the reassessment . ORG appealed before ORG , which , in a judgment of DATE , upheld the annulment of the reassessment . In its judgment the court found that , as the land tax was attached to a plot of land and not to a specific individual , it could be paid by someone other than the owner . It noted that the tax had already been paid by the public corporation responsible for the port ’s management which was using the land on the basis of a servitude . ORG lodged a cassation appeal with the ORG of ORG , which dismissed that appeal in a judgment of DATE .", "On DATE ORG notified the second applicant of a tax reassessment for ORG , including penalties , for DATE . The applicant brought annulment proceedings before the court of competent jurisdiction , which upheld his claim . ORG appealed and on DATE ORG annulled the judgment of ORG , finding that the second applicant ’s land was not part of that for which the public corporation had paid land tax . That judgment was upheld in cassation proceedings . However , in DATE the ORG of ORG reopened the proceedings on account of newly discovered facts . The case file was sent to ORG , which , in a judgment of DATE , upheld the second applicant ’s claim and annulled the disputed reassessment on the ground that the port management company had already paid land tax for the land in question . On DATE the ORG of ORG , ruling on a cassation appeal , upheld that judgment , so the second applicant was not obliged to pay any supplementary tax on the land in question .", "Adopted in DATE , LAW ( PERSON ) became fully applicable again in DATE . In DATE , DATE when the impugned expropriations took place , it did not yet include a charter of fundamental rights , which were governed by a separate instrument , LAW of DATE on the rights and obligations of persons and citizens ( ORG likums “ ORG un pilsoņa tiesības un pienākumi ” ) . LAW of that PERSON read as follows :", "“ The ORG recognises and protects ownership and the right to inheritance .", "An individual may be the owner of property of all kinds , except that which is subject to the restrictions laid down in section CARDINAL [ pertaining to natural resources ] .", "Property may be expropriated only as provided for by law and pursuant to a judicial decision . Where property is expropriated for the purpose of public projects , the owner shall be entitled to appropriate compensation . ”", "By a Law of DATE , which entered into force on DATE , the legislature inserted into the LAW a new Chapter VIII on fundamental rights . In that Chapter , the new LAW provides as follows :", "“ Everyone has a right of property . Property may not be used for purposes contrary to the interests of society . Property rights may be restricted only as provided by law . Forced deprivation of property for the needs of society shall be authorised only in exceptional cases , on the basis of a special law and in return for fair compensation . ”", "DATE ( repealed in DATE ) entrusted the ORG with delegated and limited legislative power . At the time of the expropriation of the land in question , this provision read as follows :", "“ CARDINAL legislative sessions , the ORG shall be entitled , in cases of pressing need , to adopt regulations with statutory force . Such regulations may not amend either the law on parliamentary elections , the laws on judicial organisation and procedure , LAW or budgetary law , or laws enacted by the sitting legislature ; nor may they regulate amnesty , the issuance of ORG bills , taxes levied by the ORG , customs duties , railway fares and loans , and they will lapse if they are not submitted to ORG within DATE after the opening of the following legislative session . ”", "The first sub - section of section CARDINAL of the Latvian LAW of DATE ( NORP “ ORG zemes reformu Latvijas Republikas pilsētās ” ) originally read as follows :", "“ In all ... cases , where the original owner ’s land has [ in the meantime ] been built upon , or where , in accordance with urban planning and construction projects it is intended to erect thereon constructions necessary to satisfy the needs of society , the former owners of the land or their heirs shall be entitled , as they choose :", "to claim restitution of their title to the property and to obtain from the owner of the building or construction ... the payment of rent , of which the maximum amount shall be fixed by the ORG ... ; or", "to request that they be granted the right of ownership or use of another plot of land of the same value , situated within the administrative boundaries of the same town , depending on the intended use of such land ; or", "to receive compensation in accordance with the statutory conditions . ”", "A DATE imposed restrictions on the restitution of land on which certain constructions or facilities had been erected . It thus amended the above wording as follows :", "“ Former property owners or their heirs shall recover their title to land that previously belonged to them , except :", "...", "( CARDINAL ) Where , on the land of the former owners , there can be found ... civil engineering and transport facilities or infrastructure ... , [ for example ] of ports . The title to the land is then registered in the name of the ORG or the local authority concerned ; as to the former owners and their heirs , they shall be entitled , as they choose , to request that they be granted title to another plot of land of the same value and situated within the administrative boundaries of the same town , or otherwise to receive compensation in accordance with the statutory conditions . ”", "A Law of DATE amended that provision as follows :", "“ Former property owners or their heirs shall recover their title to land that previously belonged to them , except :", "...", "( CARDINAL ) Where , on the land in question , there can be found ... civil engineering and transport facilities or infrastructure ... , [ for example ] of ports . The title to the land is then registered in the name of the ORG or the local authority concerned , after the former owners or their heirs have , as they choose , and in accordance with the statutory conditions , received land of the same value situated elsewhere ... or compensation . If it is impossible to reach an agreement with the former owners of the land , or their heirs , as to compensation or the allocation of another plot of land of the same value , the land shall then be expropriated in accordance with the conditions laid down in the law on the expropriation of real estate on public - interest grounds . ”", "The Law of DATE reformulated the above provision , deleting the last sentence concerning the expropriation of land . PERSON DATE , which entered into force on DATE , added to the subsection in question a note that read as follows , having the same statutory force as section CARDINAL itself :", "“ Note : Where the former owners of the land or their heirs possess dwellings on the territory of a port , they are entitled to recover title to that land to the extent that they have the lawful use thereof ; [ the surface area of such land ] must not , however , exceed QUANTITY , unless the land in question is situated within the residential area of GPE , including on the territory of ORG of Riga , where the former owners and their heirs may be granted restitution of their title in respect of the entire surface area of the land that belonged to them . ”", "At the same time a new subsection was inserted into section CARDINAL . It reads as follows :", "“ Where the former owners of the land or their heirs have recovered title to land on which are erected any facilities referred to in point CARDINAL of the first subsection hereof ... , the DATE amount of rent payable for the land shall not exceed MONEY of its cadastral value . ”", "At the material time , section DATE ) of LAW of DATE ( NORP par ostām ) read as follows :", "“ Only the ORG and local authorities acting through the intermediary of a port authority shall be entitled to purchase land within the territory of a port . It shall be prohibited for a port authority to sell land situated within the territory of a port . ”", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of that LAW , as amended by a LAW of DATE , which entered into force on DATE , reads as follows :", "“ Former owners ( or their heirs ) who , as at DATE , possessed land situated on the current territory of the port , and whose title to the land has been recognised ... but has not been restored on account of the statutory restrictions , shall be entitled to receive land of the same value or to be compensated in the form of compensation certificates , the number of which shall be calculated according to the updated cadastral value of the land in question . If the persons concerned have received compensation certificates corresponding to the cadastral value of the land for DATE , they will granted an additional number of ... certificates corresponding to the difference between the cadastral value of DATE and the updated cadastral value . ”", "Regulation no . CARDINAL of CARDINAL DATE on the calculation of compensation to be awarded to former landowners or their heirs , and on the determination of the value of land of which ownership has been transferred in cities ( GPE par kompensācijas aprēķināšanu bijušajiem zemes īpašniekiem vai viņu mantiniekiem un maksas noteikšanu par īpašumā nodoto zemi pilsētās ) was adopted on the basis of ORG . LAW reads :", "“ Where persons claiming compensation are not satisfied with the compensation amount calculated [ by ORG ] , they shall be entitled to submit their complaint to the courts . ”", "At the material time , and up to DATE , expropriation was governed by ORG ( NORP “ ORG nekustamā īpašuma piespiedu atsavināšanu valsts vai sabiedriskajām vajadzībām ” – the “ LAW ” ) , which was first enacted in DATE and which re - entered into force on DATE . The relevant sections of that Act read as follows :", "“ Expropriation of real estate in the public interest shall be authorised only in exceptional cases , always with payment of compensation and on the basis of a special law . ”", "“ The proposal to expropriate ... shall be made by the government on the basis of an opinion by the relevant administrative body or local authority , where the institution in question is unable to acquire the real estate by means of an agreement with the owner . The proposal must include information about the real estate to be expropriated and the justification for the expropriation . ”", "“ After the [ expropriation ] law has been enacted , the institution that proposed the expropriation shall approach the owner with a view to reaching a [ friendly ] agreement for the transfer of the real estate , and , as the institution sees fit , shall either offer compensation or propose to exchange [ the real estate ] for property of the same value . ”", "“ Where compensation [ for the expropriation ] is determined by friendly agreement , or where the value of the expropriated real estate is compensated for by the exchange thereof for other property , the parties shall enter into a contract ... ”", "“ Where [ the parties ] fail to reach an agreement , the case shall be examined by a court upon an application by the expropriating institution .", "After receiving the application , the court shall assign a bailiff to assess the value of the real estate , in the presence of the representative of the expropriating institution , together with the owner and CARDINAL experts chosen by joint agreement between the parties ... ”", "“ The expropriating institution shall submit to the court a statement indicating and justifying its assessment of the value of the real estate to be expropriated . Copies of the statement shall be served on the owner of the real estate and on any mortgage creditors of the owner ... ”", "“ The value shall be assessed according to local prices and the state of the relevant property . Should the owner so request , the assessment shall also take into account its profitability .", "The profitability of real estate shall be assessed on the basis of information supplied by its owner . When the value of the property is determined in accordance with the income generated by the latter , it shall correspond to the average net income from the real estate over DATE increased by MONEY , or , where the owner has held it for DATE , over the entire period of possession , increased by MONEY . ”", "“ Before examining the case , the court shall summon the owner , the representative of the expropriating authority and any mortgage creditors .", "The court shall determine the compensation to be paid on the basis of experts’ opinions , either according to local prices or , where the owner so requests and the court finds such request reasonable , according to the profitability [ of the property ] .", "The court ’s decision may be appealed against in accordance with the statutory procedure . ”", "“ After the court ’s decision pertaining to the expropriation of the real estate takes effect , the owner shall be paid the compensation determined and any interest at the rate fixed by the court ; the interest rate shall not be lower than MONEY per annum from the date of transfer of the property until DATE of payment . ”", "“ After the payment of compensation ... , the institution concerned shall transmit to ORG a copy of the court ’s decision together with a description of the real estate , for the purposes of its registration in the name of the ORG or local authority . ”", "A Law of DATE inserted certain provisions into LAW decision of CARDINAL DATE on the conditions of the entry into force of the DATE LAW ( PERSON “ ORG Republikas likuma ‘ ORG nekustamā īpašuma piespiedu atsavināšanu valsts vai sabiedriskajām vajadzībām’ spēkā stāšanās kārtību ” ) ; the relevant parts of those provisions read as follows :", "“ Where , in the course of the land reform , an expropriation ... concerns real estate that is necessary for ... the maintenance or operation of ... transport infrastructure , [ and where the object of the expropriation ] has been or is to be restored to the former owner ( or to the heirs thereof ) , the amount of the compensation shall be determined as a sum of money , according to the statutory procedure ; however , it shall not exceed the value of the said real estate as fixed by the land registers or by cadastral records drawn up before DATE and including an indication of the property ’s value ... The conversion coefficients to be applied to the value of the property , converting the prices from DATE ( in pre - war lati ) into current prices ... , shall be determined by ORG .", "Where , after the restitution of title , the owner has increased the value of the real estate , any investments related to the increase in value must also give rise to compensation . Similarly , compensation must be paid for any expenses reasonably incurred by the owner ( or heirs ) related to the restitution of title ( surveying , obtaining of information from records , etc . ) . Any expenses incurred in respect of the services of a representative must be reimbursed within the limits of the amounts actually paid ; however , they must not exceed the scales of lawyers’ fees .", "The expropriation procedures laid down by the present Article shall apply also to owners who have acquired property from the former owner ( or heirs thereof ) by way of donation . ”", "On DATE Act was superseded by a new ORG ( PERSON vajadzībām nepieciešamā nekustamā īpašuma atsavināšanas likums ) , enacted on DATE . Under section CARDINAL of that new Act , expropriation of real estate can take the form of a friendly settlement between the ORG and the owner of the property in question , or of “ forced ” expropriation ordered on the basis of a special law .", "The use of the term “ special law ” in LAW and in LAW indicates that each individual expropriation measure falls within the exclusive remit of the legislature , that is to say , ORG . As ORG observed in its judgment of DATE , this is a specific feature of the NORP legal system in comparison with that of other countries ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . In this system any expropriation is always based on CARDINAL legislative instruments : the general law , determining the rules of expropriation in general , and a special targeted law by which ORG orders the expropriation of designated property in a specific case . As to the sum to be paid in compensation , it is fixed by friendly settlement or , failing that , by the courts ( section CARDINAL of the DATE LAW ) .", "Regulation no . CARDINAL of CARDINAL DATE on the expropriation of land for the needs of the ORG within ORG of Riga was promptly submitted to ORG , as required by LAW ( as then in force ) . On DATE ORG enacted a law on expropriation for the needs of the State of land within ORG of Riga ( NORP “ ORG zemes īpašuma atsavināšanu valsts vajadzībām PERSON tirdzniecības brīvostas teritorijā ” ) , which used almost the exact same wording as the ORG . The relevant parts of that law read as follows :", "“ The expropriation , for the needs of the ORG , shall concern land belonging to Mr PERSON within the territory of FAC , on ORG , along the bank of the GPE , for respective surface areas of CARDINAL hectares ... , QUANTITY ... , QUANTITY and QUANTITY ... , together with land in the same sector belonging to Mr NORP Vistiņš for a surface area of QUANTITY ... ”", "“ ORG shall be responsible for having the land referred to in section CARDINAL hereof ... entered in the land register in the name of the ORG . ”", "“ ( CARDINAL ) A current account shall be opened with the public corporation Latvijas PERSON un zemes banka [ NORP ORG ] in the name of each of the landowners referred to in section CARDINAL hereof ; the compensation shall be paid into such accounts in accordance with LAW decision on the conditions of the entry into force of ORG .", "( CARDINAL ) The number of the current account shall be notified , by registered letter , to each of the beneficiaries of the compensation payment . ”", "“ The land referred to herein shall be entered in the land register in the name of the ORG on the basis of the present LAW and following confirmation from the Latvijas PERSON un zemes banka that the sums determined as compensation for the value of the properties have [ actually ] been paid into the accounts of the persons mentioned in DATE hereof . ”", "The Law of DATE on the expropriation of land for the needs of the ORG within the territory of ORG ( Likums “ ORG zemes īpašumu atsavināšanu valsts vajadzībām valsts lidostu uzņēmuma ‘ Rīga’ teritorijā ” ) is almost identical in structure to that of the law mentioned previously . Sections CARDINAL and CARDINAL order the expropriation of the specific plots of land enumerated in the annexes to the law . LAW requires ORG to have the ORG ’s title entered in the land register , while the last CARDINAL sections concern the conditions of payment of the compensation and the effective transfer of title .", "To the extent that it is relevant to the present case , section CARDINAL of ORG of Riga Act of DATE ( PERSON tirdzniecības brīvostas likums ) provided as follows :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) There shall be established hereby a personal servitude for the benefit of the public corporation ‘ Commercial Port of Riga’ , affecting the land of natural persons or other legal entities ... that is occupied by FAC .", "...", "( CARDINAL ) The user of the land shall pay to its owner compensation for the use of the servitude ; the amount of the compensation shall be determined by joint agreement , but it may not exceed MONEY per annum of the cadastral value of the land .", "... ”", "On DATE ORG enacted a new FAC ( PERSON brīvostas likums ) . It entered into force on DATE , superseding the previous LAW . LAW ) of LAW is identical to section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of the old Act .", "Under Article CARDINAL , first paragraph , of LAW ( Civillikums ) , “ [ o]nly the person who is recorded in the land register as owner of real estate may be recognised as such ” . However , LAW , second paragraph , stipulates that “ [ r]ights in rem based on a law shall be effective even in the absence of an entry in the land registers ” .", "The relevant provisions of LAW concerning the validity of contracts and other agreements read as follows :", "“ An unlawful or immoral act whose aim runs counter to religion , statute law or morality , or which is intended to circumvent the law , can not give rise to an agreement ; any such agreement shall be null and void . ”", "“ An agreement that expresses a genuine intent but has been concealed by another agreement shall be valid , unless it has been entered into with the aim of misleading a third party or , in general , of conducting an unlawful transaction . The visible agreement shall remain valid solely to the extent that this is necessary for the validity of the concealed agreement . ”", "DATE of LAW authorises the revocation of a donation ( dāvinājums ) on grounds of ingratitude on the part of the donee . Apart from an ordinary donation , the NORP Civil Code provides for CARDINAL specific categories of donation : a donation of all the donor ’s present property , a donation subject to a condition or obligation , and a donation in consideration of past services ( dāvinājums atlīdzības nozīmē ) , as governed by LAW , which reads :", "“ A donation in consideration of past services is a donation agreed in return for services rendered .", "Such donations may not be revoked on grounds of ingratitude . ”", "In a judgment of DATE given in case no . CARDINAL - CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) , ORG declared LAW decision on the conditions of entry into force of LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) compliant with LAW No . CARDINAL . It observed as follows :", "“ ...", "Land reform is a continuous and complex process which does not end with the return of the real property concerned to the former owners or their heirs , but with the completion of the restructuring of legal , social and economic relations ...", "...", "The second and fourth paragraphs of LAW decision do not deprive owners whose property has been expropriated in the public interest of their right to apply to the courts for the determination of compensation . The second paragraph of LAW decision establishes only the upper limit of such compensation . Therefore , the argument ... that such persons are deprived of their right to judicial protection and to equality before the courts is unfounded . ... ”", "In a judgment of DATE , given in case no . DATE , ORG declared unconstitutional , and null and void , the amendments made to LAW in DATE . The relevant parts of that judgment read as follow :", "“ ...", "( CARDINAL ) ...", "( CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) The fourth sentence of LAW provides that forced deprivation of property is allowed only on the basis of a ‘ special law’ enacted in exceptional cases .", "The fact that expropriation must be carried out not only on the basis of a law but ‘ on the basis of a special law’ is to a certain extent a specific feature of LAW . Most constitutions of GPE envisage only that expropriation must be carried out on the basis of a law or in accordance with a procedure established by law .", "The aim of LAW , pertaining to expropriation on the basis of a special law , is to protect the fundamental rights of the individual against any arbitrariness on the part of the administrative authorities . The word ‘ specific’ here must not only be interpreted literally and grammatically , but must primarily be given a substantive meaning . When enacting such a ‘ specific’ law , the legislature must‘exceptional’ in nature and whether it serves the needs of ORG or society ; it must also ensure that the expropriation gives rise to fair compensation .", "... ”", "Under section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW of DATE ( NORP “ ORG zemes nodokli ” ) , as in force at the material time , a person acquiring land was exempt from the payment of land tax in respect thereof for DATE from the date of its acquisition .", "In its version in force in DATE , section CARDINAL of the PERSON on the reform and the conditions of entry into force of LAW of DATE read as follows :", "“ In order to determine the value of property that is liable for tax in respect of the registration of ownership following a contractual transfer of title , the highest of the following amounts shall be used :", "( CARDINAL ) the sale price indicated in the contract ;", "( CARDINAL ) the amount resulting from the land tax assessment ;", "( CARDINAL ) the amount resulting from the assessment for the purposes of obtaining a mortgage from a lending institution . ”" ]

[ "P1" ]

[ "P1-1" ]

[ "P1-1-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[ "NORP The applicants’ DATE are indicated in the annex below . They all live in GPE .", "On various dates in DATE and DATE the applicants brought separate sets of proceedings against their employer , claiming compensation for their unpaid salaries .", "In DATE , DATE and DATE respectively , ORG , sitting as a ORG , delivered its judgments , ruling in favour of the applicants . The court stated that in addition to the compensation , the employer company had to pay proportional court fees ranging from CARDINAL to MONEY ( TRY ) .", "On DATE the applicants requested copies of the writs of execution in order to enforce the judgments in their favour , as the employer company had not paid the required court fees . They argued that the company had gone bankrupt and that they would not be able to obtain the compensation awarded to them by the court at DATE .", "On DATE ORG rejected the ORG request . The court stated that pursuant to section CARDINAL ) of the PERSON on Fees ( Law no . CARDINAL ) , the writs could not be served on the applicants unless all the fees were paid , either by the employer company or by the applicants themselves in the event that the former failed to do so .", "The judgments in favour of the applicants have not been executed to date .", "At the time of the events , section CARDINAL ) of the PERSON on Fees read :", "“ Section CARDINAL ) – Time - limit for the payment of fees", "The proportional fees set out in scale no . CARDINAL shall be paid within the following periods :", "( a ) CARDINAL of the fees for the judgment and the writ shall be paid beforehand and the rest shall be paid within DATE of the judgment ’s delivery ... The writ shall not be served on the party concerned unless the [ court ] fees for the judgment and the writ of execution are paid ... ”", "Decision of the Constitutional Court and the subsequent change in section CARDINAL ) of the PERSON on Fees", "In a decision dated DATE , ORG repealed the provision in the second sentence of section CARDINAL ) . The court indicated that to put the burden of paying the court fees on the party whose case had been accepted and who had been held exempt from those very fees by the first - instance court ’s judgment was incompatible with the right of access to court and , in particular , with the right to have a judgment executed . In this respect , the higher court pointed out that the repealed provision referred to proportional fees , which were calculated on the basis of the main amount at issue .", "Subsequently , in DATE section CARDINAL ) was amended . Following that change , the second sentence reads as follows :", "“ ... Failure to pay the court fees for the judgment and the writ of execution would not prevent the execution of the judgment , its service on the parties or the parties’ right to have recourse to appeal proceedings . ”" ]

[ "6", "P1" ]

[ "6-1", "P1-1" ]

[ "P1-1-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[ "NORP The applicant organisation is a religious organisation , ORG of GPE ’s Witnesses in GPE , located in GPE . The second applicant , PERSON , was born in DATE and lives in GPE . The third applicant , PERSON , was born in DATE and lives in GPE . The fourth applicant is PERSON , was born in DATE and lives in the GPE region .", "On DATE ORG ( “ the Committee ” ) wrote to the NORP President targeting primarily the beliefs and practices of the applicant organisation and accusing it of extremism . The letter also contained a request for an inquiry into the applicant organisation ’s activities .", "On DATE the ORG ’s letter was forwarded by ORG to GPE . The ensuing inquiry disclosed no unlawfulness in the applicant organisation ’s activities .", "On DATE the ORG lodged another complaint against the applicant organisation . It was rejected on DATE . Subsequently the ORG introduced CARDINAL more complaints . All of them were rejected following an inquiry .", "During the period DATE and DATE the applicant organisation addressed CARDINAL letters to the authorities asking about the results of their inquiries . The prosecutor ’s office responded that the applicant organisation ’s activities had revealed no violations . The applicant organisation ’s request to review the relevant file was refused .", "According to the applicant organisation , within the framework of the inquiries ORG interacted with other ORG agencies , submitted religious literature for expert examination , studied medical files of members of the applicant organisation , intervened in a school matter without parental consent and examined repeated complaints from organisations and individuals .", "On DATE a GPE ORG asked GPE to instruct all the city ’s medical institutions to report every refusal of transfusion of blood or its components by ORG . The prosecutor ’s letter read as follows :", "“ In response to the order of ORG , the city prosecutor ’s office is investigating the lawfulness of the activity of the religious organisation known as FAC of GPE ’s Witnesses in GPE .", "The ideology of the said organisation forbids its adherents to accept transfusions of blood or blood components . An investigation has established that in a series of cases refusals of blood transfusions hindered the administration of qualified medical care and aggravated the illness .", "In view of the above , I request that you instruct all medical institutions in GPE to inform the committee , without delay , of any incidents of refusal of transfusion of blood or its components by individuals who are members of the said religious organisation . ”", "On DATE ORG dismissed the applicant organisation ’s request for access to the materials compiled by it in the course of the inquiries .", "From DATE to DATE the fourth applicant underwent surgical treatment in a state hospital without the use of foreign blood or blood components . On DATE ORG asked the hospital to submit her medical record .", "On DATE the fourth applicant learnt that ORG had reviewed her medical documents and information on the treatment methods and their results .", "On DATE the third applicant was admitted to a public hospital . She chose to have non - blood management treatment for her condition which the hospital did not agree to provide . On DATE she was discharged from hospital . She was then admitted to a private hospital for a surgical intervention . The public hospital did not report her case to the prosecutor ’s office .", "On unspecified dates the second applicant underwent chemotherapy in a public hospital , following a non - blood management treatment plan . In response to ORG request ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) , the doctors informed ORG and the prosecutor ’s office of her case .", "On an unspecified date the applicant organisation and several of its members , including the second , third and fourth applicants , lodged a complaint against the prosecutor ’s office whereby they asked the court ( CARDINAL ) to declare unlawful the inquiries carried out by the prosecutor ’s office in connection with the applicant organisation ’s activities ; ( CARDINAL ) to instruct the authorities to cease their interference with the rights and lawful interests of the applicant organisation and to discontinue the investigation into its activities ; ( CARDINAL ) to declare unlawful the decision of the prosecutor ’s office of DATE refusing access to the investigative materials ; ( CARDINAL ) to order the prosecutor ’s office to return the medical documents to their respective owners and to require the destruction of the relevant materials , if any , held by the authorities ; ( CARDINAL ) to order the prosecutor ’s office to return the religious literature to the applicant organisation in its entirety and undamaged ; ( CARDINAL ) to oblige the prosecutor ’s office to provide the applicant organisation with the findings of the expert study of the applicant organisation ’s religious literature ; ( CARDINAL ) to instruct the prosecutor ’s office to restrain the ORG and other similar organisations from their attacks against the applicant organisation ; ( CARDINAL) to instruct the prosecutor ’s office to take appropriate measures regarding malicious and unfounded allegations against the applicant organisation in the event that any such allegations contained slander , defamatory statements , or signs of extremism or were untrustworthy .", "On DATE ORG of GPE granted the ORG claims in part . It pronounced unlawful the prosecutor ’s office ’s decision of CARDINAL DATE and instructed it to grant the applicant organisation ’s representatives access to the materials from the inquires . The remainder of the application was dismissed .", "As regards the third applicant ’s allegedly premature discharge from the public hospital , the court noted that this issue was beyond the scope of the ORG complaint against the prosecutor ’s office .", "The court noted as follows in respect of the disclosure of the second and fourth applicants’ medical files :", "“ According to LAW of ORG , information concerning medical consultation , an individual ’s health , his or her diagnosis and other data obtained in the course of examination or treatment shall be considered confidential ( medical secret ) . A patient is guaranteed confidentiality of the data he or she provides .", "Accordingly ... it should be acknowledged that information on blood transfusion and the method of treatment of a patient , is considered confidential , and the disclosure of such [ information ] , in the absence of [ the patient ’s ] consent , by a person privy to it as a result of their studies or professional duties is permissible only in the instances provided for in part CARDINAL of LAW .", "It is true that , in the letter dated DATE ... the GPE Deputy Prosecutor advised the chairman of ORG to order all medical institutions in GPE to inform the said committee of each refusal of transfusion of blood or its components by members of ORG , and to forward such information received by the committee to ORG ... .", "...", "According to part QUANTITY of LAW of ORG , as in force before the amendments were introduced ... on DATE , the prosecutor , in connection with an investigation , had a right to apply to a medical institution with a request to disclose confidential medical information .", "The court finds incorrect the argument of the representative [ of the applicant organisation ] and of [ the second applicant ] that the prosecutor had the power indicated above only when conducting a criminal investigation and not when conducting an investigation concerning compliance with laws , inasmuch as [ the wording of LAW ] did not refer to such a restriction . The letter of GPE Deputy Prosecutor of DATE ... was sent to the chairman of ORG before [ LAW ] was amended and can not be considered to be in contravention of the law .", "...", "The request of ORG Office of GPE of DATE ... sent to [ the oncology centre where the fourth applicant underwent treatment ] requesting [ her ] medical history file concerned only the information regarding the possibility of blood transfusion for [ the fourth applicant ] , the reasons for her refusal of such treatment and the consequences of her refusal ... . ”", "On DATE GPE upheld the judgment of DATE on appeal .", "According to the applicant organisation , the prosecutor ’s office failed to comply with the judgment of DATE ordering the latter to allow the applicant organisation to review the materials of the inquiry . The applicant organisation ’s representatives were allowed to review only MONEY of the materials in question .", "The Basic Principles of Public Health Law of GPE ( in force at the relevant time ) provided as follows :", "Article CARDINAL . Confidential medical information ( medical secret )", "“ Information concerning medical consultation , an individual ’s health , his or her diagnosis and other data obtained in the course of examination or treatment shall be considered confidential ( medical secret ) . ...", "Confidential medical information can not be disclosed by a person privy to it as a result of their studies or their professional , employment - related or other duties , except as provided for in parts CARDINAL and CARDINAL of this Article .", "A person or his legal representative may consent to the disclosure of confidential medical information to other persons , including officials , for the patient ’s examination and treatment , scientific research , publications , training and other purposes .", "Confidential medical information may be disclosed without the consent of the individual or his legal representative :", "...", "CARDINAL ) At the request of investigating bodies , a prosecutor or a court in connection with an investigation or judicial proceedings . ”", "Article CARDINAL . The individual ’s right to appeal against actions of state bodies or officers infringing the individual ’s rights and liberties in the public health sphere", "“ Actions of ORG bodies or officers which infringe the individual ’s rights and liberties set forth in the present Basic Principles in the sphere of public health may be appealed against to higher ORG bodies or officials or to a court in accordance with the applicable legislation . ”", "The Federal Law on ORG in force since DATE , as amended , provides as follows :", "Article CARDINAL . The prosecutor ’s power [ as regards legal compliance ]", "“ CARDINAL . When carrying out the duties incumbent on him or her , the prosecutor may :", "...", "... , conduct inquiries in respect of materials and requests received by the prosecutor ’s office ... ;", "ORG officials and private parties in order to obtain their explanations as regards violations of the law . ”", "DATE . The prosecutor ’s power [ as regards protection of human rights and freedoms ]", "“ CARDINAL . In performing his or her functions , the prosecutor shall :", "Examine and consider reports , complaints and other statements concerning [ alleged ] infringements of human rights and liberties ;", "Explain to the persons concerned the procedure to follow to protect their rights and liberties ;", "Take measures to prevent and to stop violations of human rights and liberties , prosecute individuals who break the law , and have any damage repaired ;", "... . ”" ]

[ "8" ]

[ "8-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , Mr GPE , is an NORP national who was born in DATE and lives in GPE . He was represented before the ORG by PERSON , a lawyer practising in GPE , GPE , with PERSON . ORG ( “ the Government ” ) were represented by their Agent , PERSON of ORG .", "The applicant arrived in GPE on DATE and claimed asylum . It was discovered that the applicant had travelled through GPE before arriving in GPE . As a consequence , a request was made to GPE for it to accept responsibility for the applicant 's asylum claim . GPE accepted responsibility on DATE .", "On DATE the Secretary of ORG declined to give substantive consideration to the applicant 's asylum claim because under ORG , etc ) Act DATE ( “ the CARDINAL Act ” : see domestic law and practice below ) the applicant could be returned to GPE .", "The applicant subsequently absconded and later was detained in an immigration enforcement operation . Directions were then set for the applicant 's removal to GPE at TIME on DATE .", "On DATE the applicant 's representatives wrote to the Secretary of ORG for ORG requesting that removal be deferred pending the outcome of the R ( Nasseri ) v Secretary of ORG for ORG [ DATE ] EWCA Civ CARDINAL ( see domestic law and practice below ) . ORG had given judgment in that case on DATE and it appeared that the unsuccessful party , Nasseri , was to petition ORG for leave to appeal .", "On DATE the Secretary of ORG responded that the applicant had failed to identify how Nasseri applied to his case . The Secretary of ORG said that the concerns that had been expressed by the ORG High Commissioner for Refugees and others about NORP procedures related to “ interrupted ” cases , cases where the applicant left GPE before their asylum claim was decided and where there was a risk that an asylum applicant might not be readmitted into the asylum process in GPE . The present applicant 's case did not fall into this category . He was being returned to GPE having originally entered the territory of the GPE through that country . There had been no criticism regarding access to the NORP asylum system in those cases .", "On DATE the applicant 's solicitors responded that there was nothing in ORG judgment in Nasseri that suggested it had proceeded on the basis that it was merely considering “ interrupted ” cases . No response was received from the Secretary of ORG .", "On DATE , the applicant brought judicial review proceedings challenging the decision to remove him to GPE . The removal directions set for DATE were cancelled . In her acknowledgment of service contesting the judicial review proceedings , the Secretary of ORG relied on ORG judgment in Nasseri that the relevant provisions of LAW were not incompatible with the investigative obligation under LAW and that , upon an examination of all of the evidence in relation to NORP practices and procedures , there was no evidence of a risk of unlawful refoulement to GPE . Furthermore there were no proceedings pending before ORG in Nasseri .", "On DATE , ORG refused the applicant permission to apply for judicial review for the reasons set out in the Secretary of ORG 's acknowledgment of service .", "Removal directions to GPE were then reset for DATE . On DATE the applicant lodged an application with this ORG .", "On DATE , the President of the Section to which the case had been allocated decided to apply Rule CARDINAL of ORG , indicating to the Government that it was desirable in the interests of the parties and the proper conduct of the proceedings that the applicant should not be expelled to GPE pending the ORG 's decision . In his letter informing the Agent of the Government of GPE of this decision , ORG stated :", "“ This indication has been made in light of the ORG report dated DATE ( a copy of which is attached ) . The parties ' attention is drawn to paragraph CARDINAL of the report that states that ' In view of GPE Member GPE ' obligation to ensure access to fair and effective asylum procedures , including in cases subject to ORG , ORG advises ORG to refrain from returning asylum seekers to GPE under LAW until further notice . ORG recommends that ORG make use of LAW , allowing GPE to examine an asylum application lodged even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria as laid down in this Regulation ' .", "The Acting President has instructed me to inform you that the Rule CARDINAL measure will remain in force pending confirmation from your authorities that the applicant , if removed to GPE and if he so wishes , will have ample opportunity in GPE to apply to ORG CARDINAL measure in the event of his onward expulsion from GPE to GPE . Your authorities may wish to avail themselves of any bilateral arrangements under LAW with a view to seeking such confirmation . ”", "“ GPE ORG ( ORG ) has been advised by the Head of ORG that Asylum seekers returned to GPE under LAW [ see relevant international and ORG law below ] are given the opportunity to lodge an asylum claim on arrival . If they do so they are kept in a holding centre for DATE while their application is registered . They are then provided with a ' pink ' card which entitles them to work and to access benefits while their application is considered . Furthermore , no asylum seeker is returned by the NORP authorities to such countries as GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE or GPE , even if their asylum application is rejected by the NORP authorities . In this event they are given a letter telling them to leave GPE within a specified time but no action is then taken to enforce their removal ... ORG has written to ORG for written confirmation of the above and express confirmation that the opportunity to apply for asylum extends equally to the opportunity to make an application to the ORG and a reply is expected within DATE .", "Furthermore , it is standard practice in GPE removal cases to GPE for GPE to obtain from the NORP authorities clarification that the individual concerned will be able to submit an asylum application upon arrival in GPE should he or she wish to do so . ”", "“ In general , no alien who submits an asylum application is put in detention for that sole reason . In any case , the expulsion procedure that regards illegal aliens or asylum applicants , who were firstly arrested for illegal entry , is going through various stages of remedy ( administrative or judicial ) [ sic ] . No asylum applicant is expelled , unless all the stages of the asylum procedure are finished and all the legal rights for review have been exhausted , according to the provisions of LAW and the non refoulement clause . Furthermore , according to LAW , they have the right to appeal against any expulsion decision and have a Rule CARDINAL indication on their case . ”", "In his reply of DATE , ORG sought confirmation that , according to the terms of the letter of DATE , the NORP authorities not only ensured the right of an asylum applicant returned to GPE to apply for a Rule CARDINAL measure but also guarantee him ample opportunity to avail himself of that right while still on the territory of GPE . The Agent of the Government of GPE in turn sought such confirmation from the Agent of the Government of GPE . On DATE , ORG forwarded a letter dated DATE from ORG . This stated :", "“ We hereby advise you that it is the objective of ORG , though its competent bodies and in accordance with the current legal framework ( Presidential Decrees DATE , ORG and CARDINAL ) , to ensure the unhindered submission of applications for asylum by all aliens who declare before any ORG , at the entry points or on NORP territory , either verbally or in writing , that they request asylum in our country or ask in any way not to be deported to other countries from fear of persecution for reasons of race , religion , nationality , social class or political views .", "Consequently , in GPE not only is there the right and the possibility to submit an application for asylum , but the actual application is also examined very carefully , exhaustively and as to substance ... ORG , as the competent authority , makes much of the ' right for asylum ' and the principle of non - refoulement , and they do not deport the alien from our country , if the procedure has not been completed . This also applies for the aliens transferred to GPE , pursuant to the provisions of ORG , provided that the requirements for the characterization of the ' applicant ' as a national of a third country or a non - citizen who has submitted an application for asylum for which a final decision has not yet been made are met , as described in the Directive CARDINAL/CARDINAL/EK [ Council Directive CARDINAL of DATE on minimum standards on procedures in Member GPE for granting and withdrawing refugee status – see relevant ORG law below ] and Presidential Decree CARDINAL ”", "This letter enclosed another letter dated DATE from ORG to that effect . Attached to the letter of DATE was a note which referred to the fact that many applicants resisting return to GPE had the right to submit asylum applications in GPE but had not done so because their purpose was to go to other ORG countries . The note also referred to the new legislative framework in GPE , which , inter alia , made provision for : ORG to oversee the implementation of the relevant domestic law in respect of aliens who are minors , without the need for an asylum application by them ; training for the officials responsible ; the right to immediate employment and education ; the issuing of travel documents for beneficiaries of subsidiary protection and “ applicants for international protection ” ; and the ipso jure revocation of all decisions in respect of “ interrupted claims ” .", "LAW ( the Convention determining the ORG responsible for examining applications for asylum lodged in one of GPE of ORG , DATE ) provided for measures to ensure that applicants for asylum had their applications examined by CARDINAL of the Member GPE and that applicants for asylum were not referred successively from CARDINAL Member ORG to another . Articles CARDINAL to CARDINAL set out the criteria for determining the single Member ORG responsible for examining an application for asylum . Pursuant to LAW , the responsibility for examining an application for asylum is incumbent upon the Member ORG responsible for controlling the entry of the alien into the territory of GPE . GPE and GPE were both signatory GPE .", "The ORG has been superseded by ORG ( ORG ) No CARDINAL/CARDINAL of DATE establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member ORG responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of GPE by a third - country national ( “ Dublin II ” , hereinafter “ LAW ) . LAW applies to all ORG Member GPE , GPE and GPE . Article CARDINAL ) of the ORG provides for asylum applications to be examined by a single Member ORG , according to the criteria set out in LAW . The criteria for determining which Member ORG is responsible include where it is established that an asylum seeker has irregularly crossed the border into a Member ORG , having come from a third country ( Article CARDINAL ) . If responsibility can be designated on the basis of the criteria , listed in LAW , LAW provides that the first Member ORG with which the application for asylum was lodged shall be responsible for examining it .", "Article ( CARDINAL of ORG allows a Member ORG to examine an asylum application even if such examination is not its responsibility . It provides :", "“ By way of derogation from paragraph CARDINAL , each Member ORG may examine an application for asylum lodged with it by a third - country national , even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation . In such an event , that Member State shall become the Member ORG responsible within the meaning of this LAW and shall assume the obligations associated with that responsibility . Where appropriate , it shall inform the Member ORG previously responsible , the Member ORG conducting a procedure for determining the Member ORG responsible or the Member ORG which has been requested to take charge of or take back the applicant . ”", "The rights and standards set out in Directive CARDINAL include : the right to remain in a Member ORG pending the examination of an asylum application ( DATE ) ; that decisions on applications are given in writing and , where an application is rejected , that the reasons in fact and law are stated in the decision with information on how to challenge a negative decision ( Article CARDINAL ) ; that each applicant for asylum be given appropriate linguistic assistance and a personal interview ( ORG CARDINAL and CARDINAL ) ; and , subject to a number of qualifications , that applicants shall have the right to legal assistance and representation ( Article CARDINAL ) . Article CARDINAL guarantees applicants the right to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal against decisions taken against them . Member GPE are to allow the ORG High Commissioner for Refugees access to applicants , access to information on individual applications and the opportunity to present its views to any competent authorities ( LAW ) .", "The above Directive requires that Member GPE ensure a dignified standard of living to all asylum - seekers , paying specific attention to the situation of applicants with special needs or who are detained . It regulates matters such as the provision of information , documentation , freedom of movement , healthcare , accommodation , schooling of minors , access to the labour market and to vocational training . It also covers standards for persons with special needs , minors , unaccompanied children and victims of torture .", "In a judgment given on DATE in GPE v. GPE ( Case C-CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) , ORG of ORG ( “ the ECJ ” ) found that GPE had failed to implement the Directive . It appears from the ORG High Commissioner for Refugees Position Paper ( set out below ) that it has now done so .", "Pursuant to ORG , Part CARDINAL of Schedule CARDINAL to ORG , etc ) Act DATE establishes a “ first list of safe countries ” which covers the other CARDINAL ORG Member GPE at the time ( prior to the accession of GPE and GPE ) , GPE and GPE .", "Paragraph CARDINAL of Part CARDINAL of Schedule CARDINAL provides :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) This paragraph applies for the purposes of the determination by any person , tribunal or court whether a person who has made an asylum claim or a human rights claim may be removed—", "( a ) from GPE , and", "( b ) to a ORG of which he is not a national or citizen .", "( CARDINAL ) A ORG to which this Part applies shall be treated , in so far as relevant to the question mentioned in sub - paragraph ( CARDINAL ) , as a place—", "( a ) where a person 's life and liberty are not threatened by reason of his race , religion , nationality , membership of a particular social group or political opinion ,", "( b ) from which a person will not be sent to another ORG in contravention of his Convention rights , and", "( c ) from which a person will not be sent to another ORG otherwise than in accordance with LAW . ”", "Sections CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) and CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW DATE provide for the making of Immigration Rules by the Secretary of ORG . Paragraph CARDINAL of ORG states :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) In a case where the Secretary of ORG is satisfied that the conditions set out in LAW and CARDINAL ) , CARDINAL and CARDINAL ) , CARDINAL and CARDINAL ) or CARDINAL of Schedule CARDINAL to ORG , etc . ) Act DATE are fulfilled , he will normally decline to examine the asylum application substantively and issue a certificate under Part CARDINAL , DATE , DATE or CARDINAL of Schedule CARDINAL to ORG , etc . ) Act DATE as appropriate .", "( CARDINAL ) The Secretary of ORG shall not issue a certificate under LAW , DATE , DATE or CARDINAL of Schedule CARDINAL to ORG , etc . ) Act DATE unless :", "( i ) the asylum applicant has not arrived in GPE directly from the country in which he claims to fear persecution and has had an opportunity at the border or within the third country or territory to make contact with the authorities of that third country or territory in order to seek their protection ; or", "( ii ) there is other clear evidence of his admissibility to a third country or territory .", "Provided that he is satisfied that a case meets these criteria , the Secretary of ORG is under no obligation to consult the authorities of the third country or territory before the removal of an asylum applicant to that country or territory . ”", "In the above case , ORG had concluded that paragraph CARDINAL of Part CARDINAL of Schedule CARDINAL was incompatible with LAW because it precluded both the Secretary of ORG and the court from considering any question as to the law and practice on refoulement in GPE . The Secretary of ORG successfully appealed to ORG . ORG ( who delivered the leading judgment ) considered the extent to which the evidence demonstrated that removal of an asylum seeker to GPE would violate GPE obligations under LAW . He concluded that :", "“ There are clearly concerns about the conditions in which asylum - seekers may be detained in GPE . It is not however shown that they give rise to systematic violations of LAW .", "... such evidence as there is , and in particular the recent ORG Paper , shows that the relevant legal procedures are to say the least shaky , although there has been some improvement .", "... But in truth there are currently no deportations or removals to GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE or GPE , and as I understand it no reports of unlawful refoulement to any destination . That seems to me to be critical . I would accordingly hold , on the evidence before us , that as matters stand GPE 's continued presence on the list does not offend GPE Convention obligations . ”", "In H ( GPE ) ; PERSON ) ; PERSON ( GPE ) v. Secretary of ORG for ORG [ DATE ] EWCA CARDINAL the ORG affirmed its judgment in Nasseri .", "Recommendation R ( CARDINAL ) CARDINAL ( containing guidelines on the application of the safe third country concept ) where relevant provides as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . In order to assess whether a country is a safe third country to which an asylum - seeker can be sent , all the criteria indicated below should be met in each individual case :", "a. observance by the third country of international human rights standards relevant to asylum as established in universal and regional instruments , including compliance with the prohibition of torture , inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment ;", "b. observance by the third country of international principles relating to the protection of refugees as embodied in the CARDINAL Convention and LAW relating to ORG , with special regard to the principle of non - refoulement ;", "c. the third country will provide effective protection against refoulement and the possibility to seek and enjoy asylum ;", "d. the asylum - seeker has already been granted effective protection in the third country or has had the opportunity , at the border or within the territory of the third country , to make contact with that country 's authorities in order to seek protection there before moving on to the member state where the asylum request is lodged or , that as a result of personal circumstances of the asylum - seeker , including his or her prior relations with the third country , there is clear evidence of the admissibility of the asylum - seeker to the third country . ”", "In Recommendation R ( CARDINAL ) CARDINAL ( on the right of rejected asylum seekers to an effective remedy against decisions on expulsion in the context of LAW recommended :", "“ [ T]hat governments of member states , while applying their own procedural rules , ensure that the following guarantees are complied with in their legislation or practice :", "An effective remedy before a national authority should be provided for any asylum seeker , whose request for refugee status is rejected and who is subject to expulsion to a country about which that person presents an arguable claim that he or she would be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment .", "In applying paragraph CARDINAL of this recommendation , a remedy before a national authority is considered effective when :", "that authority is judicial ; or , if it is a quasi - judicial or administrative authority , it is clearly identified and composed of members who are impartial and who enjoy safeguards of independence ;", "that authority has competence both to decide on the existence of the conditions provided for by LAW and to grant appropriate relief ;", "the remedy is accessible for the rejected asylum seeker ; and", "the execution of the expulsion order is suspended until a decision under CARDINAL is taken . ”", "The above recommendation ( on measures of detention of asylum seekers ) contains , inter alia , a number of recommendations on the conditions of detention of asylum seekers , which include ensuring a standard of living adequate for their health and well - being ; separate accommodation within detention facilities between men and women , as well as between children and adults ; a right of access to the ORG ; legal assistance ; and appropriate arrangements for minors .", "In Resolution CARDINAL ( DATE ) ( Accelerated asylum procedures in ORG member states ) ORG invited the governments of the member states to ensure , inter alia , that minimum procedural safeguards were met in accelerated asylum procedures , including the right to an individual determination of one 's claim and the right to an effective remedy under LAW . It also called on Member GPE to provide adequate social and medical assistance in places of detention .", "On DATE ORG ( “ the CPT ” ) published its report on it visit to GPE from DATE . Having reviewed the conditions of detention for asylum seekers , the report recommended : The report stated :", "“ With respect to all the centres visited , the ORG calls upon the NORP authorities to ensure that :", "- repair work is carried out immediately so that :", " GPE all centres have functioning toilet and shower facilities with a constant supply of water , at an appropriate temperature ;", " GPE appropriate artificial lighting is installed , and access to natural light and ventilation improved .", "- all detainees are allocated a bed / plinth and provided with a clean mattress and clean bedding ;", "- occupancy rates be revised so as to offer a minimum of CARDINAL m² of space per detainee ;", "- all detainees are provided with the necessary products and equipment to keep their accommodation clean , as well as with products for personal hygiene ( i.e. toilet paper , soap , toothpaste , toothbrush , etc . ) ;", "- all detainees have unimpeded access to toilet facilities ;", "- all detainees are allowed to spend a large proportion of DATE outside their cells and have TIME of outdoor exercise a day . ( emphasis in original ) ”", "ORG also noted that there was no regime offering purposeful activities to detainees , that staffing arrangements in the detention facilities were totally inadequate and that proper health care services had to be provided to detainees .", "IV . RELEVANT OBJECTIVE INFORMATION", "On DATE , the ORG High Commissioner for Refugees published the above paper in which it advised ORG to refrain from returning asylum seekers to GPE under LAW until further notice . It also recommended that they make use of LAW ( see relevant ORG law above ) and examine asylum applications themselves . The Position Paper criticised reception procedures for “ GPE returnees ” at GPE airport and ORG , which was responsible for registering asylum appeals . It also expressed concerns in respect of those whose asylum claims were deemed to be “ interrupted ” as a result of their having left GPE before their claims had been decided :", "“ While a number of positive changes in the practice have been noticed in DATE , the legal framework underpinning the practice of ' interruption ' continues to leave room for different interpretations and fails to guarantee that ' GPE returnees ' with ' interrupted claims ' are granted access to the procedure . This situation calls into question whether ' GPE returnees ' will have access to an effective remedy as foreseen by LAW as well as LAW DATE on minimum standards on procedures in Member GPE for granting and withdrawing refugee status – see relevant ORG law above ] . Of relevance is the decision taken by ORG on DATE to refer a case to ORG against GPE for the infringement of ORG based on GPE 's failure to enact legislative amendments to abolish the practice of ' interruption ' . ( footnotes omitted ) ”", "The Position Paper also characterised the percentage of asylum seekers who were granted refugee status as “ disturbingly low ” and criticised the quality of asylum decisions , noting in particular their short , standardised format and the absence of legal reasoning in some decisions .", "The Position Paper also noted that since the adverse finding of the ECJ in Commission v. GPE ( see above ) , ORG had been transposed into NORP law on CARDINAL DATE . However , its implementation continued to present serious flaws . The paper stated :", "“ ORG remains concerned about the extremely limited reception facilities for asylum - seekers as this situation is seriously compromising the full implementation of LAW on the Reception Conditions and urges the Government of GPE to promptly issue the awaited ministerial decision that should establish the criteria for the provision of a DATE financial allowance . Furthermore , ORG calls upon ORG to ensure that the situation of children is given primary consideration and that the current reception conditions for unaccompanied minors are urgently reviewed . ”", "On DATE CARDINAL non - governmental organisations , ORG , ORG and ORG , published a report entitled “ A gamble with the right to asylum in NORP asylum policy and the GPE CARDINAL Regulation ” . The report called on other NORP countries to apply LAW and on the NORP authorities to review their asylum policy so that it complied with GPE 's international obligations . The report stated :", "“ NORP asylum policy is better understood if CARDINAL considers the following :", "Keeping asylum seekers in police custody is a common practice , and we were told several stories of asylum seekers being abused while detained by the police . It is unacceptable that some of those fleeing from persecution in their home country are beaten up by the police in an ORG state instead of receiving help and protection .", "CARDINAL asylum applications were submitted in DATE , but the authorities have dedicated very limited resources to handle them , which is yet another example of GPE 's reluctance to deal with asylum according to its international obligations .", "From CARDINAL asylum cases that were given first instance examination in DATE CARDINAL persons were given residence permit , MONEY of the applicants . CARDINAL decisions were appealed , of which CARDINAL were examined . CARDINAL applications were granted , after the examination of appeals , that is MONEY . These are depressing figures .", "Very few asylum seekers are given legal assistance in GPE , even if they are entitled to this . Access to legal assistance is all the more important given the low percentage of applications that are granted . The number of lawyers to whom NGOs mediate access , CARDINAL , is not in proportion to the need .", "Unaccompanied minors are not guaranteed a place at a reception centre , nor education , a legal guardian or other assistance they are entitled to through ORG .", "CARDINAL available places at reception centres are far from sufficient . The majority of asylum seekers are left to fend for themselves , as best they can .", "It is impossible to respect the asylum seekers ' legal protection and fundamental social rights with resources as limited as those made available by NORP authorities . For instance , CARDINAL police officers are assigned to interview CARDINAL asylum seekers arriving in GPE in the course of DATE . The asylum interviews are therefore very short and superficial . Most of the asylum seekers we have talked to told us that authorities used CARDINAL to interview them , and that the grounds for seeking asylum were not the main topic . Furthermore , these were among the lucky ones who got access to the asylum procedure at all , for it is difficult for asylum seekers to even lodge an application for asylum in GPE .", "...", "In our opinion the deficiencies in the NORP asylum process , documented through this report , entail that there is a discord between the preconditions on which the Dublin II Regulation was founded and procedural practices followed in GPE . In our opinion the NORP system does not guarantee even minimum basic legal protection for the asylum seekers . ”", "In a press release dated DATE and entitled “ No place for an asylum - seeker in GPE ” , ORG stated :", "“ GPE must urgently improve the current situation for refugees and asylum - seekers in the country . We call on the NORP authorities to comply with their obligations under international human rights , refugee and NORP law .", "We note the decision of ORG to suspend returning refugees and asylum - seekers to GPE under the Dublin II Regulation . We consider the decision to be particularly important in light of the poor conditions in which immigration detainees are held in GPE , and the lack of legal guarantees with regard to examination of their asylum claim . We call on Member GPE to make use of LAW allowing Member GPE to examine an asylum application ' even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation ' .", "...", "We recall that a procedure against GPE was launched by ORG at ORG for infringing the Dublin II Regulation . It is our understanding that this is because of the lack of legal guarantees with regard to a substantive examination of the asylum claim by NORP authorities after transfer to GPE .", "We have repeatedly expressed concerns to the NORP authorities about its treatment of asylum - seekers and failure to provide effective asylum procedures . The organisation is concerned to receive reports that asylum - seekers have been held in conditions amounting to arbitrary detention pending the examination of their claim . Asylum - seekers are often interviewed about their claim in the absence of an interpreter and lawyer . Lawyers report that in practice , individuals can expect to have their claim rejected at first instance . We have repeatedly called on the NORP authorities to take concrete measures to improve the conditions for asylum - seekers including by resolving the legal limbo in which they are left – without documents and without access to any social services in practice . In a letter to the NORP authorities sent on DATE , the organization expressed its concern for the well - being of CARDINAL people , including unaccompanied children as young as DATE evicted from their makeshift homes in the port area of GPE . Most of the evicted people are believed to be asylum - seekers from GPE . GPE does not return people to GPE and yet does not process their asylum application in a prompt , fair way , leaving them in limbo without legal status and therefore without rights . ”" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicants were born in DATE and DATE respectively and live in GPE .", "On DATE the ORG then DATE son , PERSON , was serving a prison sentence in the juvenile wing of FAC when he made an attempt to take his own life by hanging himself in the courtyard . Prison warders arriving at the scene resuscitated him and he was subsequently returned to his prison wing . In a statement taken by the prison governor , PERSON was reported as having explained that he was finding it difficult to adapt to prison life and that he was suffering from psychological problems .", "Disciplinary proceedings were brought against PERSON for his attempted suicide but the disciplinary board decided not to impose a punishment . The board told him that “ he was setting a bad example to other inmates ” , and warned him that if he were to do “ such things ” again he would be treated more severely .", "PERSON made another attempt to kill himself on DATE by taking an overdose . He was taken to hospital for treatment and then on DATE he was transferred to FAC .", "On DATE a prisoner told the governor of FAC that PERSON had been “ behaving oddly ” , had talked about hanging himself , and his behaviour had been causing concern in the juvenile wing .", "On DATE , PERSON was transferred from the juvenile wing of the prison to another wing which housed adult prisoners from his home town . According to a report drawn up by prison officers , this had been at the request of PERSON , who had claimed that “ although his identity card showed that he was DATE , he was actually older ” and could therefore be detained in an adult wing .", "On DATE PERSON told the prison governor that he wanted to be transferred to another wing because he did not get on with the people in his wing .", "DATE and DATE PERSON sent CARDINAL letters to the prison governor and the prosecutor of FAC stating that he urgently needed to see the governor to discuss his personal problems . On the few occasions on which his requests were granted he told the governor that he wanted to be transferred to another wing in the prison . He also informed the governor that he had not been visited regularly by his family , that he did not have any money and that he wanted to work in the prison to earn some .", "According to CARDINAL reports drawn up by prison officers , on DATE PERSON met with the deputy governor and asked to be transferred to another cell . When his request was refused he tried to attack a prison warder with a razor blade , kicked and broke the sink in his cell and set fire to his mattress .", "According to another report drawn up by prison officers , on DATE , at TIME , PERSON injured his head by repeatedly hitting it against his cell walls and was then taken to the infirmary to have the injury treated . Later on DATE , he was brought back to the wing and placed in a cell on his own .", "At TIME , PERSON hanged himself from the iron bars of his cell with his bed sheets . A doctor arrived and for TIME tried unsuccessfully to resuscitate him , finally pronouncing him dead .", "Later on DATE , the GPE prosecutor and a doctor arrived at the prison and photographed PERSON body . They then took the body to the local hospital where , on DATE , a post - mortem examination was carried out . According to the post - mortem report , the cause of death was asphyxia . Samples taken from the body were sent for further forensic examination .", "DATE prosecutors questioned the prison officers . Their statements agreed with the above - mentioned reports . The prisoners questioned by the prosecutors stated that they had not seen the incident . Both the prison officers and the prisoners claimed that they knew PERSON had problems .", "It appears from a report that , on DATE , a prosecutor instructed the prison governor to inform the family of PERSON death . Later on DATE the prison governor obtained the telephone number of the second applicant ( PERSON ) from the prison records and informed him of the death of his son .", "On DATE the second applicant formally identified the body of his son . On DATE , the prosecutor released the body for burial .", "On DATE the second applicant met with the FAC prosecutor and told him that he had not been informed of the death of his son until DATE . He alleged that PERSON had not had any problems with his family and that he might have been killed by CARDINAL prison warders with whom he had argued in DATE leading up to his death . He also wanted the prison officers prosecuted for their failure to inform him promptly of his son ’s death .", "Proceedings were brought by the disciplinary board of the prison against CARDINAL prison warders who had been on duty in PERSON wing on DATE he committed suicide . On DATE the disciplinary board decided to give formal warnings to these warders . It was noted in the disciplinary board ’s report that the large number of cells in the wing had made it impossible for the warders to keep a constant watch on PERSON , who had been suffering from psychological problems . However , adequate precautions could have been taken by increasing the number of prison warders there , which would have ensured that he was under sufficient surveillance .", "On DATE both applicants , with the assistance of their legal representative , submitted a detailed complaint to the prosecutor claiming , inter alia , that the iron bars from which their son had allegedly hanged himself were too low - for a person of his height ( QUANTITY ) - to have been effective for this purpose .", "The doctors who had examined the samples taken from PERSON body stated in their report of DATE that his death had been caused by hanging .", "On DATE the GPE prosecutor decided to close the criminal investigation stating that , in his opinion , no one had incited or encouraged PERSON to commit suicide .", "On DATE the Directorate for Prisons informed the second applicant that disciplinary proceedings had been brought against the prison officers who had failed to inform the family of the suicide of their son .", "The applicants filed an objection against the prosecutor ’s decision to close the criminal investigation . They argued that the prosecutor had failed to carry out a thorough investigation into the facts surrounding their son ’s death .", "The objection was dismissed by ORG on DATE . That decision was communicated to the applicants on DATE .", "In the meantime , on DATE , the applicants wrote to ORG claiming compensation for the death of their son . In their letter the applicants argued , inter alia , that even assuming that their son had committed suicide , this was on account of the prison authorities’ failure to take adequate steps to protect his right to life . When ORG failed to respond to their letter , the applicants brought an action against ORG before ORG on DATE .", "On DATE ORG , by a majority of CARDINAL to one , rejected the applicants’ case , with the majority considering that the prison authorities could not be blamed for PERSON suicide , which had occurred as a result of his family problems . The dissenting judge , however , noted in his separate opinion that PERSON was being held in an adult wing of the prison in breach of the applicable domestic law , which required that he be kept in a juvenile wing . The judge argued that the possibility that his detention with adults had contributed to his psychological problems could not be excluded . He added that the fact that PERSON had repeatedly asked to be transferred showed that he had been having problems with the adult prisoners in his wing . The dissenting judge concluded by arguing that PERSON should have been kept under constant observation , at least on DATE when he had injured himself by hitting his head against the wall , TIME before he had succeeded in killing himself .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal against ORG decision . On DATE ORG quashed the decision and held that the file should be returned to ORG for reconsideration . In its decision ORG also referred to the prison disciplinary board ’s conclusion ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) , and concluded that the decision adopted by that disciplinary board proved that the prison authorities had acted in breach of their duties by failing to ensure an adequate watch on PERSON , who had been suffering from psychological problems . It also held that the prison authorities’ failure to inform the family in a timely manner of the death of their son must have contributed to the family ’s suffering . According to the information provided by the applicants , ORG requested a rectification of ORG decision and the examination of that request is still continuing before ORG .", "Article CARDINAL ( b ) of ORG ( which entered into force on DATE and was repealed in DATE ) stipulated that prisoners under the age of CARDINAL were to be kept separately from other prisoners . According to LAW , prisoners were to be given the opportunity to “ inform prison governors , prosecutors and ORG of their complaints and requests ” .", "Recommendation Rec(CARDINAL)CARDINAL of ORG to member States on ORG of DATE ( “ FAC ” ) includes in its basic principles :", "“ ...", "CARDINAL Children under DATE should not be detained in a prison for adults , but in an establishment specially designed for the purpose .", "CARDINAL If children are nevertheless exceptionally held in such a prison there shall be special regulations that take account of their status and needs .", "...", "CARDINAL Where exceptionally children under DATE are detained in a prison for adults the authorities shall ensure that , in addition to the services available to all prisoners , prisoners who are children have access to the social , psychological and educational services , religious care and recreational programmes or equivalents to them that are available to children in the community .", "...", "CARDINAL Where children are detained in a prison they shall be kept in a part of the prison that is separate from that used by adults unless it is considered that this is against the best interests of the child .", "... ”", "The recommendation of ORG on social reactions to juvenile delinquency ( no . R ( CARDINAL ) , adopted on CARDINAL DATE at the CARDINALth meeting of ORG , in so far as relevant , reads as follows :", "“ Recommends the governments of member states to review , if necessary , their legislation and practice with a view : ...", "NORP to exclude the remand in custody of minors , apart from exceptional cases of very serious offences committed by older minors ; in these cases , restricting the length of remand in custody and keeping minors apart from adults ; arranging for decisions of this type to be , in principle , ordered after consultation with a welfare department on alternative proposals ... ”", "In the report pertaining to its visits carried out in GPE between CARDINAL and DATE ( ORG ( CARDINAL ) CARDINAL EN , publication date : CARDINAL DATE ) , ORG for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment ( “ the ORG ” ) expressed its serious misgivings “ as regards the policy of having juveniles ( i.e. DATE ) who are remanded in custody placed in adult prisons ” .", "In a report on its visit to GPE DATE ( ORG ( DATE ) CARDINAL ) , the ORG stated the following :", "“ [ ORG the reports on its visits in DATE and DATE , the ORG has made clear its serious misgivings concerning the policy of having juveniles who are remanded in custody placed in prisons for adults . A combination of mediocre material conditions and an impoverished regime has all too often created an overall environment which is totally unsuitable for this category of inmate . The facts found in the course of the DATE visit have only strengthened those misgivings . Here again , the laudable provisions of ORG circular of DATE ( ‘ the physical conditions of the prison sections allocated to juvenile offenders shall be revised and improved to conform with child psychology and enable practising educative programmes , aptitude intensive games and sports ORG ) have apparently had little practical impact . ”", "The DATE LAW on the Rights of the LAW ( hereafter , “ the ORG Convention ” ) , adopted by ORG of ORG on DATE , has binding force under international law on GPE , including all of the member ORG .", "LAW states :", "“ For the purposes of the present Convention , a child means every human being below DATE unless , under the law applicable to the child , majority is attained earlier . ”", "Article PERSON ) states :", "“ In all actions concerning children , whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions , courts of law , administrative authorities or legislative bodies , the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration . ”", "LAW ) provides :", "“ GPE Parties shall ensure that :", "( c ) Every child deprived of liberty shall be treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person , and in a manner which takes into account the needs of persons of his or her age . In particular , every child deprived of liberty shall be separated from adults unless it is considered in the child ’s best interest not to do so and shall have the right to maintain contact with his or her family through correspondence and visits , save in exceptional circumstances ; ... ”", "Article CARDINAL provides in so far as relevant :", "“ CARDINAL . GPE Parties recognise the right of every child alleged as , accused of , or recognised as having infringed the penal law to be treated in a manner consistent with the promotion of the child ’s sense of dignity and worth , which reinforces the child ’s respect for the human rights and fundamental freedoms of others and which takes into account the child ’s age and the desirability of promoting the reintegration and the child ’s assuming a constructive role in society .", "... ”", "The relevant part of the Concluding Observations of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child in respect of GPE ( CARDINAL/CARDINAL/CARDINAL(CRC / PERSON . ) ) provides as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . ... The fact that detention is not used as a measure of last resort and that cases have been reported of children being held incommunicado for long periods is noted with deep concern . The ORG is also concerned that there are only a small number of juvenile courts and none of them are based in the eastern part of the country . Concern is also expressed at the long periods of pre - trial detention and the poor conditions of imprisonment and at the fact that insufficient education , rehabilitation and reintegration programmes are provided during the detention period .", "The ORG recommends that the ORG party continue reviewing the law and practices regarding the juvenile justice system in order to bring it into full compliance with the LAW , in particular articles CARDINAL , DATE and DATE , as well as with other relevant international standards in this area , such as ORG for ORG ( the Beijing Rules ) and LAW for ORG ( ORG ) , with a view to raising the minimum legal age for criminal responsibility , extending the protection guaranteed by ORG to all children up to DATE and enforcing this law effectively by establishing juvenile courts in every province ... ”", "According to ORG , the juvenile justice system was in its infancy in GPE in DATE . Judges were still learning about child - sensitive detention centres , alternative dispute resolution procedures and due process for children in conflict with the law ." ]

[ "2" ]

[ "2-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE .", "DATE the applicant worked on fixed - term contracts as a nurse in the polyclinic for eye diseases in a public hospital . From DATE she paid regular visits to the polyclinic for infectious diseases of the same hospital , having been diagnosed as HIV - positive .", "Early in DATE the applicant began to suspect that her colleagues were aware of her illness . At that time hospital staff had free access to the patient register which contained information on ORG diagnoses and treating doctors . Having confided her suspicions to her doctor in DATE , the hospital ’s register was amended so that henceforth only the treating clinic ’s personnel had access to its ORG records . The applicant was registered in the patient register under a false name . Apparently later her identity was changed once again and she was given a new social security number .", "NORP In DATE the applicant changed her job as her temporary contract was not renewed .", "On DATE , the applicant complained to ORG ( lääninhallitus , länsstyrelsen ) , requesting it to examine who had accessed her confidential patient record . Upon request , the director in charge of the hospital ’s archives filed a statement with ORG , according to which it was not possible to find out who , if anyone , had accessed the applicant ’s patient record as the data system revealed CARDINAL most recent consultations ( by working unit and not by person ) and even this information was deleted once the file was returned to the archives .", "In its decision of DATE ORG held that :", "“ LAW ( laki potilaan asemasta ja oikeuksista , lag om patientens ställning och rättigheter ) provides that the health authorities and staff have to comply with the regulations issued by ORG ( sosiaali- ja terveysministeriö , social- och hälsovårdsministeriet , “ the Ministry ” ) when preparing and processing patient records . Pursuant to this section the ORG has issued , on DATE , Regulation no . CARDINAL .", "In the said Regulation it is noted that patients records must be prepared having due regard to the secrecy regulations and the protection obligation and the duty to take care pursuant to LAW ( henkilörekisterilaki , personregisterlagen ; Act no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) . According to the duty to take care , precaution and good registering practices must be observed when gathering , depositing , using and delivering data and these must be done in a manner so as not to infringe unnecessarily the right to privacy of the registered person or his or her benefits and rights . The protection obligation means that data in patient records must be duly protected against unauthorised processing , use , destruction , amendment and theft ( sections CARDINAL and CARDINAL of LAW ) .", "In the said Regulation it is also noted that the patient records must form an entity to ensure that outsiders can not gain unauthorised access to them and that , in addition to the said obligations , in accordance with LAW , the purpose of use of the said data can be taken into account . This way it can be made sure that requisite patient data are only given to the personnel participating in the treatment of the patient .", "[ The applicant ] has in her representations alleged that [ X ] , who is working for [ the hospital ] has ordered up the case history of [ the applicant ’s ex - husband ] and that someone else has ordered up her file or visited the archives and read her file and/or that of [ her son ] and that the data have been transmitted to [ Y ] and other staff mentioned in [ the applicant ’s ] representations .", "[ X ] has contested having proceeded erroneously . The other persons mentioned in [ the applicant ’s ] representations have contested having had knowledge of the data mentioned therein concerning [ the applicant ] and her family .", "According to the director in charge of [ the hospital ’s ] archives it is not possible to retroactively clarify the use of patient records . The data system reveals CARDINAL most recent consultations ( by working unit and not by person ) but this information is deleted once the file has been returned to the archives .", "Therefore , ORG can not further rule on whether information contained in the patient records has been used by or given to an outsider .", "Having regard to the foregoing , ORG however finds that the system should record any consultation of patient files as a safeguard of privacy in order to ensure that the responsibility for a possible leak of information can be individualised . For the future , ORG draws the hospital ’s attention to the protection obligation and the duty to take care provided by LAW , and further , to the need to ensure that privacy protection is not put at risk when processing medical data within the hospital . ... ”", "Subsequently , in DATE , the hospital ’s register was amended in that it became possible retrospectively to identify any person who had accessed a patient record .", "On DATE , the applicant instituted civil proceedings against ORG ( sairaanhoitopiirin kuntayhtymä , samkommunen för sjukvårdsdistriktet ) , which was responsible for the hospital ’s patient register , claiming non - pecuniary and pecuniary damage for the alleged failure to keep her patient record confidential .", "On DATE , ORG ( käräjäoikeus , tingsrätten ) , having held an oral hearing , rejected the action . Having assessed the evidence before it , including CARDINAL witness statements , the decision of ORG and a statement of ORG ( tietosuojavaltuutettu , dataombudsmannen ) , the court did not find firm evidence that the applicant ’s patient record had been unlawfully consulted .", "The applicant appealed to ORG ( hovioikeus , hovrätten ) , maintaining her claim that the hospital had not complied with the domestic law , in breach of her right to respect for her private life .", "On DATE , ORG , having held an oral hearing , considered that the applicant ’s testimony about the events , such as her colleagues’ hints and remarks about her HIV infection , was reliable and credible . Like ORG it did not , however , find firm evidence that her patient record had been unlawfully consulted . It ordered the applicant to reimburse the respondent ’s legal expenses before ORG and ORG , amounting to MONEY ( ORG ) and ORG CARDINAL plus interest , respectively .", "In her application for leave to appeal to ORG ( korkein oikeus ) , the applicant claimed inter alia that there had been a violation of her right to respect for her private life .", "On DATE ORG refused leave to appeal .", "LAW ( Suomen hallitusmuoto , NORP för GPE ; Act no . CARDINAL , as amended by Act no . CARDINAL ) was in force until DATE . Its section CARDINAL corresponded to LAW ( Suomen perustuslaki , ORG grundlag ; Act no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) , which provides that everyone ’s right to private life is guaranteed .", "Until DATE , the rules governing the use and confidentiality of personal data were laid down in LAW of DATE . Sections CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the LAW prohibited the processing of sensitive personal data , including information on a person ’s health and medical treatment , except within the health authorities . Unauthorised disclosure of personal data was prohibited under section CARDINAL and illegal use of disclosed data was prohibited under LAW . Pursuant to section CARDINAL the data controller had to ensure that personal data and information contained therein were appropriately secured against any unlawful processing , use , destruction , amendment and theft . In this regard , the explanatory report of LAW PERSON ( no . ORG ) for the enactment of LAW stated that the mere existence of legal provisions did not suffice to guarantee the protection of privacy . In addition , the data controller had to make sure that data were protected de facto . When planning the physical protection of the data system regard must be had to , inter alia , whether the system was manual or automated . The delicate nature of the information naturally affected the scope of the protection obligation . Under section DATE , the data controller was liable to compensate pecuniary damage suffered as a result of the use or disclosure of incorrect personal data or of unlawful use or disclosure of personal data .", "On DATE , a new LAW ( henkilötietolaki , personuppgiftslag ; Act no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) entered into force . LAW prohibits processing of sensitive personal data . However , under LAW , health care professionals may process data relating to a person ’s state of health , illness , handicap or treatment if they are indispensable in his / her treatment . Section CARDINAL provides that the data controller shall carry out the technical and organisational measures necessary for securing personal data against unauthorised access , accidental or unlawful destruction , manipulation , disclosure and transfer as well as against other unlawful processing . Section CARDINAL lays down a secrecy obligation for those who have gained knowledge of someone ’s personal circumstances . Under section DATE , the data controller is liable to compensate pecuniary and other damage suffered by the data subject or another person as a result of the processing of personal data in violation of the provisions of the LAW .", "The Patient ’s LAW entered into force on DATE . Section CARDINAL , as in force until DATE , provided that the health authorities had to comply with the regulations issued by ORG ( “ the Ministry ” ) when creating and processing patients’ personal and medical data .", "According to ORG no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL/CARDINAL , issued on DATE , a patient ’s privacy had to be secured when creating and processing his / her patient record . The data controller had to make sure that outsiders could not gain unauthorised access to sensitive personal data and that only the personnel treating a patient had access to his / her patient register .", "Section CARDINAL of the Patient ’s LAW provided that health care professionals or other persons working in a health care unit were not allowed to reveal to an outsider ( that is a person not participating in the treatment of the patient ) information contained in the patient documents without the written consent of the patient . The said section has been amended as of DATE ( Act no . CARDINAL ) to the effect that it must be recorded in the data file if patient records have been revealed as well as the grounds for the disclosure .", "Further , ORG ( laki terveydenhuollon ammattihenkilöistä , lag om yrkesutbildade personer inom hälso- och sjukvården ; Act no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) contains provisions on the retention of patient documents and their confidentiality ( section CARDINAL ) and on the obligation of secrecy ( section CARDINAL ) .", "Finally , the new Electronic Processing of Client Information Act ( laki sosiaali- ja terveydenhuollon asiakastietojen sähköisestä käsittelystä , lag om elektronisk behandling av klientuppgifter inom social- och hälsovården ; Act no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) entered into force on DATE . The aim of this LAW is to further enforce ORG rights in the context of the processing of electronic personal data within the social and health care ." ]

[ "8" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "The applicant is the owner of a DATE newspaper , ORG , published in GPE .", "Günlük Evrensel released its first issue on DATE . On DATE , the state of emergency regional governor in south - east GPE banned the newspaper 's entry and distribution in the provinces under his jurisdiction , namely , ORG , GPE , PERSON and PERSON . The governor considered that the newspaper was pursuing the same editorial line as another newspaper called ORG , the entry and distribution of which had also been banned on DATE .", "NORP The governor 's decision to ban Günlük Evrensel , which contained no reasons , was served on the newspaper 's ORG representative on DATE . The representative acknowledged its receipt on DATE and the ban took immediate effect .", "While banned in the state of emergency region , the newspaper was freely distributed elsewhere in GPE .", "The governor 's office of the state of emergency region was set up with special powers after the state of siege was officially declared to be over on DATE by LAW no . CARDINAL of DATE . A state of emergency was thus decreed in the provinces of ORG , ORG , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , GPE and PERSON . On DATE the state of emergency was extended to the province of ORG , but lifted in the province of ORG . It was declared to be over in the provinces of Batman , ORG and ORG on DATE , in the province of GPE on DATE and in the provinces of GPE and PERSON on DATE . In DATE it was extended by DATE in the provinces of GPE and PERSON .", "The powers of the governor of the state of emergency region ( PERSON GPE ) are set out in GPE ( Law no . CARDINAL of DATE ) and various legislative decrees that were issued after the state of emergency was declared ( Legislative Decrees nos . CARDINAL , CARDINAL , CARDINAL , CARDINAL , CARDINAL , CARDINAL , CARDINAL , CARDINAL , CARDINAL , CARDINAL and CARDINAL ) .", "Section CARDINAL(e ) of LAW reads as follows :", "“ ... If a state of emergency is decreed , the following measures may be imposed with a view to maintaining general security , safety and public order and to preventing any escalation of the violence ... :", "...", "( e ) An order prohibiting , either absolutely or without prior permission , the editing , dissemination , publication or distribution of newspapers , reviews , brochures , pamphlets , posters or any similar publications , or the publication or distribution of any such [ publications ] which have been printed or disseminated outside the state of emergency region ... ”", "DATE ( a ) of Legislative Decree no . CARDINAL provides :", "“ The printing , dissemination , publication or distribution of books , reviews , newspapers , brochures , posters or other similar publications liable seriously to undermine public order in the region , to cause agitation among the local population or to obstruct the security forces in the course of their duties by giving a false account of operations being conducted in the region shall be prohibited , either absolutely or without the prior permission of the governor of the region to which the state of emergency applies or the governors of the provinces concerned . [ Likewise , ] the publication or distribution of [ any publication of the same type ] that has been printed and published outside the state of emergency region shall be prohibited , either absolutely or without the prior permission of the governor of the region to which the state of emergency applies or the governors of the provinces concerned ... ”", "The relevant part of Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL of the LAW provides :", "“ ... There shall be no right of appeal to ORG to contest the form or substance of legislative decrees issued during a state of emergency , a state of siege or in wartime . ”", "DATE Decree no . CARDINAL , as amended by LAW no . CARDINAL of CARDINAL DATE , precludes any application in the administrative courts to have an administrative act performed pursuant to Legislative Decree no . CARDINAL set aside .", "DATE of Legislative Decree no . CARDINAL reads as follows :", "“ No criminal , financial or civil liability may be asserted against ... the governor of the state of emergency region or provincial governors in that region in respect of decisions taken , or acts performed , by them in the exercise of the powers conferred on them by this legislative decree , and no application shall be made to any judicial authority to that end . This shall be without prejudice to the rights of individuals to claim reparation from the ORG for damage which they have been caused without justification [ sebepsiz ] . ”", "ORG has reviewed the constitutionality of LAW no . CARDINAL , as amended by LAW no . CARDINAL of CARDINAL DATE , in a judgment of DATE , which was published in ORG on DATE . It stated :", "“ It is not possible to reconcile that provision [ which precludes any judicial scrutiny of acts performed by the governor of the state of emergency region ] with the concept of the rule of law ... The system of government when a state of emergency has been declared is not an arbitrary one that escapes all judicial scrutiny . There can be no doubt that individual and regulatory acts performed by the competent authorities while the state of emergency continues must be subject to judicial review . Contravention of this principle is inconceivable in countries run by democratic regimes and founded on freedom . However , the impugned provision is contained in a legislative decree that can not be the subject of constitutional review ... Consequently , the application for an order quashing that provision must be dismissed as being incompatible ratione materiae [ yetkisizlik ] ... ”", "As regards LAW no . CARDINAL , in CARDINAL judgments delivered on DATE and CARDINAL DATE ( published in ORG on DATE and DATE respectively ) , ORG followed that decision in dismissing as incompatible ratione materiae applications for orders quashing the relevant provisions ." ]

[ "10", "13" ]

[]

[]

[ "14" ]

[]

[]

[ "The applicants are NORP nationals , who were born in DATE and DATE , and live in GPE , GPE , and GPE respectively .", "By a judgment of CARDINAL DATE ORG , PERSON ( “ the ORG ” ) ordered ORG of GPE to pay an allowance due to the applicants for participation in the counter - terrorist operation in LOC . The court awarded the first applicant MONEY ( RUB ) for a period of service from DATE to DATE and the second applicant RUB CARDINAL for a period of service from DATE .", "The judgment became binding and enforceable on DATE . The applicants repeatedly attempted to secure the enforcement of that judgment by contacting the debtor authority and other ORG authorities responsible for payment of the judgment debt . They provided the authorities with the necessary documents , including the writ of enforcement issued by the domestic court . However , their attempts were not successful and the judgment remained unenforced .", "Following the authorities’ prolonged failure to enforce the judgment , the applicants sued ORG of GPE on the basis of its vicarious liability ( субсидиарная ответственность ) . On DATE the ORG , GPE ( “ the LOC ” ) granted the applicants’ claims and awarded RUB CARDINAL in favour of PERSON and RUB CARDINAL in favour of Mr GPE . Those amounts corresponded to the total sum owed to the applicants under the judgments of DATE and DATE ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) .", "On DATE the judgment of CARDINAL DATE was quashed , following an application by ORG for review on account of newly discovered circumstances .", "By a new judgment of CARDINAL DATE , upheld on appeal on DATE , ORG dismissed the ORG claims . The court noted that the debtor was not in possession of the writs of enforcement and thus could not enforce the judgment of DATE in the applicant ’s favour . Furthermore , the court referred to the applicants’ failure to prove that the principal debtor had refused or failed to pay the judgment debt .", "The judgment of DATE in the ORG favour remains unenforced to the present date .", "The applicants submitted a copy of a judgment of CARDINAL DATE allegedly delivered by ORG in favour of CARDINAL claimants , including the applicants . It transpires from the text of the judgment that the court heard the oral submissions of the parties to the case at a hearing and arrived at the following conclusions :", "“ ...", "The failure of the command of ORG to issue orders to make the payments in due time does not in itself prove that the applicants did not take part in the counter - terrorist operation and are not entitled to receive combat allowance .", "The records of individual participation in the counter - terrorist operation on the territory of the GPE region reflect the dates of [ the claimants’ ] participation which match the timeframe indicated by the claimants .", "The records submitted by the finance department of ORG ’s regional office demonstrate that the claimants have indeed not received the remuneration due to them for participation in combat and other actions in defence of the public order ...", "The reports drawn up by the head of the personnel department in ORG ’s regional office following an internal inquiry show that the claimants were included in the orders authorising the counter - terrorist operation and are entitled to relevant payments .", "In addition , the case file contains the TIME of meetings held by the commission supervising the putting together of orders concerning the involvement of personnel in the counter - terrorist operation which evidence that the applicants indeed took part in the operations during the aforementioned period and are entitled to extra reimbursement .", "...", "The court concludes that the claimants indeed took part in the counter - terrorist operation . The respondent submitted to the court official documents evidencing [ this fact ] and thus de facto accepted their claims .", "...", "The amounts to be recovered are calculated by the court based on the records provided by the respondent .", "...", "Having regard to the above and relying on Articles CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the Code of Civil Procedure , the court orders ORG of GPE to pay the following amounts for de facto participation in the counter - terrorist operation on the territory of the LOC in favour of :", "...", "ORG GPE RUB CARDINAL for the period from DATE to DATE , and also to credit the above period in [ the claimant ’s ] length of service record in the proportion of DATE for DATE and in [ the claimant ’s ] length of special service record in the proportion of DATE for DATE ;", "PERSON RUB CARDINAL for the period from DATE to DATE , and also to credit the above period in [ the claimant ’s ] length of service record in the proportion of DATE for DATE and in [ the claimant ’s ] length of special service record [ in the proportion of DATE for DATE ] . ”", "On DATE ORG of ORG returned the writs of enforcement related to the judgment of DATE issued by ORG for failure to indicate the creditor ’s addresses and discrepancies between the operative part of the judgment and the enforcement document .", "NORP By letter of DATE the acting president of ORG , replying to the ORG request for correction of the irregularities in the enforcement documents and the judgment , informed them that the court had never delivered the judgment of DATE or the related writs of enforcement and that the stamps and signatures on the documents had been falsified .", "The Government submitted a copy of a decision to refuse the institution of criminal proceedings dated DATE , which read as follows :", "“ Senior police lieutenant PERSON , an investigator at the PERSON police station ’s investigative department , having examined the material submitted by the prosecutor ’s office for LOC of PERSON and registered by ... the PERSON police station ... on DATE , concerning the falsification by an unidentified person of a judgment of the Zavodskoy ORG ordering the payment of an additional monetary allowance for participation in the counter - terrorist operation in GPE , established [ the following ] :", "The judgment by the Zavodskoy District Court of DATE in [ the applicants’ ] favour and the writs of enforcement dated DATE [ by which ] ORG for GPE [ was ] ordered to pay [ the applicants ] RUB CARDINAL each , which had been submitted by [ the applicants ] to ORG of ORG , are falsified and were never delivered or issued by ORG .", "The above is confirmed by the information contained in [ a letter ] of the Zavodskoy District Court of DATE ...", "Accordingly , the actions of the unidentified person constitute the corpus delicti described in LAW .", "The above crime belongs to the category of small - scale crimes and , considering that the judgment ... was falsified in DATE , any prosecution would be time - barred in accordance with LAW a ) of LAW .", "Based on the above ... it is decided :", "To refuse to open a criminal case on account of a crime provided for in LAW [ having taken place ] ... due to the expiration of the statutory limitation period for criminal prosecution ...", "...", "To send a copy of this decision to [ the applicants ] , PERSON and the prosecutor for LOC of Grozny .", "This decision is amenable to appeal to the prosecutor for LOC of PERSON or ORG in accordance with LAW of LAW .", "... ”", "On DATE a copy of the decision was sent to the applicants .", "On DATE the ORG considered the applicants’ claims against ORG brought on the basis of its vicarious liability and ordered it to pay RUB CARDINAL to PERSON and RUB CARDINAL to Mr GPE . The amounts recovered corresponded to the total sums owed to the applicants under the judgments of DATE and DATE ( see paragraphs CARDINAL and CARDINAL above ) .", "By letter of CARDINAL DATE the president of ORG responded to an inquiry by the office of ORG at ORG as follows :", "“ In reply to your inquiry of CARDINAL DATE [ no . of the letter ] ORG [ ... ] informs you that the judgments of DATE and DATE on the claims of PERSON , PERSON and [ another person ] in their favour against ORG ordered the payment of RUB CARDINAL , CARDINAL and CARDINAL respectively for de facto participation in the counter - terrorist operation on the territory of the NORP region ( hereinafter “ the ORG ” ) .", "Pursuant to ORG CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the Code of Civil Procedure writs of enforcement were issued to the creditors upon entry of the judgments into force .", "...", "The court is not in possession of any information concerning the enforcement of the judgment of DATE in respect of PERSON and PERSON .", "Since the date of the delivery of the judgment PERSON , PERSON and PERSON have not lodged with the court any claims or complaints of nonenforcement of the judgment ; hence it is impossible to provide you with any court decisions [ in this respect ] .", "As regards the judgment of DATE which allegedly ordered the payment of monetary allowances by ORG to GPE GPE and PERSON for de facto participation in the ORG , the court has never delivered such a judgment , nor have any claims to this effect been lodged with the court . ”", "Based on the information contained in the above letter , ORG challenged the judgment of CARDINAL DATE before ORG on account of newly discovered circumstances . As a result , on DATE the judgment of CARDINAL DATE was quashed ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) . By a new judgment of DATE , ORG rejected the ORG claims ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) . The court stated that , according to all available evidence , the judgment of DATE had never been delivered . That judgment was upheld on appeal on DATE ." ]

[ "6", "P1" ]

[ "6-1", "P1-1" ]

[ "P1-1-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in Kežmarok .", "The applicant and her husband held a joint tenancy of a CARDINAL - room flat owned by a cooperative in GPE .", "Owing to differences with her husband , the applicant left the flat together with her CARDINAL children in DATE . They started living in a CARDINAL - room flat owned by ORG . It was leased by the applicant 's father , who suffered from a long - term illness and died on DATE . The applicant and her CARDINAL children , born in DATE and DATE respectively , continued to live in the flat . The applicant paid the rent .", "In a decision which became final on DATE a court granted a divorce order in respect of the applicant and her husband . Their children were placed in the applicant 's custody .", "On DATE the applicant and her former husband reached an agreement whereby the latter would continue using the flat in which they had formerly lived together . On DATE the ORG which owned the flat and of which the applicant was a member approved a request for the flat to be exchanged for a CARDINAL - room flat in Kežmarok . The applicant 's former husband lived in the flat in Kežmarok until his death on DATE . His and the applicant 's son inherited membership rights in respect of the cooperative which owned the flat in Kežmarok , including the right to use it . The applicant later started leasing the flat with a view to improving her financial situation .", "After her father 's death the applicant requested to be registered as permanently residing in the flat where she had lived DATE . In a letter of DATE the mayor of ORG replied that the position was unclear . It had to be determined , in particular , whether the tenancy had passed to the applicant pursuant to LAW after her father 's death .", "On DATE ORG informed the applicant that she had formally ceased to be a tenant of the flat which she had used with her former husband on DATE that is , after the death of her father . The right to use her father 's flat had not passed to the applicant after the former 's death as the requirements of Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL of ORG had not been met .", "On DATE ORG included the applicant on a list of persons seeking the tenancy of a flat . No municipal flat could be put at the applicant 's disposal at that time as other persons were above her on the list .", "As the applicant had refused to move out , on DATE ORG sought a judicial order for her eviction .", "On DATE ORG ordered the applicant to move out of the flat within DATE after its judgment had become final . On DATE the ORG upheld the first - instance judgment . The courts established that the applicant had not become a tenant of the flat originally used by her father since , at the time of the latter 's death , she had been registered as a user of a different flat , in which she had lived with her former husband . The requirements of LAW had not been met . After her father 's death the applicant had lived in the flat in issue without any justification . In addition , ORG held that the applicant could live in the flat in Kežmarok which her son had inherited from her former husband . The plaintiff had rightly sought the protection of its ownership rights in respect of the flat .", "The applicant lodged an appeal on points of law , arguing that the plaintiff company lacked the capacity to take part in the proceedings . On DATE ORG dismissed the appeal on points of law , holding that the plaintiff was a legal entity established by ORG . As such it had standing to sue the applicant .", "The GPE requested that the order be enforced . The applicant objected that her son had reached the age of majority and that she could not live in his flat in Kežmarok . ORG dismissed the objection on DATE , holding that the issue could not be examined in the context of the enforcement proceedings . On DATE an enforcement officer enforced the judgment , in accordance with the relevant provisions of ORG with the result that the applicant was obliged to move out of the flat in which she had lived DATE .", "On DATE that flat was allocated to a municipal employee who lived in a CARDINAL - room flat and who had applied , on DATE , for a bigger one as she had to take care of an elderly and ill relative . Later the new tenant acquired ownership of the flat for a relatively small sum in accordance with the relevant law .", "The applicant , with her under - age daughter , started living in the CARDINAL - room flat in Kežmarok inherited by the applicant 's son . The flat has a surface area of QUANTITY . The applicant has continued to work in GPE . The distance between the CARDINAL towns is QUANTITY .", "The applicant filed a petition under LAW of the LAW , alleging , inter alia , a violation of her constitutional right to protection of her private and family life as well as a violation of her ownership rights in the proceedings referred to above . She argued that the municipality had been informed that she had moved to her father 's flat in DATE with the intention of living there permanently . She had requested to be allocated municipal housing and had therefore believed that her interests would be protected . The municipality 's argument that she could live in her son 's CARDINAL - room flat in Kežmarok was unreasonable . In addition , her daughter , who was under age , was disturbed by having to live in that flat as the girl 's father had committed suicide there .", "On DATE ORG declared admissible the complaint alleging a violation of the applicant 's right to respect for her private and family life .", "On DATE ORG found that by its judgment of DATE the ORG had violated the applicant 's rights under LAW and LAW .", "The decision stated that the ordinary courts ' conclusion that the requirements of Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL of ORG had not been met in the applicant 's case was correct as such . It also had to be considered , however , whether there had been a pressing social need for the interference and whether it had been proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued , .", "The applicant had not acted contrary to the law when she had moved to her father 's flat in DATE . She had lived in that flat continuously , together with her children , even after her father 's death . At the time of the examination of the request for her eviction the applicant had had no other place to live . The flat was to be regarded , therefore , as the applicant 's home .", "ORG noted that LAW permitted the granting of relief from hardship in justified cases by ensuring that alternative accommodation should be provided to persons who had been ordered to move out of a flat . As to ORG practice and , in particular , judgment no . CARDINAL Cdo CARDINAL/CARDINAL ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) , the circumstances of the applicant 's case were different in that the applicant had legally moved into the flat in DATE and the flat was owned by the municipality and not by individuals . In any event , neither LAW nor any other legal provision could be interpreted and applied in a manner producing effects incompatible with GPE 's obligations under international treaties .", "In view of LAW , the municipality 's ownership rights in respect of the flat could not be dissociated from its obligation to assist citizens of GPE in having their basic needs satisfied . it should have been examined whether ordering the applicant to leave the flat , together with her under - age daughter and without providing them with alternative accommodation , was contra bonos mores within the meaning of LAW . The protection of family , minors and juveniles under LAW should also have been taken into account .", "Furthermore , ORG had registered the applicant as a person seeking a flat , after having verified whether her request had been justified , at approximately the same time as it had initiated judicial proceedings for her eviction . It should have been verified whether the municipality , as the owner and manager of municipal flats , had a compelling reason for ordering the applicant to move out of the flat immediately without being obliged to provide her with alternative accommodation .", "ORG did not consider the applicant 's behaviour improper . In DATE she had left the cooperative flat where she had lived with a view to avoiding the negative impact of her husband 's inappropriate behaviour on her and her children . The applicant had petitioned for divorce and her return to that flat would not have resolved her personal situation as her husband also had the right to use it .", "Finally , the applicant had used the flat for a long time and the representatives of the municipality had initially not taken a firm standpoint as regards her title to use the flat . Reference was made , in particular , to the mayor 's letter of DATE . The owner of the flat had therefore contributed to the applicant 's belief that she would not be obliged to leave the flat without alternative accommodation being provided to her . In DATE , when the judicial proceedings had started , the applicant had been in a difficult situation as the mother of CARDINAL under - age children who had lost their father .", "When deciding the case , the ORG had not duly considered the above relevant facts . Its decision to uphold the first - instance judgment ordering the applicant to leave the flat without being provided with any other accommodation therefore amounted to an interference with the applicant 's right to respect for her private and family life and for her home which was not based on relevant and sufficient reasons . As a result , and also having regard to the particular protection which LAW afforded to children and juveniles , that interference could not be regarded as being necessary in a democratic society .", "Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL guarantees to every person the right to protection against unjustified interference with his or her private and family life .", "NORP In decision NORP . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL of CARDINAL March CARDINAL ORG rejected a petition filed by a judge who alleged a violation of LAW and CARDINAL of the LAW in that ORG had asked him to submit a financial statement . The decision stated that the petitioner should have sought redress before the ordinary courts by means of an action under LAW seq . of LAW for protection of his personal rights .", "Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL guarantees the right to own property . Paragraph CARDINAL of Article CARDINAL prohibits the abuse of ownership to the detriment of the rights of others or contrary to general interests protected by law .", "Under LAW , interference with the inviolability of the home ( other than the search of a home in the context of criminal proceedings , which is governed by paragraph CARDINAL of the same Article ) may be permitted by law only where it is necessary in a NORP society for the protection of a person 's life , health or property , for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others or in cases of serious threat to public order .", "Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL provides that marriage , parenthood and family are to be protected by law . Particular protection is to be afforded to children and juveniles .", "Pursuant to LAW , as in force until DATE , the ORG could commence proceedings upon a petition ( podnet ) filed by any individuals or corporations claiming that their rights had been violated .", "According to its case - law under LAW , ORG lacked jurisdiction to draw legal consequences from a violation of a petitioner 's constitutional rights . It could neither grant damages to the person concerned nor impose a sanction on the public authority liable for the violation found . In ORG view , it was therefore for the authority concerned to provide redress to the person whose rights were violated .", "Pursuant to LAW , the exercise of civil rights and obligations must not interfere with the justified rights and interests of others unless there are relevant legal grounds and must not be contra ORG mores .", "By DATE , any natural person has the right to protection of his or her personality , and in particular of his or her life and health , civil and human dignity , privacy , name and personal characteristics .", "Under Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL , where a tenant of a flat dies , unless the flat has been jointly leased by spouses , the tenancy passes to the late tenant 's children and other close relatives , provided that they lived in the same household as the tenant at the time of his or her death and that they do not have their own flat .", "NORP In judgment no . CARDINAL Cdo CARDINAL/CARDINAL , delivered on DATE , ORG expressed the view that LAW could not be applied for the purpose of obliging the owner of a flat ( CARDINAL individuals in that particular case ) to provide accommodation to a person who used the flat without any legal grounds . Imposing such an obligation would infringe the owner 's property rights .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an application with the ORG in which she complained under LAW and LAW above - mentioned decisions of the ordinary courts leading to her eviction from the flat in which she lived . The application was registered as no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL .", "On DATE a committee of CARDINAL judges rejected the application as being inadmissible . At that time the constitutional proceedings initiated by the applicant were still pending . As ORG had declared admissible the complaint alleging a violation of the applicant 's right to respect for her private and family life , the ORG considered the relevant part of the application to be premature at that time . The decision on admissibility reads as follows :", "“ The ORG has examined the application and notes that the applicant has been informed of the possible obstacles to its admissibility . In the light of all the material in its possession , and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence , the ORG finds that they do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the ORG or its Protocols . It follows that the application must be rejected , in accordance with LAW . ”" ]

[ "8" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicants in application no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , PERSON GPE and Ms Meri Vladimirova GPE , were born in DATE and DATE respectively and live in GPE . They are sisters .", "The applicants in application no . CARDINAL , Mr PERSON , PERSON and PERSON , were born in DATE , DATE and DATE respectively and live or lived in GPE . The first CARDINAL were husband and wife , and the third is their daughter . As mentioned in paragraph CARDINAL above , Mr PERSON died in DATE .", "At the material time the applicants in application no . ORG ( “ the NORP sisters ” ) , both of whom are retired , owned a flat on the first floor of entrance “ B ” of a Ushaped block of flats in the centre of GPE . Both of them had lived in that flat since DATE . They submitted that as a result of the events described below , they were forced to move out of the flat . On DATE they sold it to a limited liability company for CARDINAL . On DATE they bought a smaller flat in another neighbourhood , and on DATE went to live there .", "The applicants in application no . CARDINAL ( “ the PERSON family ” ) own and live in a flat on the first floor of entrance “ C ” of the same block of flats . ORG daughter , born on DATE , also lives there .", "In DATE a company rented a flat on the ground floor of entrance “ B ” of the block , below the flat of the NORP sisters . It started operating a computer club there , without obtaining the necessary permits .", "NORP In DATE the club moved into a flat situated opposite the original one , again on the ground floor of entrance “ B ” . That flat was located diagonally below both the flat of the NORP sisters and that of the PERSON family .", "According to CARDINAL affidavits , the first of which was drawn up by Mr PERSON and PERSON , and the rest by witnesses asked by the applicants to describe the situation , the club had fortysix computers and CARDINAL vending machines . It was open twentyfour TIME a day , DATE a week . The services it offered were chiefly computer gaming and Internet surfing . The club ’s clients , mostly teenagers and young adults , often gathered in front of the building , chatting loudly and shouting , drinking alcohol , and smoking cigarettes and allegedly even narcotic drugs . They would often break the door of the building and enter the passageway , where they drank and smoked . The noise and the vibrations generated by them , both while inside the club and while entering or leaving the LOC , could be clearly heard and felt in the flats of the NORP sisters and of the PERSON family .", "The NORP sisters produced a certificate in which their general practitioner attested that from DATE both of them started complaining of constant headaches , insomnia , irritability and anxiety , had high blood pressure , and had lost weight . In DATE PERSON developed a sinus tachycardia . As a result of her increasingly frequent cardiac crises , she had to be hospitalised . According to the doctor , those health problems were due to the constant disturbance and noise caused by the club ’s operations , and gradually subsided after the NORP sisters went to live elsewhere in DATE .", "On DATE the general meeting of the block ’s occupants resolved , by CARDINAL votes and QUANTITY abstentions , that the club ’s operations should be stopped , and that no commercial activities should be allowed in the building . It stated that the club ’s operations caused serious disturbances to all inhabitants . The club ’s manager , who was present at the meeting , said that he disagreed and would do everything necessary to keep the club open .", "Having earlier made numerous complaints by telephone , the applicants made written complaints to the police on DATE , CARDINAL and DATE , and DATE and DATE . They submitted that those complaints had prompted only a cursory inspection of the club , which had produced no tangible results .", "On DATE the head of the local police station told the applicants that when asked to do so , the club ’s manager had been able to produce all necessary permits , and that no breaches of public order had been found . The manager had been warned not to allow breaches of public order and had undertaken to inform the police of any disturbances . The head of the local station further said that the police had no power to shut down commercial premises . On DATE the applicants protested against the passiveness of the police .", "On DATE the club ’s manager called at the ORG ’s flat and allegedly threatened Mr PERSON with violence if he persisted in his efforts to have the club ’s operations stopped . The same day Mr PERSON complained to the police , but apparently nothing ensued .", "On DATE the applicants asked the borough mayor to order the cessation of the club ’s operations . The same day the municipal services wrote to the police , informing them that the club was operating without the requisite licence .", "On DATE municipal inspectors visited the premises and noted that the club was operating unlawfully . On DATE the municipality sent the file to FAC .", "NORP However , on DATE the chief architect of the municipality approved a plan for the conversion of the flat into commercial LOC . On DATE Mr PERSON , acting in his capacity as chairman of the condominium , contested that decision before FAC . On DATE the ORG , while noting that section CARDINAL of the DATE LAW ( see paragraphs LAW below ) had not been complied with , said that that did not constitute grounds for invalidating the legalisation of the conversion under section CARDINAL ) of the LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) and upheld the mayor ’s decision .", "Despite the ORG repeated complaints to the municipal authorities , they took no further action .", "On DATE the chief architect of the municipality granted the club an operating permit , on the condition that its clients entered through the back door and not through the passageway used by the building ’s residents . On DATE the applicants challenged that decision before FAC , arguing that the condition imposed by the mayor was impossible to comply with , as the only access to the back door was through the passageway . They requested that the permit be set aside and that the club be closed . It does not seem that the permit was annulled .", "On CARDINAL DATE the applicants requested ORG to prohibit the use of the flat .", "In a decision of DATE the ORG prohibited the use of the flat . It also ordered that its electricity and water supplies be cut off . It noted that the flat had been converted into a computer club without a building permit and that the club had started operating without a use permit , in breach of section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of the DATE LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . It also observed , referring to section CARDINAL(CARDINAL)(CARDINAL ) of the LAW ( ibid . ) , that any application for judicial review of the decision would not automatically suspend its enforcement .", "The flat ’s owner appealed to ORG . On DATE the ORG rejected the appeal as inadmissible , noting that the impugned decision was not subject to an appeal to a higher authority but only to judicial review . On DATE ORG instructed ORG to enforce the decision .", "On DATE the flat ’s owner sought judicial review . She asked the court to suspend enforcement as an interim measure .", "DATE the Sofia City Court ( GPE градски съд ) granted her request . It noted that by law the decision was enforceable immediately , even if it had been challenged by way of judicial review . However , the courts could in their discretion suspend enforcement and it was justified in doing so because the file did not contain any indications that the conditions envisaged by section QUANTITY of the CARDINAL LAW , which governed the enforcement of nonfinal administrative decisions ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) , were fulfilled . In addition , the court allowed the condominium and the company operating the computer club to intervene in the proceedings , and fixed a hearing on the merits of the case for DATE .", "On DATE the applicants appealed to ORG ( NORP административен съд ) . On DATE it reversed the lower court ’s ruling , saying that the courts could suspend the enforcement of the decision only if it would engender irreparable harm or frustrate the object of the proceedings . However , the flat ’s owner had not shown that these prerequisites were satisfied , nor had the lower court made such a finding . It had merely referred to section CARDINAL of the CARDINAL LAW , which was not applicable .", "The applicants subsequently asked LOC to enforce the decision . It seems that they did not receive a reply .", "On DATE the ORG , acting pursuant to a fresh request by the flat ’s owner , again suspended the enforcement of the decision . It held that its immediate enforcement would impede the proper course of the main proceedings and result in damage for the club ’s owner . There was no indication that the life or health of others were at risk , that with time enforcement would grow more difficult or be blocked , or that important ORG interests were at stake .", "On an appeal by the applicants , on DATE ORG reversed that order . It found that in principle administrative decisions should be immediately enforced only if , inter alia , that was necessary to safeguard the life or health of others , or to protect important ORG or public interests . However , where the law specifically provided for the immediate enforcement of certain decisions , there was a presumption that such a need existed . Therefore , it was possible to suspend the enforcement of a decision which was immediately enforceable by operation of law only if that would put at risk an opposing interest of the same intensity as the one sought to be protected , which was not the case . Any pecuniary damage sustained by the club ’s owner was not of such a nature , as it could be fully compensated for by the payment of money .", "After that the applicants made numerous requests for the decision to be enforced . However , they were informed that on DATE the local authorities had permitted the use of the club ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) , and that therefore the decision could not be enforced . The applicants complained about that situation to the prosecuting authorities , but to no avail .", "In the meantime , ORG tried to hold a first hearing on the merits of the case on DATE . However , the flat ’s owner had not been properly summoned and the court adjourned the proceedings . It fixed the next hearing for DATE . On DATE the applicants complained about the delay to ORG . On DATE that court , noting that according to LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL in fine below ) , the proceedings had to follow a fasttrack procedure , instructed ORG to bring forward the date of its hearing . ORG accordingly rescheduled the hearing for DATE . However , as the flat ’s owner had again not been properly summoned , the hearing was adjourned .", "On DATE the applicants made a new complaint about delays . On DATE ORG rejected it , finding that GPE had made all possible efforts to allow the proper progress of the proceedings and that , in view of that court ’s busy calendar , the listing of a hearing for DATE did not amount to an unjustified delay .", "At the hearing on DATE the ORG started to examine the merits of the case . At the next hearing , held on DATE , the flat ’s owner declared that she wished to withdraw her application for judicial review , and the court accordingly discontinued the proceedings .", "On DATE the FAC found that the computer club was operating in breach of the condition laid down in the permit of DATE ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) , as its clients were entering through the passageway used by the building ’s residents and not through a separate entrance .", "On DATE the flat ’s owner informed the authorities that the computer club had ceased its operations . On DATE the FAC , having found after an inspection on DATE that the vending machines and CARDINAL computers had still not been taken out of the club , again prohibited its use and ordered that its electricity and water supplies be cut off .", "Some time after that the flat was rented by another company , which apparently used it as an office until DATE .", "NORP In the meantime , on DATE , the NORP sisters asked ORG to exempt them from paying court fees for a tort claim which they intended to bring against the persons operating the club . On DATE the court ’s president refused to examine the request , saying that it could be made only if a claim had already been brought , or if it had been lodged concomitantly with the statement of claim . That ruling was later upheld by ORG and ORG . It seems that the NORP sisters did not bring a claim against the persons operating the club .", "Having obtained a building permit on DATE , in DATE the owner of the flat occupied by the computer club until DATE ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) started transforming it into an electronic games club . The works involved pulling down internal walls , installation of highvoltage cables and changing the flat ’s windows .", "On DATE the Milevi sisters complained about that to FAC , saying that no assent had been sought from them under LAW ( see paragraphs CARDINAL below ) . On DATE the ORG replied that the works were lawful as they had been carried out under a permit .", "The NORP sisters then complained to ORG . On DATE it instructed ORG to check the lawfulness of the works . Apparently nothing ensued .", "In the meantime , on DATE , the PERSON sisters contested the building permit before ORG . On DATE the ORG rejected the challenge as being out of time . On an appeal by the PERSON sisters , on DATE the ORG set that decision aside and instructed the ORG to examine the challenge on the merits . The ORG appealed against that ruling , but on DATE ORG upheld it .", "In the meantime , the NORP sisters made numerous complaints about the conversion to both the building control authorities and the police , apparently to no avail .", "In DATE a company rented the flat adjacent to the flat of the NORP sisters and started using it as an office . The PERSON sisters asserted that after that they could hear telephones ringing and conversations , loud voices , moving of furniture and banging of doors .", "On DATE the applicants complained to the municipality , stating that the company had not sought their assent for using the flat as an office , in breach of section CARDINAL ) of the DATE LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . On DATE municipal inspectors visited the building and noted that the flat was being used as an office . However , the owner was not present and the inspectors were not allowed access to the premises to make more detailed findings . They sent a summary of their findings to FAC .", "After repeated complaints by the NORP sisters , on DATE the ORG instructed the municipality to gather more evidence that the flat was indeed being used as commercial premises entailing regular visits by outsiders . As a result , on DATE the inspectors made a second visit . However , they were refused access to the flat and the police , who had been called in aid , did not show up .", "Apparently the office continued operating undisturbed throughout that period .", "Section CARDINAL ) of the DATE LAW ( ORG за устройство на територията ) provides that a flat in a condominium may be converted into an office , entailing visits by outsiders , if it is on the ground floor and if all sanitary , hygienic , fireprotection and technical requirements have been complied with . The conversion must be approved expressly , in writing and before a notary by all immediate neighbours of the LOC whose conversion is proposed . Exceptionally , a flat on a higher floor may also be converted into an office , but in that case the conversion must be approved not only by the immediate neighbours but also by the condominium ’s general meeting .", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) provides that a flat on the ground floor of a condominium may be converted into a shop or other commercial LOC , if all sanitary , hygienic , fireprotection and technical requirements have been complied with and if a separate entrance which does not affect the passageway to the residential part of the building is made possible . The conversion must be approved by the condominium ’s general meeting and requires the express written assent , certified by a notary , of all immediate neighbours of the LOC whose conversion is proposed .", "Under section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) , a permit allowing the reconstruction of an existing building must be brought to the attention of the persons whose approval is required under LAW . They may challenge it before FAC ( section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) ) . Under section DATE ) , as worded DATE and DATE , building permits could , as a rule , be revoked only before the works had started . They could be revoked after that only if they were contrary to the zoning plan , substantially deviated from the building regulations and norms as regards distances to neighbouring buildings , or substantially deviated from the applicable safety requirements ( section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) , as in force DATE and DATE ) .", "NORP Under section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) , as in force at the material time , it was prohibited to use a building or a part of it before the issuing of a use permit . If a building or a part of it was being used without such permit , ORG had to ban the use and order that the building ’s electricity and water supplies and heating be cut off ( section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) , as in force at the material time ) . Applications for judicial review of such decisions do not have suspensive effect ( section CARDINAL(CARDINAL)(CARDINAL ) ) . Since such decisions can not be appealed against before a higher administrative authority , they are immediately enforceable . However , their enforcement may be suspended by the court ( section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) ) . Under section CARDINAL , as in force at the material time , the courts had to examine applications for judicial review of such decisions in special fasttrack proceedings under Articles CARDINAL of the DATE Code of Civil Procedure .", "Under section PERSON ) ( now section CARDINAL ) ) , ORG enforces decisions prohibiting the use of buildings or parts of them . In so doing , it may use technical devices and means ( section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) ) . If it encounters resistance , it may enlist the help of the police ( section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) ) .", "Section CARDINAL of the DATE LAW ( ORG за собствеността ) provides that the owner of a piece of immovable property can not carry out actions which impede , in more than the usual way , the use of the neighbouring properties .", "Under section GPE ) , the owner of a flat in a condominium may be evicted by resolution of the general meeting of the condominium if he or she , among other things , systematically breaches the internal regulations of the building or the resolutions of the general meeting for the internal order of the building , or acts contrary to good morals . However , the owner may request the district court to annul the resolution ( section CARDINAL ) ) . The eviction may take place only if the owner has not stopped the breach despite having been warned in writing that he or she will be evicted ( section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) ) . The district court may issue a writ of execution pursuant to the resolution , once it has become final ( section PERSON ) ) . According to a DATE decision of the former ORG , that does not preclude the owner from challenging his eviction in subsequent enforcement proceedings ( реш. № CARDINAL от CARDINAL ноември DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG , I г. о. ) . There is no reported caselaw on the application of those provisions in DATE . In DATE the former ORG described that procedure as a means of last resort , to be used only where the owner persisted in his breach ( реш. № CARDINAL от CARDINAL май DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG , PERSON г. о. ) .", "Under section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) , an owner may request the cessation of any “ unjustifiable activity ” which hinders him in the exercise of his rights .", "In an interpretative decision of CARDINAL DATE ( тълк. реш. № DATE от CARDINAL февруари DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG ) the former ORG explained that this claim ( actio negatoria ) provided protection against unjustified interferences – whether direct or indirect DATE which prevented an owner from using fully his property . It can be used to declare such interferences unlawful and enjoin the persons concerned to stop them and remove their effects ( for instance , demolish a building in a neighbouring property ) . Unlike decisions of the building control authorities , the ORG judgments pursuant to such claims finally determine the disputes between the aggrieved owner and the perpetrator of the interference , and may be executed by force .", "The claim may be brought by the owner against any person , irrespective of whether or not they are owners of an adjoining property ( реш. № DATE от CARDINAL октомври DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG , IV г. о. ) . It may be brought by the owner of a flat in a condominium against the owner of another flat ( реш. № DATE от CARDINAL ноември DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG , GPE г. о. ) . It may be joined to a tort claim in respect of any past loss ( реш. № DATE от DATE г. по гр. д. № CARDINAL/CARDINAL г. , ORG , GPE г. о. ) .", "Noise nuisance is actionable under section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) ( реш. № CARDINAL от CARDINAL декември DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG ) .", "For the purposes of section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) , a distinction needs to be made between buildings on neighbouring properties and activities taking place there ; while the former may be lawful and thus not actionable , the latter may unduly impinge on ORG rights and thus be subject to injunctive relief ( реш. № CARDINAL от CARDINAL март DATE г. по гр. д. № CARDINAL г. , ORG , PERSON г. о. ) .", "In some cases ( реш. № DATE от CARDINAL ноември DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG , GPE г. о. , реш. № DATE от CARDINAL февруари DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG , GPE г. о. ) the former ORG has associated the existence of “ unjustifiable activity ” resulting from constructions in neighbouring properties with failure to observe the building regulations . However , in other cases the former ORG and ORG have held that the question whether a reconstruction amounts to “ unjustifiable activity ” does not automatically hinge on whether it complies with the building regulations or has been approved by the authorities . The decisive factor appears to be whether it unduly interferes with the ORG enjoyment of their properties ( реш. № DATE от CARDINAL юли DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG , GPE г. о. ; ORG № CARDINAL от CARDINAL март DATE г. по гр. д. № CARDINAL г. , ORG , V г. о. ; MONEY CARDINAL от CARDINAL юли DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG , GPE г. о. ; реш. № CARDINAL от CARDINAL юли DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG , GPE г. о. ; реш. № CARDINAL от CARDINAL юли DATE г. по гр. д. № CARDINAL г. , ORG , GPE г. о. ; реш. № CARDINAL от CARDINAL февруари DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG , GPE г. о. ; реш. № DATE от CARDINAL ноември DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG , GPE г. о. ; реш. № DATE от CARDINAL ноември DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG , PERSON г. о. ; реш. № CARDINAL от CARDINAL април DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG , GPE г.о. ; реш. № CARDINAL от CARDINAL февруари DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG , GPE г. о. ; MONEY CARDINAL от CARDINAL януари DATE г. по гр. д. № DATE г. , ORG , GPE г. о. ; реш. № CARDINAL от CARDINAL октомври DATE г. , по гр. д. № DATE , ORG , г. о. ; опр. № CARDINAL от CARDINAL август DATE г. по гр. д. № CARDINAL/CARDINAL г. на ORG , ORG г. о. ) .", "The Regulations for Management , Order and Supervision in Condominiums ( Правилник за управлението , реда и надзора в етажната собственост ) , adopted in DATE , at the material time dealt with the internal organisation of condominiums . They contained detailed rules on the internal order of the buildings and the use of the common parts .", "Regulation CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) provided that the resolutions of the condominium ’s general meeting were immediately enforceable . The chairman of the condominium ’s management council could apply to the competent district court to obtain a writ of execution . The resolutions for evicting an owner under section CARDINAL of the DATE LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) were not immediately enforceable . To obtain a writ of execution , the condominium had to show that it had warned the owner under section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of the LAW ( regulation CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) ) .", "Under section CARDINAL of the DATE ORG , the organs of ORG could stop the use of buildings , installations , etc . , as well as stop all other activities which , among other things , posed a risk for public order .", "Regulations on Public Order and the Preservation of Municipal Property on the Territory of GPE ( ORG CARDINAL за обществения ред и опазването на общинските имоти на територията на PERSON голяма община ) , issued by ORG in DATE and superseded by similar regulations in DATE , dealt with public order on the territory of GPE Regulation CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) prohibited noisy social events in residential buildings . Under regulation CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) , noisy commercial activities in residential buildings were allowed only if their inhabitants agreed in writing . Under regulation CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) , if no effective noise protection could be secured , the use of noisy devices and machines was allowed only from TIME and from TIME", "Breaches of the Regulations were punishable by a fine ( regulation CARDINAL ) ) . Repeat offenders were liable to an increased fine ( regulation MONEY ) ) . If the repeated offence was connected to a profession or a trade , the penalty could also be a prohibition on engaging in such profession or trade for a period ranging from DATE to DATE ( ibid . ) .", "DATE . The supervisory organs , which included the police and officials authorised by the mayor ( regulation CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) ) , had to note down every breach of the regulations ( regulation CARDINAL ) ) .", "The Regulations on the Manner of Carrying On Commercial Activities on the Territory of GPE ( Наредба за реда на провеждане на търговска дейност на територията на Столичната община ) , issued by ORG on DATE and superseded by new regulations in DATE , subjected commercial operations on the territory of GPE to a licence requirement . Regulation CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) provided that when giving a licence the borough mayor had to fix TIME of the operation in a way that ensured the tranquillity of others and public order . Under regulation ORG ) the borough mayors had to take all necessary steps to stop and punish breaches of the regulation . Such breaches were punishable by a fine and , in case of repetition , a ban on commercial activities for DATE ( regulation CARDINAL ) ) .", "Section DATE LAW , as in force at the material time , provided that administrative authorities could direct that a decision be immediately enforceable , if that was necessary to protect the life or health of individuals , prevent losses for the economy , or safeguard other material ORG or public interests , or if there was a risk that the enforcement would subsequently be frustrated or seriously hindered .", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of the DATE ORG Caused to Citizens Act ( on DATE its name was changed to “ ORG and ORG ” ) provides that the ORG is liable for damage suffered by private persons as a result of unlawful decisions , actions or omissions by civil servants committed in the course of or in connection with the performance of their duties . LAW ) provides that compensation for damage stemming from unlawful decisions may be claimed after the decisions concerned have been annulled in prior proceedings ." ]

[ "8" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE , GPE .", "On DATE several schools organised a collective visit by pupils to a local cinema , which was owned by the municipal company E. , for a film showing . The applicant 's daughter , PERSON , born in DATE , was among the pupils who visited that cinema . While the first group of pupils was still watching the film , another group of pupils for the next showing entered the auditorium . As a result of a lack of control of entry to the auditorium during the film , there was a stampede in which CARDINAL children were trampled to death and QUANTITY children , including the applicant 's daughter , received varying degrees of injury . The applicant 's daughter , in particular , was diagnosed with , inter alia , severe post - traumatic hypoxic damage to the central nervous system ( посттравматичне постгіпоксичне ураження центральної нервової системи важкого ступеню ) , a right sided pneumothorax , and other injuries . According to the applicant , her daughter was in a coma for DATE .", "On DATE the applicant 's daughter was classified as temporarily Category CARDINAL disabled . DATE , on DATE , she was classified as permanently disabled .", "The applicant 's daughter underwent inpatient medical treatment at least until DATE , after which she periodically had medical treatment and rehabilitation therapy .", "By a judgment of CARDINAL March CARDINAL ORG ( “ the ORG ” ) declared the applicant 's daughter incapacitated . Apparently that judgment became final and on DATE the ORG appointed the applicant as the legal guardian of her disabled daughter .", "At the present time the applicant 's daughter still suffers the consequences of post - traumatic consequences and needs medical assistance and nursing .", "On DATE the ORG instituted criminal proceedings and on an unspecified date indicted PERSON , the head of the E. company ( it appears from the submitted documents that criminal proceedings against other persons were also instituted but were subsequently abandoned for various reasons ) .", "On DATE a medical expert reported on the aforesaid injuries to the applicant 's daughter and identified them as serious .", "Meanwhile , on DATE a special administrative committee composed of CARDINAL experts was set up to investigate the accident of DATE . On DATE that committee drew up a report which recommended that CARDINAL persons be dismissed and CARDINAL others subjected to disciplinary sanctions .", "According to the applicant , the pre - trial investigation was completed by DATE and the case was transferred to ORG .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a civil claim against S. , seeking compensation for pecuniary and non - pecuniary damage . CARDINAL other claims were also lodged with the court by other victims .", "On DATE ORG found S. guilty of abuse of authority and forgery and sentenced him to DATE imprisonment . The court also banned PERSON from holding managerial positions for DATE . As to the civil claims , the court allowed them in part , awarding , in particular , the applicant CARDINAL NORP hryvnias ( ORG ; PERCENT ( ORG ) at the material time ) in respect of non - pecuniary damage , to be paid by S.", "On DATE ORG ( “ the Court of Appeal ” ) quashed that judgment because of procedural shortcomings of the trial before the first - instance court . On DATE , having held a re - trial , it found S. guilty of forgery in office ( he had forged the documents stating that he had taken necessary accident prevention measures and instructed his subordinates ) and negligence that had had serious consequences , finding that the cinema personnel had not been instructed and lacked relevant expertise , the auditorium had not been properly equipped and the cinema tickets had been sold without indication of time , row and seat . The court thus sentenced PERSON to DATE imprisonment and banned him from holding managerial positions for DATE . However , in view of LAW , the court exempted S. from these punishments . Finally , the court awarded the applicant ORG CARDINAL,CARDINAL.CARDINAL ( about EUR CARDINAL,CARDINAL.CARDINAL ) in respect of pecuniary damage and ORG CARDINAL ( about EUR CARDINAL,CARDINAL.CARDINAL ) in respect of non - pecuniary damage , to be paid by ORG , as well as ORG CARDINAL,CARDINAL ( about EUR CARDINAL.CARDINAL ) in respect of non - pecuniary damage , to be paid by S.", "On the last - mentioned day ORG issued a special ruling ( окрема постанова ) informing its head and the head of ORG of the delays in the case caused by the first - instance court .", "On DATE ORG of GPE amended the judgment of DATE , replacing the amnesty with statutory limitation , as the reason for LOC 's exemption from the punishment . The court also quashed the judgment in part related to the civil claims , casting doubts on the liability of ORG . Accordingly , it remitted that matter for fresh consideration .", "It appears from the documents submitted that , at this stage of the proceedings , the applicant and another civil claimant requested ORG to join to the proceedings a number of legal persons ( such as the schools which had organised the pupils ' collective visit to the cinema , the PERSON company , the local department of education , etc . ) . For these reasons , on DATE ORG decided to remit the case to ORG .", "Subsequently , a clinic which had treated the applicant 's daughter brought its claim against the defendants and joined the proceedings ; the other claimants ( some other victims of the accident ) withdrew their claims as being settled extra - judicially . In the course of the proceedings the claimants modified their claims on several occasions .", "On DATE ORG found in part for the applicant and other civil claimants . In particular , it ordered ORG , the education and culture departments of ORG and PERSON to pay the applicant , who was acting on her own behalf and on behalf of her daughter , in the specified proportions the total amount of ORG ( about EUR CARDINAL,CARDINAL.CARDINAL at the material time ) in respect of the care , medical , legal and other expenses she had incurred from the date of the accident to CARDINAL DATE and PERCENT of the statutory minimum salary after DATE , DATE . Additionally , the court awarded the applicant the total amount of ORG CARDINAL ( about ORG CARDINAL,CARDINAL.CARDINAL at the material time ) in respect of non - pecuniary damage to be paid by ORG and the education and culture departments of ORG . The court also awarded damages to other victims of the accident , as well as to the clinic in reimbursement of medical and other expenses for treating the applicant 's daughter .", "On DATE ORG allowed the defendants ' appeals in part and quashed the judgment in part concerning the reimbursement to the clinic of medical and other expenses for treating the applicant 's daughter because it had been claimed by the applicant , not the clinic , and the applicant 's legal expenses regarding the publication in a newspaper of details of the court 's hearings ; consequently , it remitted these parts of the case for fresh examination . It also reduced the awards to other victims of the accident and upheld the remainder of the judgment .", "On DATE ORG of GPE rejected the requests for leave to appeal in cassation lodged by ORG and the education and culture departments of ORG .", "NORP Apparently , the proceedings in the remitted part are still pending before the first - instance court .", "On DATE ORG instituted proceedings to enforce the judgment of DATE , as amended on CARDINAL DATE .", "ORG and the education and culture departments of ORG requested adjournment of the enforcement for DATE , referring to a lack of relevant funds . On DATE ORG allowed these requests .", "On DATE the victims of the accident were paid ex gratia by the local authorities the total amount of ORG CARDINAL , out of which the applicant was paid ORG CARDINAL ( MONEY at the material time ) . She was further paid :", "on DATE ( about ORG MONEY ) ;", "on DATE – UAH CARDINAL ( about ORG CARDINAL,CARDINAL.CARDINAL ) ;", "on DATE – UAH CARDINAL ( about ORG CARDINAL ) ;", "on DATE – UAH CARDINAL ( about EUR CARDINAL ) .", "Articles DATE , DATE , and CARDINAL of the LAW on the right to life and right to compensation for damage caused by authorities are set out in PERSON and Others v. GPE ( no . CARDINAL , § MONEY , DATE ) .", "Article CARDINAL ( forgery in office ) of the LAW provides as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . Forgery in office , that is putting any knowingly false information in official documents , any other fabrication of documents , and also making and issuing knowingly false documents , by an official , –", "shall punishable by a fine of CARDINAL tax - free minimum incomes , or restraint of liberty for a term of DATE , with the deprivation of the right to occupy certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of DATE . ... ”", "Article CARDINAL ( neglect of official duty ) of the LAW provides as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . Neglect of official duty , that is the failure of an official to perform , or the improper performance of , his / her official duties due to negligence , where it caused significant damage to the legally protected rights and interests of individual citizens , or state and public interests , or interests of legal entities , –", "shall be punishable by a fine of CARDINAL tax - free minimum incomes , or correctional labour for a term of DATE , or restraint of liberty for a term of DATE , with the deprivation of the right to occupy certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of DATE .", "The same act that caused any grave consequences , –", "shall be punishable by imprisonment for a term of DATE with the deprivation of the right to occupy certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of DATE and with or without a fine of CARDINAL tax - free minimum incomes . ”", "Under Articles CARDINAL § CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) and CARDINAL § CARDINAL of the Code , a person convicted for an offense of medium gravity can be exempted from the punishment if a period of DATE has elapsed from the date of the criminal offense to the effective date of the judgment . An offense of medium gravity is punishable by imprisonment for a term of DATE ( LAW ) .", "Articles DATE ( compensation for moral ( non - pecuniary ) damage ) and CARDINAL ( liability of an organisation for damage caused through the fault of its employees ) of the Code are set out in GPE v. GPE ( ( dec . ) , no . CARDINAL , CARDINAL DATE ) ." ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicants , whose names appear in the appendix , are NORP nationals . They are represented before the ORG by Mr PERSON , Mr LOC and Mr PERSON , lawyers practising in GPE .", "The facts of the cases , as submitted by the applicants , may be summarised as follows .", "Until DATE the applicant lived in PERSON , a hamlet of the GPE village in the district of GPE in GPE , where he owns property .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On an unspecified date the applicant lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE , complaining about the burning down of his house by security forces .", "On an unspecified date ORG office issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG in GPE decided not to conduct an investigation into the applicant ’s allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE and CARDINAL DATE the applicant filed petitions with the Governor ’s office in GPE for submission to the Governor ’s office in GPE and requested permission to return to his hamlet . He received no response to his petitions within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by Law no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicant lived in PERSON , a hamlet of the GPE village in the district of GPE in GPE , where he owns property . It is to be noted that the title deeds to the property that the applicant used in PERSON bear his father ’s name .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On an unspecified date the applicant filed a petition with the District Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE ORG of the GPE office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the District Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "Until DATE the applicants lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district in GPE , where they own property . It is to be noted that the title deeds to the property that the applicants used in PERSON bear the names of", "ORG and ORG .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicants’ property . The applicants and their families then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "ORG and ORG lodged petitions with ORG office in GPE on DATE and on DATE respectively complaining about the burning down of their house by security forces .", "On an unspecified date ORG issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - files to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG decided not to conduct an investigation into their allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE Ağa ORG filed a petition with the District Governor ’s office requesting alternative residence . He received no response to his petition .", "On an unspecified date PERSON filed a petition with the Prime Minister ’s office requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE he filed a further petition with the District Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE the Prime Minister ’s office sent the following reply to him :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been transmitted to ORG for examination . ”", "On DATE the District Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following reply to PERSON :", "“ ... The struggle against terrorism in our region has been continuing intensively and positive result is being achieved .", "Our government has been working on the solutions to the problems you have mentioned in your petition and you will be informed by the District Governor ’s office when it is possible to return to the villages ... ”", "On DATE Ağa Lazım , PERSON and ORG lodged a petition with ORG requesting alternative residence and expropriation of their property in PERSON .", "On DATE the Governor ’s office in GPE refused the ORG requests stating :", "“ When the villages are secure and suitable for residence , you can return and reside in your village .", "There is no legal ground for expropriation of your property . ”", "On an unspecified date PERSON filed a petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE ORG of the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "On DATE the applicants filed a further petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to their village . They received no response to their petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicants lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district in GPE , where they own property . It is to be noted that another person , PERSON , appears to be the owner of the property in question on the documents submitted to the ORG .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicants’ property . The applicants and their families then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE PERSON lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE complaining about the burning down of his house by security forces .", "On an unspecified date ORG office sent the case - file to the GPE office in GPE .", "On DATE ORG in GPE decided not to conduct investigation into his allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE PERSON filed a petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE ORG of the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following response to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "On DATE the applicants filed petitions with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to their village . They received no response to their petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicant lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district in GPE , where he owns property .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE complaining about the burning down of his house by the security forces .", "On an unspecified date ORG office issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG in GPE decided not to conduct an investigation into the applicant ’s allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE the applicant filed a petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE to be referred to the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE ORG of the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "On DATE the applicant filed a further petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village . He received no response to his petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicants lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district in GPE , where they own property . It is to be noted that the title deeds to the property that the applicants used in PERSON bear the names of PERSON , PERSON and PERSON .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicants’ property . The applicants and their families then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "PERSON , PERSON and PERSON lodged petitions with ORG office in GPE on DATE , DATE and DATE respectively complaining about the burning down of their houses by the security forces .", "On an unspecified date ORG office issued decisions of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - files to ORG .", "On DATE ORG in GPE decided not to conduct an investigation into the ORG allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE PERSON filed a petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE ORG of the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following response to him :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "On DATE the applicants filed petitions with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to their village . They received no response to their petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicants lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district in GPE , where they own property . It is to be noted that another person , ORG , appears to be the owner of the property in question on the documents submitted to the ORG .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicants’ property . The applicants and their families then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "PERSON and PERSON wife lodged petitions with ORG office in GPE on DATE and on DATE respectively complaining about the burning down of their house by security forces .", "On an unspecified date ORG issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG decided not to conduct an investigation into their allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On an unspecified date PERSON and ORG filed petitions with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to their village .", "On DATE ORG , ORG and PERSON ORG filed petitions with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to their village .", "On DATE ORG of the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicants :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to your village has been received by the Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "On DATE the applicants filed further petitions with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to their village .", "They received no response to their petitions within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicants lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district , in GPE , where they own property . It is to be noted that other persons with the family name “ GPE ” appear to be the owners of the property in question on the documents submitted to the ORG .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicants’ property . The applicants and their families then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE PERSON , lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE complaining about the burning down of his house by security forces .", "On an unspecified date , ORG issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG decided not to conduct an investigation into his allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE PERSON a filed petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE ORG of the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to your village has been received by the Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "On DATE the applicants filed petitions with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to their village . They received no response to their petitions within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicant lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district in GPE , where she owns property . It is to be noted that the title deeds to the property that the applicant used in PERSON bear her father ’s name", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and her family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE the applicant filed a petition with ORG requesting permission to return to her village .", "On CARDINAL DATE the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ ... The struggle against terrorism in our region has been continuing intensively and positive result is being achieved .", "Our government has been working on the solutions to the problems you have mentioned in your petition and you will be informed by the District Governor ’s office when it is possible to return to the villages ... ”", "On an unspecified date , the applicant filed a petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to her village .", "On DATE ORG of the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the District Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "On DATE the applicant filed a further petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to her village . She received no response to her petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicants lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district in GPE , where they own property . It is to be noted that PERSON and another person , PERSON , appear to be the owners of the property in question on the documents submitted to the ORG .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicants’ property . The applicants and their families then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "PERSON and PERSON husband , PERSON , lodged petitions with ORG office on DATE and on DATE in GPE respectively complaining about the burning down of their house by the security forces .", "On an unspecified date ORG office issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - files to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG in GPE decided not to conduct an investigation into the ORG allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE PERSON and PERSON filed petitions with the GPE office in GPE requesting permission to return to their village .", "On DATE the District Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicants :", "“ ... The struggle against terrorism in our region has been continuing intensively and positive result is being achieved .", "Our government has been working on the solutions to the problems you have mentioned in your petition and you will be informed by the District Governor ’s office when it is possible to return to the villages ... ”", "On DATE PERSON filed a petition with ORG requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE the District Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following reply to him :", "“ ... The struggle against terrorism in our region has been continuing intensively and positive result is being achieved .", "Our government has been working on the solutions to the problems you have mentioned in your petition and you will be informed by the District Governor ’s office when it is possible to return to the villages ... ”", "On DATE PERSON , PERSON and PERSON filed petitions with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to their village . They received no response to their petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "On DATE and CARDINAL DATE PERSON and PERSON respectively filed petitions with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to their village . They received no response to their petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicants lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district , in GPE , where they own property . It is to be noted that the title deeds of the property submitted to the ORG bear the name of “ ORG ” , the husband of PERSON , the father of PERSON and the father - in - law of ORG .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicants’ property . The applicants and their families then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE ORG and ORG lodged petitions with ORG office in GPE complaining about the burning down of their house by security forces .", "On an unspecified date ORG issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - files to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG decided not to conduct an investigation into their allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE Saher Elmas and ORG filed petitions with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to their village .", "On DATE ORG of the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicants :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to your village has been received by the Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "On DATE ORG filed a further petition with the Governor ’s office in NORP requesting permission to return to her village . She received no response to her petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "On DATE PERSON and PERSON filed further petitions with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to their village . They received no response to their petitions within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicant lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district , in GPE , where he owns property . It is to be noted that other person , ORG , appears to be the owner of the property in question on the documents submitted to the ORG .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE complaining about the burning down of his house by security forces .", "On an unspecified date ORG issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG decided not to conduct an investigation into his allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE the applicant filed a further petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "He received no response to his petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until OctoberCARDINAL the applicant lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district in GPE , where he owns property .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE complaining about the burning down of his house by the security forces .", "On an unspecified date ORG office issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG in GPE decided not to conduct an investigation into the applicant ’s allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE the applicant filed a petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE ORG of the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "On DATE the applicant filed a further petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village . He received no response to his petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicant lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district in GPE , where he owns property . It is to be noted that the applicant did not submit any certificate to the ORG attesting his ownership of the property in ORG .", "On DATE the applicant filed a petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE ORG of the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following response to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "On DATE the applicant filed a further petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "He received no response to their petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicant lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district , in GPE , where he owns property . It is to be noted that other persons , PERSON and PERSON , appear to be the owners of the property in question on the documents submitted to the ORG .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE complaining about the burning down of his house by security forces .", "On DATE ORG sent a letter to the applicant stating that there would not be an investigation into his allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE the applicant filed a petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE ORG of the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following response to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "On DATE the applicant filed a further petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village . He received no response to his petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicants lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district , in GPE , where they own property . It is to be noted that PERSON appears to be the owner of the property in question on the documents submitted to the ORG .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicants’ property . The applicants and their families then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE PERSON and PERSON lodged petitions with ORG office in GPE complaining about the burning down of their houses by security forces .", "On DATE Mahmut ORG , lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE complaining about the burning down of his house by security forces .", "On an unspecified date ORG office issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG sent letters to the applicants stating that there would not be an investigation into their allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE the PERSON and PERSON filed petitions with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to their village .", "On DATE ORG of the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following response to the applicants :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "On DATE the applicants filed petitions with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to their village . They received no response to their petitions within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by Law no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicants lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district , in GPE , where they own property . It is to be noted that other persons with the family name “ PERSON ” appear to be the owners of the property in question on the documents submitted to the ORG .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicants’ property . The applicants and their families then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE PERSON filed a petition with the GPE office in GPE requesting an alternative residence . He received no response to his petition .", "On DATE ORG lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE complaining about the burning down of his house by the security forces .", "On an unspecified date ORG office issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG sent a letter to the applicant stating that there would not be an investigation into his allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE PERSON filed petitions with the GPE office in GPE and ORG requesting alternative residence and expropriation of his property in ORG .", "On DATE the District Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ ... The struggle against terrorism in our region has been continuing intensively and positive result is being achieved .", "Our government has been working on the solutions to the problems you have mentioned in your petition and you will be informed by the District Governor ’s office when it is possible to return to the villages ... ”", "On DATE the Governor ’s office in GPE refused PERSON request stating :", "“ When the villages are secure and suitable for residence , you can return and reside in your village .", "There is no legal ground for expropriation of your property . ”", "On an unspecified date PERSON filed a petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE ORG of the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to the Village and Rehabilitation Project . ”", "ORG and ORG filed petitions with the Governor ’s office in GPE on CARDINAL and DATE respectively requesting permission to return to their village . They received no response to their petitions within the DATE period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicant lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district , in GPE . It is to be noted that the applicant submitted CARDINAL documents dated DATE and DATE , certifying the ownership of property .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE complaining about the burning down of his house by security forces .", "On an unspecified date ORG office issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG sent a letter to the applicant stating that there would not be an investigation into his allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE the applicant filed a petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village . He received no response to his petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicant lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district , in GPE , where he owns property . It is to be noted that the title deeds to the property that applicant used in PERSON bear his father ’s name .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE the applicant filed a petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village . He received no response to his petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicant lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district , in GPE , where he owns property .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE the applicant filed a petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village . He received no response to his petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicants lived in the Karataş village , in the GPE district , in GPE , where they own property . It is to be noted that PERSON appears to be the owner of the property in question on the documents submitted to the ORG .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicants’ property . The applicants and their families then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "PERSON and PERSON , filed petitions with the Governor ’s office in GPE on CARDINAL and DATE respectively , requesting permission to return to their village . They received no response to their petitions within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until OctoberCARDINAL the applicant lived in the GPE village , in the GPE district in GPE , where he owns property .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated GPE on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE complaining about the burning down of his house by the security forces .", "On DATE ORG office issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG in GPE decided not to conduct an investigation into the applicant ’s allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On an unspecified date the applicant filed a petition with the District Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE ORG of the GPE office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the District Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "Until OctoberCARDINAL the applicant lived in GPE , in GPE district in GPE , where she owns property .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated PERSON on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and her family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On an unspecified date the applicant lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE complained about the burning down of her house by the security forces .", "On an unspecified date ORG office issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG in GPE decided not to conduct an investigation into the applicant ’s allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE the applicant applied to ORG of the GPE office in GPE and requested permission to return to her village . She was told by a police officer that her petition would not be registered and that she would not be replied . The applicant and CARDINAL other witnesses drafted a note on this statement . This note is attached to the applicant ’s application to the ORG . The applicant did not submit any official document to the ORG certifying the statement made by the police officer in question .", "On DATE the applicant filed a further petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to her village . She received no response to her petitions within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until OctoberCARDINAL the applicant lived in Tepsili village , in GPE district in GPE , where he owns property .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated Tepsili on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE the applicant filed a petition with the District Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE ORG of the GPE office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the District Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "Until OctoberCARDINAL the applicant lived in the NORP village , in the ORG district in GPE , where he owns property .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to the PERSON village in GPE where they currently live .", "The applicant filed petitions with the District Governor ’s office in ORG and the Prime Minister ’s office on DATE and on DATE respectively requesting permission to return to his village and compensation for the damages he suffered .", "On DATE the Prime Minister ’s office informed the applicant that his petition had been transmitted to ORG .", "On DATE the District Governor ’s office in ORG sent a letter to the applicant stating that the applicant had left his property voluntarily on account of disturbances in the region and had been granted financial aid by ORG ( PERSON ve PERSON ) .", "Until OctoberCARDINAL the applicant lived in ORG , a hamlet of the GPE village in the district of GPE in GPE , where he owns property .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated ORG on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to the GPE village where they currently live .", "On an unspecified date the applicant lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE and complained about the burning down of his house by the security forces .", "On an unspecified date ORG office issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to the office of ORG in GPE .", "On DATE the GPE office in GPE decided not to conduct an investigation into applicant ’s allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE the applicant filed a petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his hamlet .", "On DATE ORG of the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "Until OctoberCARDINAL the applicant lived in the GPE village , in the GPE district in GPE , where he owns property .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated GPE on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE complaining about the burning down of his house by security forces .", "On DATE ORG office issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG in GPE decided not to conduct an investigation into the applicant ’s allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE the applicant filed a petition with the District Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE ORG of the GPE office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the District Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "Until OctoberCARDINAL the applicant lived in the GPE village , in the GPE district in GPE , where he owns property .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated GPE on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE complaining about the burning down of his house by security forces .", "On DATE ORG issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG decided not to conduct an investigation into his allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE the applicant filed a petition with the District Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE ORG of the GPE office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the District Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "Until DATE the applicant lived in the Cevizlidere village , in the GPE district , in GPE , where he owns property . It is to be noted that the applicant did not submit any certificate attesting his ownership of property in Cevizlidere .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated Cevizlidere on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE the applicant filed a petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village . He received no response to his petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicant lived in the Cevizlidere village , in the GPE district , in GPE , where he owns property . It is to be noted that the applicant did not submit any certificate attesting his ownership of property in Cevizlidere .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated Cevizlidere on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicant ’s property . The applicant and his family then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On DATE the applicant filed a petition with the Governor ’s office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village . He received no response to his petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "Until DATE the applicant lived in the Cevizlidere village , in the GPE district in GPE , where he owns property . It is to be noted that PERSON appears be the owner of the property in question on the documents submitted to ORG .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated Cevizlidere on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicants’ property . The applicants and their families then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On an unspecified date PERSON lodged a petition with ORG office in GPE complained about the burning down of his house by security forces .", "On DATE ORG issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG decided not to conduct an investigation into the applicant ’s allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "On DATE PERSON filed a petition with the GPE office in the district of GPE in GPE to be referred to the GPE office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village . He received no response to his petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "On DATE PERSON filed further petitions with the GPE office in GPE , the Governor ’s office in GPE and ORG requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE he lodged a further complaint with ORG office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE ORG issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - file to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG of the Governor ’s office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ Return to the Cevizlidere village is forbidden for security reasons . However , you can return and reside in GPE , PERSON , ORG , GPE , PERSON , NORP and NORP villages .", "Furthermore your petition will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "On DATE the GPE office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to return to your village has been received by the District Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "On DATE PERSON filed a petition with the GPE office in GPE requesting permission to return to his village .", "On DATE the GPE office in GPE sent the following reply to the applicant :", "“ Your petition containing a request of permission to your village has been received by the District Governor ’s office and will be considered under the ‘ Return to Village and Rehabilitation Project’ . ”", "Until DATE the applicant lived in the Cevizlidere village , in the GPE district in GPE where they own property . It is to be noted that PERSON , PERSON and other persons with the family name “ GPE ” appear to be the owners of the property in question on the documents submitted to the ORG .", "In DATE security forces forcibly evacuated Cevizlidere on account of disturbances in the region . They also destroyed the applicants’ property . The applicants and their families then moved to GPE where they currently live .", "On unspecified dates PERSON and PERSON lodged petitions with ORG office in GPE complaining about the burning down of their houses by security forces .", "On DATE ORG issued a decision of non - jurisdiction and sent the case - files to ORG in GPE .", "On DATE ORG decided not to conduct an investigation into their allegations as the perpetrators of the alleged acts could not be identified .", "PERSON and PERSON , filed petitions with the GPE office in GPE on DATE and on DATE respectively , requesting permission to return to their village . They received no response to their petitions within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "On DATE PERSON and PERSON filed petitions with the Governor ’s office in NORP requesting permission to return to their village . They received no response to their petition within the CARDINAL-day period prescribed by PERSON no . CARDINAL .", "The official records indicated that the inhabitants of GPE , GPE , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , GPE and Cevizlidere had evacuated their village on account of intense terrorist activities in the region and threats issued by the ORG ( Workers’ ORG ) terrorist organisation against the villagers . The security forces had not forced the applicants to leave their village .", "Currently there was no obstacle preventing villagers from returning to their homes and possessions in their villages . Persons who had left their villages as a result of terrorism had already started returning and regaining their activities in their villages . In this connection , in a letter of DATE the NORP Governor of GPE informed the applicants that they could return to their villages and resume their economic activities if they wished . He further noted that all villages were open for re - settlement and that the authorities had been carrying out maintenance work to repair the infrastructure of the villages in the region .", "On DATE the Law on Compensation for Losses resulting from Terrorism and the Fight against Terrorism was passed by ORG and entered into force on DATE ( “ Compensation Law ” ) . That PERSON provided for a sufficient remedy capable of redressing the LAW grievances of persons who were denied access to their possessions in their villages .", "In that connection Damage Assessment and Compensation Commissions were set up in QUANTITY provinces . Persons who had suffered damage as a result of terrorism or of measures taken by the authorities to combat terrorism could lodge an application with the relevant compensation commission claiming compensation .", "The number of persons applying to these commissions had already attained CARDINAL . CARDINAL persons , whose applications were pending before the ORG , had also applied to the compensation commissions . Many villagers had already been awarded compensation for the damage they had sustained .", "A description of the relevant domestic law can be found in the ORG ’s decision of PERSON v. GPE ( no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , § § DATE , DATE ) and in its judgment of ORG and Others v. GPE ( nos . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , CARDINAL/CARDINAL and CARDINAL - CARDINAL/CARDINAL , § § DATE , ORG CARDINAL-VI ) ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , ORG , is a company incorporated in GPE .", "In DATE , in accordance with the PERSON on the Privatisation Programme for DATE , the Government put up for sale their portion of the shares ( CARDINAL shares , representing PERCENT ) in FAC and ORG ( “ the quarry ” ) .", "NORP The applicant company participated in the auction and , having offered the highest price , purchased the stock in DATE at a price of CARDINAL NORP lei ( MDL ) per share . The total price of the purchased stock was MDL CARDINAL .", "NORP In DATE ORG carried out a check on the privatisation activity of the Government and in a decision of DATE found that in DATE the quarry had received from a third ORG - owned company CARDINAL railway carriages without any title and that those carriages had remained in the quarry 's possession throughout its subsequent existence without ever being included in the accounting documents .", "On an unspecified date in DATE ORG initiated proceedings for unjust enrichment against the quarry , claiming compensation for the railway carriages . The proceedings ended with a final judgment of ORG of DATE , by which the quarry was ordered to pay the State MDL CARDINAL , representing the cost of the carriages as established by an expert report . The judgment was enforced in DATE .", "On DATE ORG ( “ NORP ” ) initiated criminal proceedings in respect of the privatisation of the quarry . The activity of the quarry was blocked as a result of the seizure of the accounting documents , the refusal to extend licences for extraction of granite and gravel , and other measures taken against the quarry by the ORG authorities . It appears that the criminal investigation is still pending before the ORG and that the case has never been brought before the courts .", "On DATE ORG initiated , on behalf of the Government , court proceedings against ORG and the applicant company , seeking the annulment of the contract of sale of the ORG - owned stock . It argued that since at the date of the sale of the shares the quarry had not included the CARDINAL carriages in its accounting documents ( see paragraphs CARDINAL and CARDINAL above ) , the price of each share had been fixed at only MDL CARDINAL , whereas it should have been MDL CARDINAL . ORG did not make reference to the proceedings which ended with the judgment of ORG of DATE . In its pleadings before the court , ORG argued that its action was not time - barred since the time - limit did not apply to its court actions .", "NORP In its observations and pleadings , ORG disagreed with ORG action and argued that the applicant company had participated in an auction organised by the Government and had won it by offering the highest price for the shares . The auction was organised in accordance with the relevant regulations . The question of the carriages which had not been included in the quarry 's accounting documents in DATE had been resolved by ORG by way of civil proceedings which ended with the judgment of ORG of DATE in favour of ORG . That judgment was enforced in DATE .", "In its observations and pleadings , the applicant company argued that ORG action was time - barred . It was contrary to the principle of legal certainty and equality of arms to allow ORG to challenge administrative acts in the courts without the latter being subject to any time limitations . In any event , the provision of the old LAW exempting ORG from complying with the general DATE time - limit only referred to claims against kolkhozs ( collective farms ) , non - governmental organisations , cooperatives and citizens . The applicant company did not fall within any of those categories . Finally , the dispute over the carriages had already been resolved by a final judgment of ORG of DATE .", "On DATE ORG upheld ORG action and found the arguments adduced by him to be well - founded . Referring to the applicant company 's objection concerning LAW , the court found that the DATE time - limit was applicable to ORG court action . At the same time , according to the court , the time - limit was to be calculated from the date when ORG found out or must have found out about the problem with the carriages . In the court 's opinion , that date was DATE , the date of ORG decision ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) . Accordingly , the action was lodged within the DATE limit . As to the applicant 's objection concerning the existence of a final judgment concerning the same dispute , the court found that objection ill - founded because the first set of proceedings had concerned the issue of compensation while the second concerned the issue of the annulment of the privatisation . ORG ordered the annulment of the contract of sale of shares , the return of CARDINAL shares to the ORG and the return to the applicant company of the price paid for them , ORG .", "The applicant company appealed against this judgment and argued , inter alia , that ORG had on its own initiative come up with a solution for ORG problem with the time - limit . Furthermore , the applicant disagreed with this solution and argued that the time - limit should be calculated from the date when the shares were bought . It submitted that there were no impediments preventing ORG from finding out about the problem of the carriages before ORG had issued its decision in DATE and relied in this connection on the official commentary to LAW . The applicant company also submitted that there had been no impediments to ORG conducting its investigation earlier , and argued that accepting ORG line of thinking amounted to accepting that ORG could challenge transactions concluded DATE by arguing that it had just found out about their illegality . The applicant company further submitted that the dispute was identical to that which ended with the judgment of ORG of DATE and that the judge of ORG who had examined the case had been influenced by the Government .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the applicant company 's appeal and upheld the reasoning given by the lower - instance court . The judgment became final and an enforcement warrant was issued , under which the applicant company was obliged to transmit to the Government CARDINAL shares in the quarry .", "During the enforcement proceedings , the ORG realised that in spite of the favourable outcome of the proceedings for them , they had not gained control over the quarry . Notably , they learned that in DATE the quarry had issued CARDINAL new shares as a result of the applicant company 's adding new extraction equipment worth MDL CARDINAL to its assets . The new shares were registered by ORG on DATE . As a result , the ratio of the shares in the quarry 's stock obtained by the Government after the proceedings had ended with the judgment of CARDINAL DATE represented PERCENT and the applicant company maintained control over the quarry .", "On DATE ORG , on behalf of the Government , applied to ORG for a supplementary judgment . It argued that the meaning of the judgment of ORG of DATE had been to put the parties in the position they had been prior to DATE , when the ORG held PERCENT . However , that was not possible because of the issue of new shares in DATE . Accordingly , the court was requested to annul the decision of the quarry 's shareholder 's meeting concerning the issue of CARDINAL shares and the decision of ORG Values on DATE concerning the registration of the new shares .", "In its submissions to ORG the applicant company argued that ORG , acting on behalf of the Government , had not requested the annulment of the issue of CARDINAL shares in its initial court action . According to LAW , a supplementary judgment could be issued only if the court had omitted to rule in respect of a claim made by one of the parties to the proceedings . Since ORG only sought the annulment of the sale of CARDINAL shares , his new request could not be treated in a supplementary judgment . In any event , the issue of the new shares took place in DATE and , therefore , ORG action was time - barred . The approach taken by the court in respect of the time - limit in the main proceedings was inapplicable to the new request of ORG because ORG did not refer to the problem of the issue of new shares in its judgment of DATE . Accordingly , the ORG could not claim to have found out about that only in DATE .", "On DATE ORG upheld ORG action . Referring to the applicant company 's objection that no claim about the annulment of the issue of new shares had been made during the proceedings which had ended on DATE and that the new request could not be examined in a supplementary judgment , the court found that the claim was implicit in ORG Office 's action , seeking that the ORG be reinstated in its right of ownership of PERCENT of the quarry 's shares . According to the court , it was impossible to make such a reinstatement without annulling the shares issued in DATE . Since the court failed to rule on that problem , it was necessary to treat it in a supplementary judgment . The court ordered the annulment of the new shares arguing that otherwise the Government would own PERCENT of the quarry 's stock , a situation contrary to the judgment of CARDINAL DATE , where it was ordered that the ORG be reinstated in its right of ownership of PERCENT of the shares . The court did not refer to the applicant company 's objection based on the time - limit .", "NORP The applicant company appealed against the judgment and argued , inter alia , that in its initial action ORG had requested the annulment of the sale of the shares in DATE but not the reinstatement of the ORG in its right of ownership of PERCENT of the quarry 's shares . In support of this submission the applicant company cited parts of ORG application before the first - instance court . It argued that ORG had misrepresented the prosecutor 's claims . The applicant company also submitted that the first - instance court had failed to address its LAW objection .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the applicant company 's appeal . It found that since the sale of the shares of DATE had been declared void , the parties had to be reinstated in their initial position , namely the position before the act of sale when the ORG owned PERCENT of the shares . Therefore , it was correct for ORG to adopt a supplementary judgment clarifying the situation .", "On DATE the applicant company applied to ORG and requested it to explain how the judgment of DATE was to be enforced in terms of restitution of its contribution as a result of which the quarry had issued new shares in DATE ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) .", "On DATE ORG issued a new judgment explaining that the applicant company was to be paid by the Government MDL CARDINAL , the value of the shares issued in DATE . The ORG appealed against this judgment .", "On DATE ORG upheld the ORG 's appeal , quashed the judgment of DATE and ordered a re - examination .", "On DATE ORG re - examined the applicant company 's request . It did not order that the value of the shares issued in DATE be returned to the applicant but that the latter be returned the extracting equipment which had been added to the quarry 's assets in DATE ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) . The applicant company appealed and argued that the solution given by ORG was contrary to domestic legislation . However , the appeal was dismissed by ORG on DATE .", "Since the mining equipment had been used and was useless to the applicant company , it has not been recovered by it from the quarry .", "The relevant provisions of LAW , in force at the relevant time , provide :", "The general limitation period for protection through a court action of the rights of a [ natural ] person is DATE ; it is DATE for lawsuits between ORG organisations , collective farms and any other social organisations .", "The competent court ... shall apply the limitation period whether or not the parties request such application .", "The limitation period starts running from DATE on which the right of action arises . The right of action arises on DATE when a person comes to know or should have come to know that his right has been breached ...", "Expiry of the limitation period prior to initiation of court proceedings constitutes a ground for rejecting the claim .", "If the competent court ... finds that the action has not commenced within the limitation period for well - founded reasons , the right in question shall be protected .", "The limitation period does not apply :", "...", "( CARDINAL ) to claims by ORG organisations regarding restitution of ORG property found in the unlawful possession of ... other organisations ... and of citizens ; ” .", "The relevant provisions of the new Civil Code , in force after DATE , read as follows :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) The civil law does not have a retroactive character . It can not modify or suppress the conditions in which a prior legal situation was constituted or the conditions in which such a legal situation was extinguished . The new law can not alter or abolish the already created effects of a legal situation which has been extinguished or is in the process of execution . ”", "In a judgment of DATE ( case nr . CARDINAL ) ORG dismissed the plaintiff 's contentions based on the provisions of the new Civil Code on the ground that the facts of the case related to a period before the entry into force of the new Civil Code and that , therefore , the provisions of the old Civil Code were applicable ." ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicants are a married couple , PERSON ( “ the first applicant ” ) and PERSON ( “ the second applicant ” ) and their daughter , PERSON ( “ the third applicant ” ) . They were born in DATE and DATE respectively . The second and third applicants have NORP nationality , while the first applicant has no nationality . All CARDINAL live in GPE ( GPE ) .", "The first CARDINAL applicants arrived in GPE in DATE and DATE respectively . The second applicant , who was a member of the NORP armed forces at the time , was stationed in GPE and remained there until he finished serving his time in DATE . The third applicant and her elder sister , PERSON , were born in NORP territory .", "Following the break - up of GPE and the restoration of NORP independence in DATE the applicants , who had previously been NORP nationals , became stateless .", "In DATE Tatjana married a NORP national . She is mother to CARDINAL minor children who have NORP nationality .", "In DATE the first and second applicants applied to the NORP ORG ( GPE ministrijas GPE un imigrācijas departaments – “ the GPE ” ) to obtain permanent resident status and to be entered in the register of residents of GPE Latvijas ORG reģistrs ) . However , on DATE the ORG issued them only with temporary residence permits .", "The first and second applicants then lodged an application with ORG , requesting it to direct the ORG to enter them in the register of residents as permanent residents . In a judgment delivered on DATE after adversarial proceedings , which was upheld on DATE following an appeal on points of law , the court allowed their application . It considered that , under the legislation in force , the situation of the second applicant , who had left the army before CARDINAL DATE – the date on which GPE had declared its independence – could not be equated with that of a non - NORP serviceman temporarily present on NORP soil , who would be entitled only to a temporary residence permit . The ORG subsequently entered all the applicants in the register of residents .", "NORP In DATE the GPE discovered that the first CARDINAL applicants had each obtained CARDINAL former NORP passports in DATE and had therefore been able to have their place of residence registered in GPE ( GPE ) despite already having a registered place of residence in GPE ( pieraksts or dzīvesvietas reģistrācija ) .", "In CARDINAL decisions dated DATE and DATE the NORP police decided not to institute criminal proceedings against the applicants for using false identity papers . However , ORG imposed an administrative penalty of CARDINAL lati ( ORG ) ( MONEY ( ORG ) ) on them for breach of the passport regulations . ORG also applied to ORG to have the proceedings reopened to consider new facts , alleging fraudulent behaviour on the part of the first CARDINAL applicants . ORG also noted that the third applicant had followed the example of her parents and sister in DATE , obtaining CARDINAL passports and having her place of residence registered in both GPE and GPE .", "In an order of CARDINAL DATE ORG , ruling on the application for the proceedings to be reopened , allowed the ORG 's application , quashed its own judgment of CARDINAL DATE and ordered the removal of the applicants ' names from the register of residents . The first CARDINAL applicants appealed to ORG which , in an order dated DATE , quashed the decision in question and referred the case back to ORG .", "In DATE the second and third applicants applied for and obtained NORP nationality . On DATE ORG in GPE issued them with passports of GPE .", "In DATE the third applicant , by now an adult , was joined as a party to the proceedings before ORG .", "In a letter of CARDINAL DATE ORG for the implementation of the agreement between the Government of GPE and the Government of GPE on social - welfare arrangements for retired members of the NORP armed forces and their family members residing in GPE ( “ the NORP agreement ” – see paragraph CARDINAL below ) requested ORG Nationality and Migration Directorate ( GPE ministrijas GPE un migrācijas lietu pārvalde – “ the ORG ” ) , which had replaced the ORG , to issue the applicants with permanent residence permits , on the ground that they had the right to remain in GPE under the above agreement . In a second letter sent DATE the ORG informed ORG that the first applicant had neither NORP nor any other nationality .", "In DATE the applicants submitted a further request to ORG . In a joint memorial they argued that , as the second and third applicants had NORP nationality , they had the right to obtain permanent residence permits under the NORP - Latvian agreement . The first applicant , who had no nationality , contended that she was entitled to the status of a “ permanently resident noncitizen ( nepilsonis ) ” under the LAW on the Status of Former GPE Citizens without NORP or other Citizenship ( “ LAW ” – see paragraph CARDINAL below ) .", "NORP In court , the applicants made no attempt to deny the actions of which they had been accused by ORG and the ORG , but maintained that those actions had been in breach only of NORP law and therefore had no effect on their rights in GPE .", "In a judgment of CARDINAL DATE ORG allowed the applicants ' request . It noted that the applicants ' place of residence had been legally registered in PERSON DATE and that they had lived there from then onwards . In the court 's view , since the procuring of second passports by the applicants and their registration in GPE were illegal and void acts , they had no impact on the applicants ' legal status in GPE . The court also noted that the second applicant was on the list of former members of the NORP armed forces in receipt of a NORP military pension and entitled to remain in GPE . That list had been drawn up jointly by the QUANTITY governments in accordance with the NORP - Latvian agreement . Consequently , the court held that the first applicant was entitled to apply for a passport as a “ permanently resident non - citizen ” and that the second and third applicants were entitled to obtain permanent residence permits .", "The ORG appealed against that judgment to ORG . In a judgment of DATE ORG dismissed the appeal , endorsing the findings and reasoning of the firstinstance court .", "The ORG then lodged an appeal on points of law with the ORG of ORG . In a judgment of DATE the ORG quashed ORG judgment and declared it null and void . The ORG found that secretly obtaining CARDINAL passports and registering places of residence in CARDINAL different countries , failing to disclose the second passports and supplying false information to the authorities when applying for regularisation constituted serious breaches of NORP immigration law . The ORG also referred to section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) , subparagraph CARDINAL , of LAW , which stated that the status of “ permanently resident non - citizen ” could not be granted to persons who , on DATE , had their permanent place of residence registered in a member ORG of ORG ( of which GPE is a member ) . The ORG considered that the provision in question was fully applicable to the applicants ' case .", "The ORG also noted that the judgment of ORG of DATE had been subsequently set aside when the proceedings were reopened , thereby depriving the entry of the applicants on the register of residents of any legal basis . It concluded that the second and third applicants , since they did not satisfy the requirements of section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) of the Aliens and ORG ( “ LAW ” – see paragraph CARDINAL below ) , were also not entitled to obtain permanent residence permits . Consequently , the ORG set aside the judgment of DATE and referred the case back to the appellate court .", "For procedural reasons , the case was transferred to ORG which , in a judgment of DATE , rejected the applicants ' application , reaffirming the reasons given by the ORG . Unlike the NORP ORG , ORG considered that the first applicant had NORP nationality under GPE Nationality Act . With regard to the second applicant , it considered that the fact that an individual was on the list of retired army personnel merely attested to the fact that the person concerned actually resided in GPE and was in receipt of a NORP military pension ; it did not in any sense confer entitlement to a residence permit .", "In a judgment of DATE the ORG of ORG dismissed an appeal by the applicants on points of law , endorsing in substance the arguments of ORG .", "In CARDINAL letters dated DATE and DATE the ORG reminded the applicants that they were required to leave GPE .", "On DATE the head of the ORG sent a letter to each of the applicants explaining the procedure to be followed in order to regularise their stay in GPE . The relevant passages of the letter sent to the first applicant read as follows :", "“ ... The [ Directorate ] ... would remind you that , in accordance with the principle of proportionality , no order has hitherto been made for your deportation , and that it is open to you to regularise your stay in GPE in accordance with the [ country 's ] legislation .", "Under sections CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the Status of Stateless Persons Act , persons who are not considered to be nationals of any CARDINAL ORG under the laws of that ORG ... and who are legally resident in GPE , may obtain stateless persons status .", "You satisfy the above requirements ...", "In view of the above , the ORG is prepared to regularise your stay in GPE by entering your name in the register of residents as a stateless person [ resident ] in GPE and by issuing you with an identity document on that basis .", "In order to complete the necessary formalities , you will need to go in person to the LOC district office of the ORG , bringing with you your identity papers , your birth certificate and CARDINAL photographs ... ”", "The letters sent to the other CARDINAL applicants were similar in content . The letter to the second applicant stated in particular :", "“ ... If your wife , PERSON , avails herself of the opportunity to regularise her stay in GPE in accordance with the provisions in force , you will be entitled , under LAW , to obtain a residence permit . The ORG is not aware of any reason which would prevent you from applying for and obtaining a residence permit in GPE .", "Under the terms of section CARDINAL of LAW , only aliens residing in GPE on the basis of a residence permit may apply to the ORG for a residence permit ... In other cases , and where such a move accords with international human rights provisions and the interests of ORG , or on humanitarian grounds , the head of the ORG may authorise the person concerned to submit the relevant papers to the ORG in order to apply for a residence permit . As no order has hitherto been made for your deportation , you may submit the relevant papers ... to the ORG district office of the Directorate ...", "...", "In view of the above , the ORG is prepared to issue you with a residence permit at your wife 's place of residence , in accordance with section CARDINAL of LAW , on condition that PERSON completes the necessary formalities in order to regularise her stay in GPE as a stateless person , and that she responds to the invitation from the LOC office of the Directorate ... ”", "Lastly , the letter to the third applicant contained the following passages :", "“ ... If your mother , PERSON , avails herself of the opportunity offered to her and , after completing the necessary formalities , regularises her stay in GPE in accordance with the provisions in force , you will be entitled , under LAW , to obtain a residence permit . The ORG is not aware of any reason which would prevent you from applying for and obtaining a residence permit in GPE .", "...", "The ORG would further inform you that , in accordance with section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) of LAW , in cases not provided for by the LAW , a temporary residence permit may be issued by the Minister of the ORG , where such a move is in accordance with the provisions of international law . Consequently , you are also entitled to apply to the Minister of the ORG for a residence permit valid for a period longer than that specified in DATE ( CARDINAL ) subparagraph CARDINAL of LAW . Furthermore , after a period of residence of DATE on the basis of a temporary residence permit , you may apply for a permanent residence permit in accordance with section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) subparagraph CARDINAL of LAW ... ”", "In addition , a letter containing the above information concerning the CARDINAL applicants was sent to ORG . On DATE , CARDINAL DATE , the head of the ORG signed CARDINAL decisions formally regularising the applicants ' status in GPE . More specifically , he ordered that the first applicant be entered in the register of residents as a “ stateless person ” , that she be issued with an identity document valid for DATE , and that the second and third applicants be issued with temporary residence permits valid for DATE and DATE respectively . However , regularisation of the status of the second and third applicants was contingent upon that of the first applicant . In other words , in order for PERSON and PERSON to obtain residence permits , PERSON first had to submit the relevant documents to the ORG .", "None of the applicants complied with the instructions outlined above in order to obtain residence permits . As matters stand , the applicants continue to reside in GPE . According to the information available to the ORG , the second applicant is legally employed as the operator of a municipal communal heating plant in Alūksne , while the third applicant is studying law at a private establishment in GPE .", "The applicants contended that , on TIME , the first applicant , PERSON , had been summoned to the regional headquarters of the security police ( PERSON policija ) . An officer of the security police had asked her a number of questions , some of them relating to her application to the ORG and to an interview she had given to journalists from a NORP television channel on the subject . In particular , the police had asked the first applicant how the NORP journalists had made contact with her , how she had heard about the possibility of lodging an individual application with the ORG , how she had found lawyers to represent her before the ORG and how she had known that certain persons had bribed ORG officials in order to obtain NORP residence permits . In addition , the police officer had asked her several questions about her professional career and about the members of her family .", "The dialogue between the first applicant and the police officer , as reconstructed by the applicant and sent to her lawyers on DATE , ran as follows :", "“ Police officer : How did the television channel ORG find you ?", "Applicant : We had had telephone calls in DATE [ and ] DATE . At the time , we had refused to meet them , but journalists are bloodhounds , they always get what they want .", "Police officer : And then ?", "Applicant : They telephoned from GPE and said they wanted to meet us and talk to us . I agreed . They wanted to talk to several [ people ] who had brought cases before the courts .", "Police officer : When did they phone ?", "Applicant : It was a DATE TIME , TIME They came round on the DATE , at TIME If you want to come round [ too ] , you 're welcome . Our door is always open .", "Police officer : You said that you 'd taken the case all the way to ORG , did n't you ?", "Applicant : Yes , I did . There were CARDINAL sets of proceedings ; we fought and fought [ again ] , and eventually we turned to ORG , because of the people in charge in the [ Directorate ] . They saw it as a game to get us deported from the country , while we wanted to prove that we were in the right . [ Their ] attitude towards us was based on prejudice : we had n't broken any laws in GPE .", "Police officer : How and where did you find out that you could apply to ORG ?", "Applicant : The issue of our regularisation was discussed several times by the tripartite ORG . We had approached ORG . We had lawyers . The representatives of ORG and the [ Directorate ] had told us at the last meeting that they had no objections to raise or accusations to make as far as we were concerned , and that everything would be fine . Unfortunately , they have n't kept their promises so far . The ORG advised us to lodge an application with ORG about the length of the proceedings if the case was n't resolved .", "Police officer : And how did you find those lawyers ?", "Applicant : With the help of the lawyers in the social welfare office we were registered with .", "Police officer : Perhaps your lawyers threatened you , saying that if you did n't give information to ORG they would stop working with you ?", "Applicant : That 's nonsense . They told us not to give information to anyone without their consent , not even to ORT ...", "Police officer : You said that over DATE people had lodged applications ?", "Applicant : Yes , I did . Actually , there are even more people involved : I meant that there were CARDINAL families . We 've all been through the courts : some of us once , some twice , and some even CARDINAL times . A lot of people solved the problem by paying backhanders .", "Police officer : How do you know that ?", "Applicant : We were all in the same boat and we helped one another . We used to say to one another that if someone had money , it was better for him to pay , to avoid a trial . [ The first applicant then gave the example of CARDINAL families whose status had been regularised after they had bribed ORG officials ; she named CARDINAL of the officials concerned . ]", "Police officer : And why did you not come to us ?", "Applicant : We did n't know you could help us .", "Police officer : How did you come by the information that CARDINAL people had lodged applications ?", "Applicant : Actually , the figure is higher . We 've all had a lot of problems . [ The applicant dwelt in detail on CARDINAL specific cases concerning the regularisation of persons in a similar situation to her own . ]", "Police officer : What does your husband think about the case ?", "Applicant : He supports [ me ] : what would you do ?", "[ The police officer then asked the applicant a series of questions about her education , her work , her husband 's work and the family 's financial situation . ]", "Police officer : Once more , how did you find out that you could take your case to ORG ?", "Applicant : We read the papers , we watch television ; the cases of GPE , PERSON , PERSON and several other families were reported in the media . We approached ORG , who gave us advice and even offered to [ help us ] find a lawyer . Strange , is n't it ? It was very hard for us , having to bring a case against GPE before ORG , but all the avenues open to us to try and resolve the problem in GPE had been exhausted . It 's the fault of the [ Directorate and its officials ] , who flout the law and force people to leave GPE . They 're the ones who bring shame on GPE . We have n't broken any law .", "Police officer : When is the case going to be examined ?", "Applicant : We do n't know .", "Police officer : What documents have you sent them ?", "Applicant : The courts ' decisions . ”", "The Government contested the accuracy of this record , particularly in view of the length of time that had elapsed between the interview itself and the drafting of the document . The first applicant conceded that the document was probably less than perfect , given that it had been drafted from memory DATE after the fact ; she acknowledged that several other questions ( which she could not recall ) might have been asked during the interview . However , she contended that her record reflected with sufficient accuracy the content and tone of the interview . Furthermore , she was “ absolutely certain ” that her conversation with the police officer had been recorded on tape .", "NORP legislation on nationality and immigration distinguishes several categories of persons , each with a specific status .", "( a ) NORP citizens ( Latvijas Republikas pilsoņi ) , whose legal status is governed by LAW ( GPE likums ) ;", "( b ) “ permanently resident non - citizens ” ( nepilsoņi ) – that is , citizens of the former GPE who lost their NORP citizenship following the break - up of the GPE but have not subsequently obtained any other nationality DATE who are governed by LAW of DATE on the Status of Former GPE Citizens without NORP or other Citizenship ( Likums “ ORG to bijušo ORG pilsoņu statusu , kuriem nav Latvijas vai citas valsts pilsonības ” – “ the NonCitizens Act ” ; see paragraph CARDINAL below ) ;", "( c ) asylum - seekers and refugees , whose status is governed by LAW ( Patvēruma likums ) ;", "( d ) “ stateless persons ” ( bezvalstnieki ) within the meaning of ORG of DATE ( NORP “ ORG bezvalstnieka statusu Latvijas Republikā DATE see paragraph CARDINAL below ) , read in conjunction with the Aliens and ORG Act of DATE ( “ LAW ” – see paragraph CARDINAL below ) and , since DATE , with LAW of DATE ( GPE likums – see paragraph CARDINAL below ) ;", "( e ) “ aliens ” in the broad sense of the term ( ārzemnieki ) , including foreign nationals ( ārvalstnieki ) and stateless persons ( bezvalstnieki ) falling solely within the ambit of LAW ( before DATE ) , and LAW ( after DATE ) .", "The relevant provisions of LAW read as follows :", "Section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) [ Version in force before DATE ]", "“ This Act shall apply to citizens of the former GPE who are resident in GPE ... , were resident within NORP territory before DATE and are registered as being resident there , regardless of the status of their housing , provided that they are not citizens of GPE or of any other ORG , and also to their children below the age of majority , if the latter are not citizens of GPE or of any other ORG . ”", "[ Version in force since DATE ]", "“ The persons governed by LAW non - citizens ' – shall be those citizens of the former GPE , and their children , who are resident in GPE ... and who satisfy all the following criteria :", "( CARDINAL ) on DATE they were registered as being resident within the territory of GPE , regardless of the status of their housing ; or their last registered place of residence by DATE was in GPE ; or a court has established that before the above - mentioned date they had been resident within the territory of GPE for not less than DATE ;", "( CARDINAL ) they do not have NORP citizenship ; and", "( CARDINAL ) they are not and have not been citizens of any other ORG .", "...", "Section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL )", "“ ... [ LANGUAGE have the right", "...", "( CARDINAL ) not to be deported from GPE , save where deportation takes place in accordance with the law and another ORG has agreed to receive the deportee . ... ”", "The relevant provisions of ORG read as follows :", "Section CARDINAL", "“ CARDINAL . The status of stateless person may be granted to persons whose status is not defined either by the LAW on the Status of Former GPE Citizens without NORP or other Citizenship or by LAW , provided they", "...", "( CARDINAL ) are legally resident in GPE .", "Stateless persons who have obtained outside GPE documents attesting to the fact that they are stateless may obtain the status of stateless person in GPE only if they have obtained a permanent residence permit in GPE .", "... ”", "Section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL )", "“ Stateless persons shall be issued with an identity document for stateless persons , which shall also serve as [ a ] travel document . ”", "Section CARDINAL", "“ CARDINAL . Stateless persons in GPE shall enjoy all the human rights enshrined in LAW [ Satversme ] .", "NORP In addition to the rights referred to in the first paragraph of this section , stateless persons shall be entitled", "( CARDINAL ) NORP to leave and return to GPE freely ;", "( CARDINAL ) to be joined by their spouse from outside the country , and by their own minor children or those dependent on their spouse , in accordance with the rules laid down by the Aliens and ORG ) Act ;", "( CARDINAL ) to preserve their native language , culture and traditions , provided these are not in breach of the law ;", "...", "During their stay in GPE , stateless persons shall be bound by [ the provisions of ] NORP law . ”", "The relevant provisions of LAW , in force prior to CARDINAL DATE , read as follows :", "Section CARDINAL", "“ Any foreigner or stateless person shall be entitled to stay in GPE for DATE [ version in force since CARDINAL DATE : ' DATE in the course of CARDINAL of a calendar DATE ' ] , provided that he or she has obtained a residence permit in accordance with the provisions of this Act . ... ”", "Section CARDINAL", "( amended by LAW of DATE )", "“ Aliens or stateless persons may be issued with", "( CARDINAL ) a temporary residence permit ;", "( CARDINAL ) a permanent residence permit . ... ”", "Section CARDINAL", "“ The following may obtain a permanent residence permit :", "...", "( CARDINAL ) the spouse of a NORP citizen , of a ' permanently resident non - citizen ' of GPE or of an alien or stateless person who has [ himself or herself ] been granted a permanent residence permit , in accordance [ with section ] ... CARDINAL of this LAW , and the spouse 's minor or dependent children ... ”", "Section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) ( added by LAW of DATE , in force since DATE )", "“ Permanent residence permits may be obtained by aliens who , on DATE , were officially registered as being resident for an indefinite period within GPE if , at the time of applying for a permanent residence permit , they are officially registered as being resident within GPE and are entered in the register of residents .", "Citizens of the former GPE who acquired the citizenship of another ORG DATE must apply for a permanent residence permit by DATE . ORG of the former GPE who acquired the citizenship of another ORG after DATE must apply within DATE on which they acquired the citizenship of that ORG . ... ”", "Section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) ( amended by LAW of DATE , in force since DATE )", "“ The spouse of an alien or stateless person in possession of a permanent residence permit in GPE , if [ he or she ] is not a NORP citizen or non - citizen or an alien or stateless person in possession of a permanent residence permit , shall be issued with :", "( CARDINAL ) following the initial application : a temporary residence permit valid for DATE ;", "( CARDINAL ) following the second application : a temporary residence permit valid for DATE ;", "( CARDINAL ) following the third application : a permanent residence permit . ”", "Section CARDINAL", "“ No residence permit shall be issued to a person who", "...", "( CARDINAL ) has knowingly supplied false information in order to obtain such a permit ;", "( CARDINAL ) is in possession of false or invalid identity or immigration documents ;", "... ”", "Section CARDINAL", "“ The head of the ORG or of the regional office of the ORG shall issue a deportation order ...", "...", "( CARDINAL ) NORP if the alien or stateless person is in the country without a valid visa or residence permit ... ”", "Section CARDINAL", "“ A person shall leave the territory of GPE within DATE after the deportation order has been served on him or her , provided that no appeal is lodged against the order in the manner prescribed in this section .", "Persons in respect of whom a deportation order is issued may appeal against it within DATE to the head of the ORG , who shall extend the residence permit pending consideration of the appeal .", "An appeal against the decision of the head of the ORG shall lie to the court within whose territorial jurisdiction the ORG 's headquarters are situated , within DATE after the decision has been served . ”", "Section CARDINAL", "“ Where an international agreement on the entry , residence and deportation of aliens and stateless persons , concluded by GPE and approved by ORG , contains provisions at variance with the provisions of the present LAW , the provisions of the international agreement shall take precedence . ”", "Since DATE LAW cited above is no longer in force ; it was repealed and replaced by LAW . The relevant provisions of LAW read as follows :", "Section CARDINAL", "“ The present Act uses the following definitions :", "an alien [ ārzemnieks ] – a person who is neither a NORP citizen nor a “ [ permanently resident ] non - citizen ” of GPE ; ... ”", "Section CARDINAL", "“ CARDINAL . In accordance with the arrangements laid down in the present Act , an alien may request a temporary residence permit", "( CARDINAL ) NORP once in the course of DATE , for a period not exceeding six months , if he or she is the relative of a NORP citizen or a “ [ permanently resident ] non - citizen ” of GPE or of an alien who has obtained a permanent residence permit . This shall apply up to the third degree in lineal descent , the second degree collaterally or the second degree by marriage ;", "...", "( CARDINAL ) for the duration of his or her employment , up to a maximum of DATE ;", "...", "NORP In cases not covered by the present Act , the temporary residence permit shall be granted by the Minister of the Interior , where the relevant decision accords with the provisions of international law or the interests of ORG , or on humanitarian grounds .", "NORP In the cases referred to in CARDINAL ... of paragraph CARDINAL of this section , an application for a permanent residence permit may also be lodged by the spouse of the alien , his or her minor children ( including those under his or her guardianship ) or by persons placed under his or her supervision . ”", "Section CARDINAL", "“ CARDINAL . In accordance with the arrangements laid down in the present Act , the following persons may apply for a permanent residence permit :", "...", "( CARDINAL ) the spouse of a NORP citizen or a “ [ permanently resident ] non - citizen ” of GPE or of an alien who has obtained a permanent residence permit , in accordance with section CARDINAL or CARDINAL of the present Act ... ;", "...", "NORP In cases not covered by the present Act , the permanent residence permit shall be granted by the Minister of the Interior , where it accords with the interests of the State .", "...", "NORP The aliens referred to in paragraph CARDINAL , subparagraph CARDINAL ... of this section may obtain a permanent residence permit if they have a command of the official language . The level of knowledge of the official language and the means of verifying that knowledge shall be determined by ORG .", "NORP Aliens who do not satisfy the requirements set forth in paragraph CARDINAL of this section shall be entitled to continue to reside in GPE if they hold a temporary residence permit . ”", "Section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL )", "“ An alien married to an[other ] alien who holds a permanent residence permit may obtain :", "( CARDINAL ) following the initial application : a temporary residence permit valid for DATE ;", "( CARDINAL ) following the second application : a temporary residence permit valid for DATE ;", "( CARDINAL ) following the third application : a permanent residence permit . ”", "Section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL )", "“ [ By way of exception , ] [ t]he head of the ORG may authorise [ the person concerned ] to submit an application for a residence permit to the ORG , where such authorisation accords with the provisions of international law or the interests of ORG , or on humanitarian grounds . ”", "Section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL )", "“ ... When the time - limit set down [ for submitting an application for a residence permit ] has passed , the head of the ORG may authorise [ the person concerned ] to submit the [ relevant ] documents , where such authorisation accords with the interests of ORG , or on grounds of force majeure or humanitarian grounds . ”", "Section CARDINAL", "“ CARDINAL . Where a decision is taken to refuse an application by an alien for a residence permit or to withdraw his or her residence permit , the person who invited the alien may appeal against that decision to the head of the ORG , within DATE after the decision has been served .", "Where the head of the ORG refuses an application for a residence permit from an alien legally resident in GPE , the alien concerned , or the person who invited him or her , may appeal before the courts against that decision , in the manner prescribed by law . ”", "Section CARDINAL", "“ CARDINAL . Aliens in respect of whom a deportation order is issued ... may lodge an appeal against that decision with the head of the ORG within DATE . The head of the ORG shall extend the person 's stay pending consideration of the appeal .", "“ CARDINAL . An appeal against the decision of the head of the ORG shall lie to the court within whose territorial jurisdiction the ORG 's headquarters are situated , within DATE after the decision has been served . ... ”", "An agreement between GPE and GPE on socialwelfare arrangements for retired members of the armed forces of GPE and their family members resident in GPE was signed in GPE on DATE . It was ratified by GPE on DATE and entered into force on DATE . The relevant provisions of the agreement read as follows :", "Article CARDINAL", "“ The present agreement shall apply to persons residing in GPE who are covered by LAW of DATE on the granting of retirement benefit to persons who have served in the armed forces and in the organs of ORG ( “ retired members of the armed forces ” ) and to their family members . The phrase “ family members ” shall be taken to mean the spouses , minor children and other dependants of retired members of the armed forces . ”", "Article CARDINAL", "“ The persons referred to in LAW agreement shall enjoy fundamental rights in GPE , in accordance with international law , the provisions of this agreement and NORP legislation .", "The persons to whom this agreement applies ... and who were permanently resident in GPE before DATE , including those persons appearing in the lists confirmed by both Parties and annexed to the agreement in respect of whom the relevant formalities have not been completed , shall retain the right to reside without hindrance in GPE if they so wish . By agreement between the Parties , persons who were permanently resident in GPE before DATE and whose names , for whatever reason , have not been entered on the abovementioned lists , may have their names added . ... ”", "At the time of the facts reported by the applicants , the relevant provisions of LAW ( Administratīvo pārkāpumu kodekss ) read as follows :", "Article CARDINAL", "“ ... Use of a passport which has been replaced by a new passport shall be punishable by a fine of CARDINAL lati . ”", "Article CARDINAL ( CARDINAL )", "“ Failure to provide the offices of the NORP ORG with the information to be entered in the register of residents within the time allowed shall be punishable by a fine of between CARDINAL and QUANTITY lati . ”", "The main provisions governing interviews similar to that complained of by the first applicant are contained in the LAW of DATE on operational measures ( Operatīvās darbības likums ) . The “ operational measures ” referred to in the LAW cover all operations , covert or otherwise , aimed at protecting individuals , the independence and sovereignty of the ORG , the constitutional system , the country 's economic and scientific potential and classified information against external or internal threats ( section CARDINAL ) . Operational measures are aimed in particular at preventing and detecting criminal offences , tracing the perpetrators of criminal offences and gathering evidence ( section CARDINAL ) .", "The most straightforward measure is the “ intelligence - related operational procedure ” ( operatīvā izzināšana ) , designed to “ obtain information on events , persons or objects ” ( section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) ) . The procedure takes CARDINAL of the following forms :", "( i ) an “ operational request for intelligence ” ( operatīvā aptauja ) , during which “ the persons concerned are asked questions about the facts of interest to the [ relevant ] authorities ” ( section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) ) ;", "( ii ) “ operational intelligence gathering ” ( operatīvā uzziņa ) , which involves “ gathering information relating to specific persons ” ( section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) ) ;", "( iii ) “ operational clarification of intelligence ” ( operatīvā noskaidrošana ) , consisting in obtaining information by covert or indirect means where there is reason to suspect that the informer will be unwilling to supply the information directly ( section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) ) .", "All operational measures must be in strict compliance with the law and human rights . In particular , no harm – physical or otherwise – may be caused to the persons concerned , nor may they be subjected to violence or threats ( section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) to ( CARDINAL ) ) . Any person who considers that he or she has suffered harm as a result of the actions of a member of the security forces may lodge a complaint with the prosecuting authorities or the relevant court ( section CARDINAL ) .", "Under LAW of ORG of DATE ( NORP drošības iestāžu likums ) , the security police come under the supervision of ORG . They have powers to deploy operational measures in order to combat corruption ." ]

[ "8" ]

[]

[]

[ "34" ]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , Mr PERSON , is a NORP national who was born in DATE and lives in GPE . He was represented before ORG , solicitors in GPE . ORG ( “ the Government ” ) were represented by their Agent , PERSON of ORG .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "The applicant ’s wife died on DATE . On DATE the applicant applied for widows’ benefits . On DATE the applicant was informed that his claim had been disallowed as he was not a woman . On DATE the applicant appealed . On DATE he was advised that the decision would not be reviewed . The applicant did not appeal further as he considered or was advised that such a remedy would be bound to fail since no such social security benefit was payable to widowers under GPE law .", "The applicant was not in receipt of child benefit at the time of his claim .", "The domestic law relevant to this application is set out in Runkee and White v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , § § CARDINAL , DATE ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in PERSON . He is an engineer . In DATE he was the head of a ORG - owned power distribution company called Moldtranselectro .", "The background to this case lies in a series of complex contractual arrangements made in DATE concerning importation of electricity from GPE to GPE and involving , in addition to Moldtranselectro , a NORP ORG - owned power distribution company , a NORP private company and a NORP private company called ORG ( see ORG v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , § CARDINAL , DATE ) . The agreement to which Moldtranselectro was a party provided , inter alia , that Oferta Plus would pay the NORP private company for the electricity supplied to ORG ( ORG ) and would later be paid back by Moldtranselectro in GPE lei ( MDL ) at the official exchange rate on DATE of payment .", "On unspecified dates DATE Oferta Plus paid MONEY for the electricity supplied to Moldtranselectro from GPE .", "On an unspecified date Moldtranselectro paid ORG Plus MDL CARDINAL .", "On DATE the Government of GPE adopted Decision no . CARDINAL by which ORG was authorised to issue nominative ORG bonds ( “ ORG bonds ” ) in favour of private companies for the payment of debts arising from the importation of electricity supplied to state institutions .", "On DATE Moldtranselectro wrote a letter to ORG asking it to issue a ORG bond with a value of MDL CARDINAL in favour of ORG . The letter was signed by the applicant in his capacity as head of Moldtranselectro .", "On DATE ORG issued a ORG bond valued at MDL CARDINAL ( ORG CARDINAL as of CARDINAL DATE ) in favour of ORG , payable by DATE . The ORG bond provided that ORG Plus had to present it to ORG at least DATE before the date of payment . It also provided that Moldtranselectro had to present , by that date , to ORG , documents proving the supply of electricity to state institutions .", "Oferta Plus presented the ORG bond to ORG DATE before the date of payment . However , the latter refused to pay , on the ground that Moldtranselectro had failed to submit evidence concerning the payment by FAC for the imported electricity .", "NORP In DATE ORG Plus initiated civil proceedings against both ORG and Moldtranselectro . ORG defended the action on the grounds set out in paragraph CARDINAL above while Moldtranselectro declined all responsibility .", "On DATE ORG found in favour of ORG and confirmed its right to be paid MDL CARDINAL by ORG , in accordance with the ORG bond . It based its judgment on the finding that ORG had paid for energy supplied to Moldtranselectro from GPE in accordance with the agreement between them and that that energy had been consumed by state institutions . The court also decided to absolve Moldtranselectro of any responsibility .", "NORP Since an appeal by ORG was dismissed on DATE for failure to pay court fees , a warrant for the enforcement of the judgment of DATE was issued to ORG Plus in DATE .", "On DATE Oferta Plus officially requested a bailiff to start the enforcement procedure under the warrant .", "On DATE ORG requested an extension of the time - limit for lodging an appeal against the judgment of DATE and its request was granted . The appeal was examined on its merits and dismissed by a judgment of ORG of GPE on DATE . ORG lodged an appeal on points of law , reiterating that Moldtranselectro had not complied with its obligation in the ORG bond .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the appeal and upheld the judgments of DATE and DATE . It found it undisputed that ORG had paid for electricity supplied from GPE to Moldtranselectro and consumed , inter alia , by state institutions .", "In DATE , following a request by ORG , ORG introduced a request for annulment of the final judgment of ORG . On DATE ORG dismissed the request and upheld the judgments favourable to ORG . It found , inter alia , that both during the proceedings before the lower courts and before ORG , it had been established that over MDL CARDINAL worth of electricity had been supplied to state institutions .", "On DATE the Government Agent informed ORG about ORG application to the ORG concerning the non - enforcement of the final judgments in its favour and requested it to “ take all the necessary steps in order to avoid a finding of a violation against the ORG by the ORG , with the consequent impairment of the country 's image ” .", "On DATE ORG wrote to ORG , informing it , inter alia , that it considered the judgment in favour of ORG Plus to be unlawful , but that it had complied with it partially so that ORG Plus would not complain to the ORG . ORG had informed it that ORG had already complained to the ORG . The ORG asked ORG for advice .", "On DATE ORG wrote to ORG as follows :", "“ ... during the proceedings [ between ORG Plus , Moldtranselectro and ORG ] ORG and Moldtranselectro presented invoices for ORG CARDINAL , of which by DATE only ORG CARDINAL,CARDINAL,CARDINAL had been paid .", "No other evidence as to the extent to which ORG had fulfilled its obligations under the agreement [ of DATE ] has been presented . Despite this the courts ruled in its favour .", "In that respect ORG has ordered an audit to verify the supply of electricity and the payments between ORG , Moldtranselectro and state institutions . A final decision will be adopted by ORG after the results of the audit become available to it and ORG will be informed accordingly . ”", "An attempt to carry out this audit was made in DATE by a representative of ORG at the request of ORG . However , it was unsuccessful because , in accordance with book - keeping legislation , ORG had destroyed the accounting documents after DATE .", "ORG did not wait for a final reply from ORG and on DATE lodged with ORG a request for revision of the judgments in favour of ORG . The request did not specify any reasons for revision .", "On DATE ORG upheld the revision request , following a hearing at which ORG was represented by ORG . It quashed the judgments in favour of ORG and ordered the reopening of the proceedings . The re - opened proceedings ended with a judgment of ORG of DATE in favour of ORG .", "In the meantime , on DATE , ORG , having examined the letter from ORG of DATE ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) , initiated criminal proceedings against ORG and against the applicant on charges of large - scale embezzlement of ORG property . ORG referred to the results of the audit which it had attempted to carry out in DATE ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) and stated , inter alia , that according to the results of that audit , ORG had not paid for electricity supplied to state institutions .", "On DATE the Chief Executive Officer of Oferta Plus ( “ PERSON ) was questioned by ORG .", "On DATE the offices of ORG Plus were searched and some documents seized .", "On DATE the criminal proceedings were discontinued . The prosecutor in charge of the criminal case stated in his decision of discontinuation , inter alia , the following :", "“ According to the evidence obtained during the audit , DATE Moldtranselectro 's debt to ORG reached MDL CARDINAL ...", "The materials gathered [ during the investigation ] and the audit prove the existence of the debt of Moldtranselectro to Oferta Plus for the electricity supplied . ...", "Taking into consideration the evidence gathered , [ the prosecution concludes ] that the acts of ORG management do not disclose any signs of the offence [ of large - scale embezzlement ] or of other offences . ”", "On DATE the ORG communicated the case of ORG Plus to ORG .", "On DATE the Deputy Prosecutor General quashed the decision of DATE . He submitted , inter alia , that on DATE Moldtranselectro 's debt to the applicant company for the electricity supplied had been MDL MONEY . He argued that while ORG had paid the NORP partner more than MDL CARDINAL for the electricity supplied to Moldtranselectro , it appeared that the energy for which it had paid had not been supplied exclusively to state institutions .", "On DATE the applicant was declared a suspect in the criminal proceedings . In particular he was accused of having written the letter of DATE to ORG asking it to issue a ORG bond in favour of ORG ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) while knowing that the energy supplied to Moldtranselectro , for which the ORG bond was to be issued , had not been consumed by state institutions as stipulated in the Government 's Decision of DATE ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) . On the same date PERSON was indicted on similar charges .", "On DATE the applicant and PERSON were arrested and remanded in custody for DATE on the grounds , inter alia , that they could influence witnesses and hinder the investigation . According to the applicant , before being arrested the investigator made it clear to him that his arrest or release depended on whether he would agree to make the declarations expected of him .", "Both the applicant and PERSON appealed against the detention order and argued , inter alia , that there had been no reasonable suspicion that they had committed an offence and that the criminal proceedings against them had been a form of pressure to persuade ORG to abandon its application before the ORG . The applicant argued that he had been arrested because he had refused to make the declarations he had been asked to make by the investigating officer and in order to induce him to make such declarations . He also argued that the criminal proceedings had been pending since DATE and that since that date he had never failed to appear before the investigating authorities when summoned . On DATE the applicant 's appeal was dismissed without any reasons being given for rejecting the arguments relied on by the applicant .", "The applicant 's detention was subsequently extended and all his habeas corpus requests rejected . It continued until DATE when he was released on bail .", "NORP Throughout his detention the applicant was detained in the detention centre of ORG ( “ NORP ” ) . The room used for meetings between lawyers and detainees had a glass partition to keep them separated . The applicant complained before the domestic courts of the impossibility of holding confidential meetings with his lawyer , but his complaints were dismissed . He did not want the domestic authorities to know about his application to the ORG and therefore his application and the power of attorney had to be signed by his wife .", "On DATE the applicant was acquitted by ORG of all the charges brought against him .", "The relevant domestic law concerning pre - trial detention was set out in the ORG 's judgment in ORG v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , § DATE , CARDINAL DATE .", "It appears from the photographs submitted by the Government that in the lawyer - client meeting room of the ORG detention centre , the space for detainees is separated from the rest of the room by a door and a window . The window appears to be made of CARDINAL plates of glass joined together . Both plates have small holes pierced with a drill ; however the holes do not coincide , so that nothing can be passed though the window . Moreover , there is a dense green net made either of thin wire or plastic between the glass plates , covering the pierced area of the window . There appears to be no space for passing documents between the lawyer and his client .", "DATE ORG held a strike , refusing to attend any proceedings regarding persons detained in the LOC detention centre until the administration had agreed to provide lawyers with rooms for confidential meetings with their clients . The demands of ORG were refused ( see ORG , cited above , § CARDINAL ) .", "NORP On DATE ORG held a meeting at which the President of ORG and another lawyer informed the participants that they had taken part , together with representatives of ORG , in a committee of inspection of the LOC detention centre . During the inspection they had asked that the glass wall be taken down in order to check that there were no listening devices . They had pointed out that it would only be necessary to remove a few screws and proposed that all the expenses linked to the verification be covered by ORG . The ORG administration had rejected the proposal ." ]

[ "18", "34", "5" ]

[ "5-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicants were each targeted in undercover operations conducted by the police in the form of a test purchase of drugs under sections CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the Operational - Search Activities Act of CARDINAL DATE ( no . TIME ) . These operations led to their criminal conviction for drug dealing .", "The facts of each individual criminal case , as submitted by the parties , are summarised below . The applicants disagreed with the Government on the underlying causes and the circumstances leading to the test purchases , and where this is so both versions are given . As regards the factual details of the covert operations , they are not in dispute . In particular , it is common ground that the applicants knowingly procured drugs in the course of the test purchases .", "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE . At the time of his arrest he was a DATE student at a management college . He is currently serving a prison sentence in a correctional colony .", "According to the ORG , on CARDINAL DATE a PERSON voluntarily went to the police and reported that QUANTITY persons , “ PERSON ” ( the applicant ) and “ FAC , were selling hashish at MONEY ( RUB ) per QUANTITY .", "According to the applicant , X was a drug addict , with a previous criminal conviction for illegal possession of drugs , and he was a police informant who had previously taken part in test purchases of drugs . To support these allegations the applicant provided a copy of the judgment against ORG and copies of CARDINAL judgments in unrelated criminal proceedings against CARDINAL different persons where X featured as the buyer in test purchases of cannabis , heroin and hashish from the accused .", "It is common ground , supported by the official records , that the police ordered a test purchase and proceeded with it immediately after having received the information from X. The order indicated the applicant ’s name and stated that he was suspected of selling hashish at RUB QUANTITY . X phoned “ FAC and told him that he wished to buy hashish . The police officers were present when PERSON was speaking to “ FAC , but the conversations were not recorded . X was given RUB CARDINAL that had been photocopied . He met “ PERSON later on TIME and together they met the applicant who took RUB CARDINAL from them and went away to purchase the drugs . The applicant was later arrested and was found in possession of banknotes that matched the photocopied ones . Throughout the test purchase X had his mobile phone turned on with the police officer ’s number dialled , which enabled the police to overhear their conversations . These communications were not recorded . Neither “ Ruslan ” nor the applicant ’s dealer were arrested or prosecuted , allegedly on the grounds that their identities could not be established .", "X testified at trial that he had met the applicant and “ Ruslan ” at a local supermarket DATE before the test purchase . In the course of their conversation the applicant had told him that he could get some hashish for him . “ Ruslan ” had given him his phone number . X had then volunteered that information to the police and agreed to take part in the test purchase . He testified that he had not previously bought drugs from the applicant . When the defence counsel cross - examined X the court disallowed questions about his criminal record and whether he was a drug user . It also dismissed the motion to have the judgments proving that X had previously acted as a buyer in test purchases of drugs accepted as evidence .", "NORP The policemen who had initiated and carried out the test purchase testified at the trial that prior to X ’s information they had not known the applicant as drug dealer . They reiterated the details of the test purchase .", "At the trial the applicant pleaded guilty of assisting “ Ruslan ” in buying drugs , but claimed that it had been the result of police incitement . He claimed that he and “ FAC were occasional smokers of hashish but that he was not selling or otherwise supplying it to anyone . The test purchase was the first time he had agreed to help “ FAC , or anyone , in obtaining drugs , and he had only done so because of his insistent prompting .", "NORP The person named “ FAC was not called to be cross - examined at the trial , allegedly because the investigating authorities had failed to establish his identity .", "On DATE the NORP ORG of GPE found the applicant guilty of attempted illegal sale of narcotic drugs and sentenced him to DATE imprisonment . The court did not make an express assessment of the applicant ’s plea of entrapment .", "The applicant appealed . He reiterated his plea of provocation , claiming , inter alia , that X had been a police informant and challenging the refusal of the firstinstance court to admit the relevant documents as evidence . He also pointed out that the police had no other information suggesting that he had previously sold drugs . He also complained that the authorities had not made any attempts to find and question “ PERSON , who had played a key role in the test purchase and could have cast light on the extent of the provocation .", "On DATE ORG upheld the firstinstance judgment . It reiterated the finding that the applicant had attempted to sell the narcotic drug during the test purchase and implicitly dismissed the plea of entrapment without answering the applicant ’s arguments .", "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE . He is currently serving a prison sentence in PERSON .", "According to the Government , on DATE Ms Y voluntarily went to the police and reported that she was a heroin addict and that she wished to inform on her drug dealer . She said that she had been buying heroin from the applicant for a long time , but did not specify for how long . The police asked her to participate in a test purchase of drugs from the applicant , and she agreed to do so .", "According to the applicant , he knew Y from primary school and through his girlfriend . He knew that she was a drug user ; she would occasionally offer to sell him second - hand mobile phones of unclear provenance . DATE before the test purchase she had sold him a DVD player which had later been seized by the police as a stolen item . Because of that , Y owed the applicant RUB CARDINAL,CARDINAL which she was unable to repay . On DATE she contacted him with an offer to redeem the debt , but told him that she would only do so if he got her some heroin , of which she was badly in need . The applicant contacted an acquaintance , a drug dealer , and arranged for the quantity Y had requested . He claimed that it was the first time he had agreed to purchase drugs for Y or for anyone .", "It is common ground between the parties that prior to ORG submissions the police had not been in possession of any information suggesting the applicant ’s possible involvement in drug dealing .", "On DATE the police ordered a test purchase . The order indicated the applicant ’s name and address and stated that he was suspected of selling heroin at RUB CARDINAL per gram . Y was given RUB CARDINAL in banknotes that had been photocopied . She phoned the applicant and arranged to purchase QUANTITY of heroin . The content of the phone call , which was made from police LOC and in the presence of police officers , was not recorded . The applicant met Y at the agreed place in town and she passed him the money . The police arrested the applicant on the spot . He was in possession of RUB CARDINAL in banknotes that matched the ones the police had photocopied . Y handed in a packet of heroin allegedly purchased from the applicant . The applicant claimed that he had not supplied the drugs handed in by Y because he was supposed to give them to her later .", "After the arrest the applicant offered to inform the police on the dealer from whom he had obtained the heroin for Y and to conduct a test purchase from him , but the offer was not followed up .", "The case was examined at first instance by LOC of PERSON . At the trial the applicant pleaded partly guilty but claimed that the crime he had committed was the result of police entrapment . He pointed out , in particular , that there was no evidence of his prior involvement in drug dealing . He maintained that ORG had previously asked him to buy heroin for her , knowing that he had an acquaintance who was a dealer , but he had always refused . CARDINAL DATE was the first time he had agreed to help her , and this was only because she had promised to pay back her debt if he did . He claimed that her participation in the test purchase was not “ voluntary ” , but prompted by the police , who had manipulated her by playing on her drug addiction .", "Y testified at the trial that on DATE she had voluntarily gone to the police to inform them about the applicant ’s involvement in drug trafficking . She also stated that she had previously bought heroin from the applicant CARDINAL times .", "The police officer who carried out the test purchase testified at the trial that on DATE Y had voluntarily gone to the police station and reported that she was a heroin addict and that she wished to inform them that the applicant was her drug dealer . He also stated that she had collaborated with him for DATE prior to the test purchase , and that she had taken part in unrelated test purchases of drugs from other persons . He further stated that prior to CARDINAL DATE the police had had no information on the applicant and that the test purchase was ordered as soon as Y had reported him . She had been asked to make a phone call to the applicant immediately from the police station ; when she did so she had only asked the applicant to sell her heroin , without entering into any other subjects .", "The court also cross - examined another policeman who had taken part in the test purchase , and read out statements given by the attesting witnesses in the investigation , in which they set out the details of the test purchase . On DATE it found the applicant guilty of attempted illegal sale of narcotic drugs in particularly large quantities . It did not expressly refer to the applicant ’s plea of entrapment , having found the fact of the sale sufficiently established and having noted the compliance of the test purchase with the procedural requirements . It considered that the applicant ’s version of events , whereby he met Y because of the debt , had been refuted by other evidence . The applicant was sentenced to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment in a high - security correctional colony .", "The applicant appealed , pleading police incitement of the offence he was convicted of and alleging that the firstinstance court had incorrectly assessed the evidence .", "On DATE ORG upheld the first - instance judgment . It did not address the plea of entrapment , but limited itself to finding the applicant ’s conviction lawful and well - founded .", "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE . Trained in the past as a policeman , in DATE he was convicted of a murder and , after his release , worked as a welder . He is currently serving a prison sentence in a correctional colony in GPE following his conviction of the drug offence described below .", "According to the Government , on DATE Ms Z voluntarily presented herself at the local office of ORG , the police ) and reported that she was a heroin addict and that she wished to inform the authorities that the applicant was a drug dealer . The police asked her to participate in a test purchase of drugs from the applicant , and she agreed to do so .", "It is common ground between the parties that prior to ORG ’s submissions the police had not been in possession of any information suggesting the applicant ’s possible involvement in drug dealing . However , the Government also claimed that this information was corroborated by a report of an officer of ORG drawn on DATE , DATE .", "According to the applicant , he had known Z for DATE through his personal contacts ; he was also acquainted with a certain ORG , also through personal contacts . From his police training with ORG he knew that the QUANTITY women were drug addicts , with criminal records related to drug dealing , and that they were police informants . On DATE Z called him and asked for the phone number of P because she wanted to buy drugs from her ; she said that she was suffering severe withdrawal symptoms and was on the verge of committing suicide . Later the same day she called him again and asked him to accompany her to the meeting with P because she feared that P would not sell to her if she was on her own . Out of compassion he agreed to go along . When the CARDINAL of them met , P sold Z QUANTITY grams of methamphetamine , a home - made narcotic drug produced with ephedrine and referred to throughout the proceedings by its slang name “ speed ” ( « винт PERSON ) . The applicant was arrested on the spot . He alleged that he did not have either money or drugs on him during the arrest , claiming that the money was planted on him during the search . He acknowledged , however , that he assisted Z in buying the “ speed ” but maintained that it was the first time he had done so for Z or for anyone , having succumbed to her persistent begging .", "The official records presented the following account of the test purchase . Having received the information from Z , the police ordered a test purchase and proceeded with it immediately . The order indicated the applicant ’s name and stated that he was suspected of selling “ speed ” for RUB CARDINAL per gram . Z was given RUB CARDINAL in banknotes that had been photocopied . She phoned the applicant from police premises and asked him to get the drugs for her . He called her back later and they arranged to purchase QUANTITY of “ speed ” . The police officers were listening when Z spoke to the applicant on the phone , but the conversations were not recorded . The applicant met DATE on the same night and together they met another person , P. When Z gave a signal to the police they arrested the applicant and took him to the police station . At the station the police examined a wallet allegedly found on him which contained RUB MONEY in banknotes that matched the photocopied ones . Z handed in a syringe with “ speed ” in it , allegedly purchased from the applicant . P was also arrested , but she was released shortly afterwards and was not prosecuted .", "At the trial the applicant pleaded guilty of helping Z to buy drugs , but claimed that he had been induced by the police to do so and requested that the evidence relating to the test purchase be excluded .", "Z testified that she had volunteered information about the applicant to the police because she thought it would make it easier for her to overcome her addiction . She stated that before the test purchase she had never bought drugs from the applicant ; however , since they used to buy and consume them together she told the police that she would be able to convince him to obtain the drugs for her . She further stated that she did not know if the applicant had previously sold drugs to anyone else , and she was almost certain he did not produce them himself . She also admitted that she used to buy drugs from another source . Finally , concerning the circumstances of the test purchase , she testified that she gave the money to the applicant and took the syringe from him and that she did not see P handle either the money or the syringe .", "The applicant requested that P be called and cross - examined , but the court noted that she had been summoned and had absconded , and that her whereabouts were unknown . The court considered this to constitute exceptional circumstances allowing it to take her written depositions into account . Despite the applicant ’s objections , it read out her pre - trial statement saying that she had delivered the drugs to the agreed place at the applicant ’s request , but that the sale had been arranged by him .", "QUANTITY police officers were cross - examined about the covert operation . They reiterated the details of the test purchase . CARDINAL of them testified , when asked , that Z was not remunerated for her collaboration with the police .", "On DATE the ORG of GPE found the applicant guilty of attempted illegal sale of narcotic drugs and sentenced him to DATE imprisonment . The sentence was increased to DATE for breach of parole relating to his previous conviction .", "NORP The applicant appealed , pleading police incitement of the offence he was convicted of and complaining that the first - instance court had incorrectly assessed the evidence .", "On CARDINAL DATE ORG examined the appeal . It dismissed the plea of entrapment , stating that the test purchase was based on the information given by Z to the police , notably that she “ had previously bought drugs from the applicant on multiple occasions ” , and concluded that the test purchase was therefore lawful . It upheld the first - instance judgment as well - founded .", "Article CARDINAL of LAW ( as in force at the material time ) provided that the unlawful sale of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances carried a sentence of DATE imprisonment ; the same offence involving a large quantity of drugs or committed by a group of persons acting in conspiracy carried a sentence of up to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment ; the same offence involving a particularly large quantity of drugs carried a sentence of up to DATE imprisonment ( Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL ( d ) ) .", "On DATE ORG of GPE adopted guidelines ( Ruling No . DATE ) on jurisprudence in criminal cases involving narcotic drugs or psychotropic , or strong , or toxic substances . The Plenary ruled , in particular , that any sale of such substances , if carried out in connection with a test purchase under LAW , should carry charges of attempted sale ( LAW in conjunction with LAW ) . It also set out the following conditions on which the results of the test purchase could be admitted as evidence in criminal proceedings : ( i ) they must have been obtained in accordance with the law ; ( ii ) they must demonstrate that the defendant ’s intention to engage in trafficking of illegal substances had developed independently of the undercover GPE acts ; and ( iii ) they must demonstrate that the defendant had carried out all the preparatory steps necessary for the commission of the offence .", "The Operational - Search Activities Act of CARDINAL DATE ( no . ORG ) provided as follows at the material time :", "“ An operational - search activity is a form of overt or covert activity carried out by operational divisions of ORG agencies authorised by this LAW ( hereinafter ‘ agencies conducting operational - search GPE ) within the scope of their powers , with a view to protecting the life , health , rights and freedoms of individuals and citizens , or property , and protecting the public and the ORG against criminal offences . ”", "“ The aims of operational - search activities are :", "– to detect , prevent , intercept and investigate criminal offences as well as searching for and identifying those responsible for planning or committing them ;", "... ”", "“ ...", "A person who considers that an agency conducting operational - search activities has acted in breach of his or her rights and freedoms may challenge the acts of that agency before a higher - ranking agency conducting operational - search activities , a prosecutor ’s office or a court .", "... ”", "“ In carrying out investigations the following measures may be taken :", "...", "NORP test purchase ;", "...", "NORP supervision of postal , telegraphic and other communications ;", "telephone interception ;", "collection of data from technical channels of communication ;", "operational infiltration ;", "controlled supply ;", "operational experiments .", "...", "Operational - search activities involving supervision of postal , telegraphic and other communications , telephone interception through [ telecommunications companies ] , and the collection of data from technical channels of communication are to be carried out by technical means by ORG , the agencies of ORG and the regulatory agencies for drugs and psychotropic substances in accordance with decisions and agreements signed between the agencies involved .", "... ”", "“ [ Operational - search activities may be performed on the following grounds ; ] ...", "NORP pending criminal proceedings ;", "NORP information obtained by the agencies conducting operational - search activities which :", "( CARDINAL ) indicates that an offence is being planned or has already been committed , or points to persons who are planning or committing or have committed an offence , if there is insufficient evidence for a decision to institute criminal proceedings ;", "... ”", "“ Operational - search activities involving interference with the constitutional right to privacy of postal , telegraphic and other communications transmitted by means of wire or mail services , or with the privacy of the home , may be conducted , subject to a judicial decision , following the receipt of information concerning :", "NORP the appearance that an offence has been committed or is ongoing , or a conspiracy to commit an offence whose investigation is mandatory ;", "NORP persons who are conspiring to commit , or are committing or have committed an offence whose investigation is mandatory ;", "...", "Test purchases ... , operational experiments , or infiltration by agents of the agencies conducting operational - search activities or individuals assisting them , shall be carried out pursuant to an order issued by the head of the agency conducting operational - search activities .", "Operational experiments may be conducted only for the detection , prevention , interruption and investigation of a serious crime , or for the identification of persons who are planning or committing or have committed a serious crime .", "... ”", "“ The examination of requests for the taking of measures involving interference with the constitutional right to privacy of correspondence and telephone , postal , telegraphic and other communications transmitted by means of wire or mail services , or with the right to privacy of the home , shall fall within the competence of a court at the place where the requested measure is to be carried out or at the place where the requesting body is located . The request must be examined immediately by a single judge ; the examination of the request may not be refused .", "...", "The judge examining the request shall decide whether to authorise measures involving interference with the above - mentioned constitutional right , or to refuse authorisation , indicating reasons .", "... ”", "“ To pursue their aims as defined by this LAW , agencies conducting operational - search activities may create and use databases and open operational registration files .", "Operational registration files may be opened on the grounds set out in points CARDINAL to CARDINAL of section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of this LAW ... ”", "“ Information gathered as a result of operational - search activities may be used for the preparation and conduct of the investigation and court proceedings ... and used as evidence in criminal proceedings in accordance with legal provisions regulating the collection , evaluation and assessment of evidence . ... ”", "On DATE section CARDINAL of the Act was amended to prohibit agencies conducting operational - search activities from directly or indirectly inducing or inciting the commission of offences .", "Article CARDINAL of the Code of Criminal Procedure of GPE , in force from DATE , provided at the material time that orders of a preliminary interview officer , investigator or prosecutor that were capable of encroaching on the constitutional rights and freedoms of participants in criminal proceedings or obstructing their access to justice could be challenged before a court whose jurisdiction covered the place of the investigation . Subsequent changes in the Code added the head of the investigating authority to the list of officials whose acts could be challenged .", "On DATE ORG of GPE adopted guidelines ( Ruling No . CARDINAL ) on the practice of judicial examination of complaints under LAW . The Plenary ruled , inter alia , that decisions of officials of agencies conducting operational - search activities must also be subject to judicial review under the provisions of LAW if the officials were acting pursuant to an order by an investigator or the head of the investigating or preliminary inquiry authority .", "The Code of Criminal Procedure provides , in so far as relevant :", "“ CARDINAL . Evidence obtained in breach of this Code shall be inadmissible . Inadmissible evidence shall have no legal force and can not be relied on as grounds for criminal charges or for proving any of the [ circumstances for which evidence is required in criminal proceedings ] .", "... ”", "“ ...", "ORG If a court decides to exclude evidence , that evidence shall have no legal force and can not be relied on in a judgment or other judicial decision , or be examined or used during the trial .", "Article CARDINAL of the ORG contains a list of situations which may justify the reopening of a finalised case on account of newly discovered circumstances . A judgment of ORG finding a violation of LAW in a case in respect of which an applicant lodged a complaint with the ORG is considered to be a new circumstance warranting a reopening ( LAW ( CARDINAL ) ) .", "The ORG conducted a comparative study of the legislation of CARDINAL member ORG GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , “ the former GPE ” , GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE and GPE ) concerning the use of undercover agents in test purchases and similar covert operations .", "The comparative study showed that in all of these countries it is possible for the police to carry out undercover operations , in particular in drug - trafficking cases , according to the procedure set out in the relevant laws and regulations . Only in GPE is there no formal legislative or regulatory basis for the use of undercover police . A number of countries provide also for the involvement of private individuals and authorise resort to undercover agents only when the collection of evidence by other means is too complicated or impossible .", "Research reveals that in most of the countries covered there is exclusive or shared responsibility of the judicial bodies in the authorisation procedure , although in some the decision lies with the public prosecutor , the administrative authorities or high - level police officials .", "A judicial authorisation is required in GPE ( court ) , GPE ( investigating judge ) , GPE ( investigating judge ) , GPE ( indictments chamber ) , GPE , GPE ( regional court with prior agreement of ORG ) , GPE ( investigating judge ) , and GPE ( judge ) .", "In GPE and GPE the authority to sanction undercover operations lies exclusively with the public prosecutor .", "A number of countries provide for the involvement of the prosecutor or the court , or both , depending , for example , on the type of operation or , more commonly , the stage of the proceedings .", "In GPE , “ fictitious transfers ” , which include test purchases , require authorisation by the public prosecutor , whereas the use of an undercover agent ( in connection with particularly serious offences ) can be authorised only by a High Court judge . Under NORP law , the use of undercover agents must be authorised by the public prosecutor , and additionally by a court if the operation targets a particular person or involves entry into private LOC . In GPE also the authorisation is given by the public prosecutor , but video and audio recording during the operation requires prior authorisation by a judge .", "In GPE , the authorisation is delivered by the public prosecutor at the preliminary inquiry stage , and by the investigating judge ( juge d’instruction ) during the pre - trial investigation . NORP law , in a similar vein , requires the authorisation of a pre - trial judge during a pre - trial investigation , while at an earlier stage the authorisation of the prosecutor suffices . In “ the former GPE ” special investigative measures in the pre - investigation phase can be ordered either by the public prosecutor or by an investigating judge , but once an investigation has been opened the authorisation can be given only by the latter .", "In GPE , covert operations within the framework of the inquiry are subject to the prior authorisation of the competent member of LAW , with mandatory communication to the investigating judge , and are deemed to be ratified if no order refusing permission is issued within TIME . If the operation is carried out in the framework of crime prevention , it falls within the competence of the investigation judge to give the required authorisation at the proposal of the prosecution authorities .", "NORP law also provides for notification of the investigating judge when authorisation for an undercover operation has been given by the public prosecutor . Such authorisation can also be issued directly by the judge .", "In GPE there is no requirement for formal authorisation from the prosecutor or a court , but the appropriate authority must give prior notification of the start of the operation to the competent prosecutor . In drug cases , before undertaking an undercover operation , ORG or its regional or provincial offices need to inform the prosecutor in charge of the investigations , but they do not need their formal approval .", "In a few countries , there is no involvement of a court or a prosecutor in the authorisation procedure . In GPE , the decision on undercover activities is taken by the Head of ORG or the Head of ORG , at the request of a regular police department . The decision - making bodies are separate from the services which carry out the operation .", "In the GPE undercover operations are subject to administrative rather than judicial authorisation . In the ORG of Lords decision in R v. Loosely [ DATE ] Lord PERSON underlined that although the technique in GPE for authorising and supervising such practice was very different from the judicial supervision in continental countries , the purpose was the same , namely to remove the risk of extortion , corruption or abuse of power by policemen operating without proper supervision .", "The public authorities entitled to authorise the use or conduct of a Covert Human Intelligence Source ( ORG ) are laid out in law . Each public authority has its own separate authorising officer .", "ORG officers should not be responsible for authorising their own activities , that is , those in which they themselves are to act as the ORG or as the handler of the CHIS . Furthermore , authorising officers should , where possible , be independent of the investigation . However , it is recognised that this is not always possible , especially in the case of small organisations , or where it is necessary to act urgently or for security reasons . Where an authorising officer authorises his own activity the central record of authorisations should highlight this and the attention of a Commissioner or Inspector should be drawn to it during his next inspection .", "In GPE similarly there is no judicial authorisation procedure . The police or other enforcement agencies both take and carry out all operational decisions concerning undercover operations .", "ORG instruments on the use of special investigative techniques are outlined in PERSON v. GPE ( [ ORG ] , no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , § § DATE , ECHR CARDINAL- ... ) .", "“ ... in order to ensure that the use of undercover agents does not unduly interfere with the right to fair trial guaranteed by LAW , LAW Legislative Decree No . CARDINAL/CARDINAL on the prevention of drug - trafficking has been amended by LAW . CARDINAL of DATE . According to the added paragraph CARDINAL to Article DATE , the use of such persons is subject to a court ’s approval , which has to be given within DATE and for a specific period .", "The Government is of the opinion that , in view of the supra - legal status of the ORG , as interpreted by ORG , in NORP law ( ORG judgments ORG . ORG of DATE and CARDINAL of DATE ) , the NORP courts will exercise this supervision and adapt their interpretation of LAW ( in particular of LAW in such a way as to avoid new violations similar to that found in the PERSON case .", "In order to facilitate this adaptation , the judgment of ORG has been published in the Revista Portuguesa de Ciência Criminal ( ORG CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) and also disseminated to the authorities concerned , including the police . ”", "On DATE ORG concluded the execution of the judgment in the case of ORG v. GPE ( no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , DATE ) , having adopted Resolution ResDH(CARDINAL)CARDINAL which read in so far as relevant :", "“ The ORG ’s findings have been endorsed in national case - law : it is held that , in conformity with LAW , the conviction of an accused should not arise solely from the conduct of a police officer involved in the case ( acting as agent provocateur ) , otherwise the requirements of a fair trial are not met ( Court of Cassation CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) . Furthermore , this conviction should be based on additional , strong evidence , and not only on the testimony of the police officers involved . ( Court of Cassation DATE , ORG of Appeal CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) . ”", "“ In order to prevent similar violations , ORG set out , in its decision of DATE , the general principles with regard to cases where the criminal conduct simulation model is employed .", "First , ORG stressed that the criminal conduct simulation model as an investigative technique may not be employed to incite the commission of an offence but may be applied only if credible and objective information had already been obtained to the effect that the criminal activity had been initiated .", "Secondly , state officials may not act as private persons to incite third parties to commit an offence , while the acts of private persons acting to incite third parties to commit an offence under the control and instructions of state officials shall constitute such incitement .", "Thirdly , it may be inferred that there is an act of incitement even if state officials do not act in a very intensive and pressing manner , including in situations when contact with third parties is made indirectly through mediators .", "Fourthly , the burden of proof in judicial proceedings lies with the state authorities , which have an obligation to refute any argument raised by a defendant in criminal proceedings in respect of the incitement by state agents to commit an offence .", "Fifthly , once the act of incitement is established , no evidence obtained through incitement shall be admissible . The confession of an offence as a result of incitement does not eradicate either incitement or its effects .", "Sixthly , it is preferred that undercover techniques are supervised by a court although supervision by a prosecutor does not in itself violate the Convention .", "This decision of ORG is binding upon all domestic courts . Thus , it provides a clear and foreseeable procedure in similar cases . ”" ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "He is a recidivist offender . He served a number prison sentences in various detention establishments in GPE .", "Since DATE the applicant has been suffering from epilepsy marked by frequent ( DATE ) seizures and encephalopathy accompanied by dementia . He also suffers from ulcers and syphilis . He has been classified by the social security authorities as a person with a “ first - degree disability making him completely unfit to work ” ( pierwszy stopień inwalidztwa całkowicie niezdolny do pracy ) .", "On DATE ORG ( Sąd Rejonowy ) appointed neurology and forensic medicine experts to produce a report on the applicant ’s health in connection with a criminal case pending at that time against him . The experts examined the applicant ’s medical records and the preceding psychological and forensic medicine reports . The extracts from these documents revealed that since DATE the applicant had been suffering from epilepsy accompanied by very frequent seizures and from a personality disorder . He had made several suicide attempts . During CARDINAL medical interview , the applicant had stated that he could not obtain the necessary medical treatment in prison and that his cellmates ignored his epileptic fits . The doctors , who had examined the applicant in the past , agreed that he could remain in prison provided that he received specialised psychiatric treatment on a permanent basis .", "On DATE ORG appointed new medical experts to draft a report on the applicant ’s health . The experts found that the penitentiary medical care system could no longer offer the applicant the necessary treatment . They emphasised that his continuous incarceration might put his health and life at risk . It was further indicated that the applicant should obtain a more detailed diagnosis from a specialised clinic and , perhaps , undergo brain surgery .", "It appears that the applicant was first remanded in custody on DATE .", "From DATE until DATE and from DATE until DATE he was detained in FAC .", "It appears that in DATE he was admitted for DATE to an unspecified prison hospital .", "On DATE the applicant was committed to FAC where he received medical treatment in the neurology ward . Doctors emphasised the need to provide the applicant with permanent specialised medical care and to ensure his constant supervision by another person .", "On DATE he was transferred to FAC .", "On DATE the applicant was released home .", "On DATE he was again remanded in custody in connection with a new criminal case against him . From that day until DATE he was detained in FAC .", "On DATE he was granted conditional release from prison .", "On DATE the applicant was once more remanded in custody . He was committed to an unspecified detention facility .", "From DATE until DATE the applicant was at liberty .", "On DATE the applicant was again remanded in custody . From that day until DATE he was in continuous detention either in ordinary detention facilities or in prison hospitals .", "During that time he was detained in FAC during CARDINAL separate periods : ( CARDINAL ) from CARDINAL until DATE ; ( CARDINAL ) from CARDINAL May until DATE ; ( CARDINAL ) from DATE until an unspecified date , presumably DATE ; and ( CARDINAL ) from CARDINAL May until DATE .", "It appears that apart from ORG the applicant was detained in the following facilities : from CARDINAL DATE until DATE in FAC ; from DATE until an unspecified date in FAC ; subsequently in GPE , GPE , PERSON and ORG ; from DATE until DATE in the FAC hospital and immediately afterwards in FAC ; from an unspecified date in DATE in FAC ; from DATE until DATE in the FAC hospital ; from DATE until DATE in ORG ; from DATE until DATE in the FAC hospital ; from DATE until DATE in ORG hospital ; from DATE until CARDINAL DATE in FAC hospital .", "The applicant submitted that in FAC he was committed to a general and not medical wing . He had shared his cells with healthy prisoners , who , as he submitted , had ignored his epileptic fits and had not offered him any help in his DATE routines . The applicant also submitted that he had been humiliated in front of his fellow inmates because , as a result of his seizures , he had often lost consciousness and had wet himself .", "On DATE the applicant was released and he is currently at liberty .", "From DATE until DATE the applicant was detained at the internal disease ward of FAC hospital . He was administered PERSON as a main drug in his treatment .", "From DATE until DATE he was detained in the neurology ward of the FAC hospital . He was prescribed PERSON and PERSON as the main drugs in his treatment and it was suggested that he should regularly undergo neurological examinations .", "From DATE until DATE , during his detention in FAC , the applicant was examined twice by a neurologist and CARDINAL times by the remand centre ’s in - house doctor .", "In addition , from DATE until DATE he was placed under medical observation in the FAC hospital . At the hospital new generic drugs were administered to the applicant in place of PERSON , which was an expensive medicine .", "From DATE until DATE the applicant was once more admitted to the neurology ward of the FAC hospital , where he resumed taking PERSON .", "From DATE until DATE he was detained in the surgery ward of ORG hospital because he had developed gallstones .", "From DATE until CARDINAL DATE the applicant was detained in FAC hospital , where he was admitted to the ward for the chronically ill . PERSON was administered to him during this time .", "On his release from the hospital , the doctors considered the applicant to be in a good overall shape and self - sufficient . It was recommended that he be assigned a bottom bunk bed , be put on a diet and continue the pharmacological treatment prescribed , comprising PERSON . It was also stressed that the applicant be placed under CARDINAL-hour medical supervision .", "Between CARDINAL DATE and DATE , when the applicant was detained in FAC , he continued taking PERSON . It appears that he was examined CARDINAL times by the remand centre ’s in - house doctors .", "Copies of medical records furnished by the applicant reveal that towards DATE his epilepsy was still severe , although , his epileptic seizures were less frequent . Moreover , his personality disorder continued to manifest itself in that the applicant sometimes experienced hallucinations . Most of the time , however , he was suffering from serious dementia .", "The Government did not submit any medical documents or information regarding the applicant ’s health condition or his treatment .", "On DATE a new report was drafted by experts in psychology , psychiatry and neurology , who had been appointed by the ORG ( PERSON ) in the course of social security proceedings for a disability benefit . The experts found that the applicant was suffering from epileptic seizures a number of times per DATE , sometimes even several times per day . He had also been diagnosed with encephalopathy accompanied by dementia , and also with ulcers and syphilis . The experts concluded that , even though the applicant could at that time perform basic DATE activities such as washing , dressing , eating and the toilet without help , he was nevertheless too handicapped to act autonomously in making decisions or in undertaking more demanding DATE routines . The experts were of the opinion that the applicant was incapable of being self - reliant and that he required , at least for the time being , direct and permanent care from another person .", "On DATE , DATE and DATE the applicant lodged with the penitentiary administration complaints about his medical treatment in prison . He claimed that he had only received information stating that his complaints had been referred to the “ competent authorities ” ( do właściwych organów ) . In the ORG ’s submission , all CARDINAL complaints had been examined by competent authorities , including the Chief Doctor of ORG of ORG ( ORG PERSON Służby Więziennej ) and considered ill - founded .", "On DATE the applicant complained to ORG that he had been prescribed NORP generic medicine in place of PERSON , a more effective drug . That complaint was considered ill - founded because at the time when his medicines had been changed the applicant had been under close medical supervision at the prison hospital and his health had not deteriorated .", "Article CARDINAL of the LAW , in its relevant part , reads :", "“ CARDINAL . Everyone shall have a right to have his health protected .", "Equal access to health care services , financed from public funds , shall be ensured by public authorities to citizens , irrespective of their material situation ... ”", "Article CARDINAL of LAW ( NORP karny wykonawczy ) ( “ the Code ” ) provides :", "“ CARDINAL . A sentenced person shall receive medical care , medicines and sanitary articles free of charge .", "...", "Medical care is provided , above all , by health care establishments for persons serving a prison sentence .", "Health care establishments outside of the prison system shall cooperate with the prison medical services in providing medical care to sentenced persons if necessary , in particular", "CARDINAL ) NORP to provide immediate medical care because of a danger to the life or health of a sentenced person ;", "CARDINAL ) NORP to carry out specialist medical examinations , treatment or rehabilitation of sentenced person ;", "CARDINAL ) NORP to provide medical services to a sentenced person who has been granted prison leave or a temporary break in the execution of the sentence ... ”", "On the basis of Article CARDINAL , paragraph CARDINAL of the LAW , the Minister of ORG issued the LAW of DATE on the detailed rules , scope and procedure relating to the provision of medical services to persons in confinement by health care establishments for persons deprived of liberty ( ORG w sprawie szczegółowych zasad , zakresu i trybu udzielania świadczeń zdrowotnych osobom pozbawionym wolności przez zakłady opieki zdrowotnej dla osób pozbawionych wolności – “ the DATE LAW ) . It entered into force on DATE .", "Under paragraph CARDINAL of the DATE Ordinance , health care establishments for persons deprived of liberty provide , inter alia , medical examinations , treatment , preventive medical care , rehabilitation and nursing services to persons deprived of liberty .", "Paragraph CARDINAL of this GPE further provides :", "“ CARDINAL . In a justified case , if the medical services as enumerated in subparagraph CARDINAL can not be provided to persons deprived of liberty by the health care establishments for persons deprived of liberty , in particular due to the lack of specialised medical equipment , such medical services may be provided by public health care establishments .", "NORP In a case as described in subparagraph CARDINAL , the head of a health care establishment for persons deprived of liberty shall decide whether or not such medical services [ provided by the public healthcare establishments ] are necessary ... ”", "Paragraph CARDINAL of the DATE LAW states :", "“ CARDINAL . The decision to place a person deprived of liberty in a prison medical centre shall be taken by a prison doctor or , in his absence , by a nurse ...", "NORP The decision whether or not it is necessary to place a person deprived of liberty in a ... prison hospital shall be taken by the prison hospital ’s director or by a delegated prison doctor .", "...", "NORP In case of emergency the decision whether or not it is necessary to transfer a person deprived of liberty to a hospital may be taken by a doctor other than a prison doctor ... ”", "The rules of cooperation between prison health care establishments and public health care facilities are set out in the Ordinance of the Minister of ORG issued on DATE on the detailed rules , scope and procedure for the cooperation of health care establishments with health services in prisons and remand centres in the provision of medical services to persons deprived of liberty ( ORG w sprawie szczegółowych zasad , zakresu i trybu współdziałania zakładów opieki zdrowotnej ze służbą zdrowia w zakładach karnych i aresztach śledczych w zapewnianiu świadczeń zdrowotnych osobom pozbawionym wolności – “ the DATE Ordinance ” ) . It entered into force on DATE .", "Detention and prison establishments in GPE are supervised by penitentiary judges who act under the authority of the Minister of ORG .", "Under LAW ( “ the LAW ” ) a convicted person is entitled to make applications , complaints and requests to the authorities enforcing the sentence .", "Article CARDINAL , paragraphs CARDINAL and CARDINAL , of the LAW provides that a convicted person can challenge before a court any unlawful decision issued by a judge , a penitentiary judge , a Governor of a prison or a remand centre , a Regional Director or ORG or a court probation officer . Applications related to execution of prison sentences are examined by a competent penitentiary court .", "The remainder of LAW reads as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . Appeals against decisions [ mentioned in paragraph CARDINAL ] shall be lodged within DATE of the date of the publication or the service of the decision ; decision [ in question ] shall be published or served with a reasoned opinion and instruction as to the right , deadline and procedure for lodging an appeal . An appeal shall be lodged with the authority who had issued the contested decision . If [ that ] authority does not consider the appeal favourably , it shall transfer it together with the case file and without undue delay to the competent court .", "The ORG competent for examining the appeal can cease the enforcement of the contested decision ...", "Having examined the appeal the court shall rule on upholding the contested decision , [ its ] quashing or changing ; the court ’s decision shall not be a subject of an interlocutory appeal . ”", "In addition , under LAW ( “ the LAW ” ) a penitentiary judge is entitled to make unrestricted visits to detention facilities , to be acquainted with documents and provided with explanations from the management of these establishments . A penitentiary judge also has the power to communicate with persons deprived of liberty without the presence of third persons and to examine their applications and complaints .", "LAW in its relevant part reads as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . A penitentiary Judge shall quash an unlawful decision [ issued by , inter alia , the Governor of a prison or remand centre , the Regional Director or ORG ] concerning a person deprived of liberty .", "An appeal to the penitentiary court lies against the decision of a penitentiary judge ...", "In the event of finding that the deprivation of liberty is not in accordance with the law , a penitentiary judge shall , without undue delay , inform the authority [ in charge of a person concerned ] of that fact , and , if necessary , shall order the release of the person concerned . ”", "Finally , Article CARDINAL , paragraph CARDINAL , of the Code guarantees a convicted person a right to lodge applications , complaints and requests with other competent authorities , such as the management of a prison or remand centre , heads of units of ORG , penitentiary judges , prosecutors and the ORG . The detailed rules on the procedure are laid down in the Ordinance of the Minister of ORG issued on CARDINAL DATE on the manner of proceeding with applications , complaints and requests of persons detained in prisons and remand centres ( ORG w sprawie sposobów załatwiania wniosków , skarg i próśb osób osadzonych w zakładach karnych i aresztach śledczych ) ( “ the DATE LAW ) .", "DATE the Civil Code contains a non - exhaustive list of the so - called “ personal rights ” ( prawa osobiste ) . This provision states :", "“ The personal rights of an individual , such as in particular health , liberty , honour , freedom of conscience , name or pseudonym , image , secrecy of correspondence , inviolability of the home , scientific or artistic work , [ as well as ] inventions and improvements shall be protected by the civil law regardless of the protection laid down in other legal provisions . ”", "Article CARDINAL paragraph CARDINAL of the Civil Code provides :", "“ A person whose personal rights are at risk [ of infringement ] by a third party may seek an injunction , unless the activity [ complained of ] is not unlawful . In the event of infringement [ the person concerned ] may also require the party who caused the infringement to take steps necessary to remove the consequences of the infringement ... In compliance with the principles of this LAW [ the person concerned ] may also seek pecuniary compensation or may ask the court to award an adequate sum for the benefit of a specific public interest . ”", "Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW , applicable in the event a person suffers a bodily injury or a health disorder as a result of an unlawful act or omission of a ORG agent , reads as follows :", "“ ... [ T]he court may award to the injured person an adequate sum in pecuniary compensation for the damage suffered . ”", "Under LAW , a person whose personal rights have been infringed may seek compensation . That provision , in its relevant part , reads :", "“ The court may grant an adequate sum as pecuniary compensation for non - material damage ( krzywda ) suffered to anyone whose personal rights have been infringed . Alternatively , the person concerned , regardless of seeking any other relief that may be necessary for removing the consequences of the infringement sustained , may ask the court to award an adequate sum for the benefit of a specific public interest ... ”", "In addition , Articles CARDINAL et seq . of the NORP LAW provide for the ORG ’s liability in tort .", "Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL of the Civil Code provided :", "“ The State Treasury shall be liable for damage ( szkoda ) caused by an agent of the ORG in carrying out acts entrusted to him . ”", "After DATE amendments LAW provides :", "“ ORG or [ as the case may be ] a self - government entity or other legal person responsible for exercising public authority shall be liable for any damage ( szkoda ) caused by an unlawful act or omission [ committed ] in connection with the exercise of public authority . ”", "In their submissions on the admissibility and the merits of the case the Government referred to the judgment of ORG ( PERSON ) of DATE and ORG ( Sąd Najwyższy ) of DATE in which domestic courts had examined claims for compensation brought by former detainees on account of the alleged infringement of their personal rights .", "On CARDINAL DATE ORG awarded compensation for non - pecuniary damage in a case which had been brought by a certain GPE , a non - smoker detained with smoking inmates ( IC CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) . The plaintiff alleged that by forcing him to be a passive smoker the authorities had breached his right to an environment free from cigarette smoke and had caused him mental suffering . He also alleged that as a result of passive smoking his allergies had increased and his overall immune system had been weakened .", "The domestic court examined the case under ORG CARDINAL and CARDINAL of LAW . It was observed that the notion of damage under those provisions was linked with the liability ex delicto based on the fault ( wina ) of the person who had caused the damage . The provisions relied on concerned both material and non - material damage . The former was defined as a physical injury or health disorder resulting from an unlawful act or omission . The latter could be manifested by negative mental experiences suffered by the plaintiff as a result of his physical injury or health disorder . In both cases the burden of proof rested on the plaintiff .", "ORG observed that according to the Ordinance of CARDINAL DATE on the principles for the permitted use of tobacco in closed establishments under the Minister of ORG ( ORG w sprawie określenia zasad dopuszczalności używania wyrobów tytoniowych w obiektach zamkniętych podległych PERSON ) ( “ DATE Ordinance ” ) persons detained in remand centres and prisons could smoke only inside the selected cells designated for smokers .", "It was held that the administration of the remand centre where the applicant had been detained with smokers had acted in breach of the DATE Ordinance and LAW . The court found that the plaintiff had not proved any material damage , namely the physical injury or health disorder . He had however suffered non - material damage resulting from an unlawful interference with his right to protect himself from passive smoking . The court awarded the plaintiff LAW .", "On DATE ORG recognised for the first time the right of a detainee under LAW , read in conjunction with LAW , to lodge a civil claim against ORG for damage resulting from overcrowding and inadequate living and sanitary conditions in a detention establishment .", "That judgment originated from the civil action brought by a certain DATE , who was remanded in custody shortly after he had suffered a complicated fracture of his leg and arm . The plaintiff argued that he had not received adequate medical care in detention and that he had been detained in overcrowded cells in poor sanitary conditions .", "ORG dismissed the cassation appeal in so far as it related to the allegation of inadequate medical care . In this connection ORG upheld the judgments of the first and second - instance courts which had found no causal link between the deterioration of the plaintiff ’s health and the quality of medical care provided to him in detention .", "In so far as the cassation appeal related to the allegation of overcrowding and inadequate conditions of the plaintiff ’s detention ORG quashed the second - instance judgment in which the applicant ’s claim had been dismissed . ORG held that the case should have been examined under LAW , in conjunction with LAW of LAW , and that it was the respondent who had the burden of proving that the conditions of detention had been in compliance with the statutory standards and that the plaintiff ’s personal rights had not been infringed . The case was remitted to the appeal court .", "On DATE ORG held that overcrowding coupled with inadequate living and sanitary conditions in a detention facility could give rise to degrading treatment in breach of a detainee ’s personal rights . On the other hand , the court observed that in the light of ORG established case - law , a trial court did not have a duty to award compensation for each personal right ’s infringement . CARDINAL of the main criteria in assessing whether or not to award compensation for a breach of a personal right was the degree of fault on the part of a respondent party . ORG held that in relation to the overcrowding , no fault could be attributed to the management of a particular detention facility since the management were not in a position to refuse new admissions even when the average capacity of a detention facility had already been exceeded . Ultimately , the case was dismissed ." ]

[ "3" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "On DATE ORG , in a decision of the Minister for ORG and pursuant to Legislative Decree no . DATE on expropriations and LAW no . CARDINAL on the obligations of adjoining owners where major roads are built , expropriated CARDINAL properties , some of which belonged to the applicants , in order to build a new major road between LOC . The property expropriated from the applicants included an area of CARDINAL sq . m that was part of a larger piece of land .", "Law no . CARDINAL creates a presumption that , on the building of a new major road , adjoining owners whose properties front the road derive benefit .", "It accordingly provides that on the expropriation of such properties the owners must contribute towards the costs thereof ( see paragraphs TIME below ) .", "Applying that presumption , the authorities considered in the instant case that the applicants had derived an economic benefit from the building of the major road which offset their right to compensation for QUANTITY . m of the expropriated land . Consequently , the applicants were compensated for CARDINAL sq . m.", "On DATE the NORP State brought an action in ORG for the assessment of a provisional unit amount for compensation per square CARDINAL .", "On DATE ORG assessed the provisional unit amount for compensation at MONEY ( GRD ) per square metre ( judgment no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) .", "On DATE the applicants brought an action in ORG for the assessment of the final unit amount for compensation .", "NORP The hearing before ORG took place on DATE . The applicants maintained that the real value of the land was GRD QUANTITY and produced before the NORP courts CARDINAL expert reports in which it was valued at MONEY per square metre respectively . They also relied in support of their estimation on an official report of ORG ( PERSON ) , in which the land was valued at FAC QUANTITY .", "In a judgment of DATE ( no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) ORG assessed the final unit amount for compensation at FAC QUANTITY .", "On DATE the applicants appealed to ORG on points of law ; however , they did not lodge their submissions with that court until DATE . In their submissions , they maintained that ORG had not given sufficient reasons for its decision and had assessed the final amount for compensation without taking into account the special features of their properties . The hearing took place on CARDINAL DATE .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the ORG appeal ( in judgment no . DATE ) . Its judgment was “ finalised ” ( καθαρoγραφή ) on DATE and the applicants obtained a copy on DATE . ORG does not serve its judgments .", "The relevant Article of the DATE LAW reads as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . Property shall be protected by the ORG ; rights deriving therefrom , however , may not be exercised contrary to the public interest .", "No one may be deprived of his property unless it is for the public benefit , which must be duly proved , in the circumstances and manner laid down by law and only after full compensation corresponding to the value of the expropriated property at the time of the court hearing on the provisional assessment of compensation . In cases in which an application is made for immediate final assessment of compensation , regard shall be had to the value of the expropriated property at the time of the court hearing of the application .", "Any change in the value of the expropriated property occurring after and solely as a result of publication of the decision to expropriate shall not be taken into account .", "Compensation shall in all cases be assessed by the civil courts . A court may even make a provisional assessment of compensation after the person entitled has been heard or his attendance requested and , at its discretion , require such person to furnish an appropriate guarantee before receiving the compensation , in accordance with law .", "Until either final or provisional compensation has been paid , all the rights of the owner shall remain intact , occupation of the property being prohibited .", "Compensation as assessed shall be paid within DATE of publication of the provisional assessment order or , if immediate final assessment is sought , of publication of the final assessment by the court , failing which the expropriation shall automatically lapse .", "... ”", "“ CARDINAL . Η ιδιοκτησία τελεί υπό την προστασία του GPE , τα δικαιώματα όμως που απορρέουν από αυτή δεν μπορούν να ασκούνται σε βάρος του γενικού συμφέροντος.", "Κανένας δεν στερείται την ιδιοκτησία του , παρά μόνο για δημόσια ωφέλεια που έχει αποδειχθεί με τον προσήκοντα τρόπο , όταν και όπως ο νόμος ορίζει , και πάντοτε αφού προηγηθεί πλήρης αποζημίωση , που να ανταποκρίνεται στην αξία την οποία είχε το απαλλοτριούμενο κατά το χρόνο της συζήτησης στο δικαστήριο για τον προσωρινό προσδιορισμό της αποζημίωσης. Αν ζητηθεί απευθείας ο οριστικός προσδιορισμός της αποζημίωσης , λαμβάνεται υπόψη η αξία κατά το χρόνο της σχετικής συζήτησης στο δικαστήριο.", "Η ενδεχόμενη μεταβολή της αξίας του απαλλοτριουμένου μετά την δημοσίευση της πράξης απαλλοτρίωσης , και μόνο εξαιτίας της , δεν λαμβάνεται υπόψη.", "ORG αποζημίωση ορίζεται πάντοτε από τα πολιτικά δικαστήρια. PERSON να οριστεί και προσωρινά δικαστικώς , ύστερα από ακρόαση ή πρόσκληση του δικαιούχου , που μπορεί να υποχρεωθεί κατά την κρίση του δικαστηρίου να παράσχει για την είσπραξή της ανάλογη εγγύηση , σύμφωνα με τον τρόπο που νόμος ορίζει.", "ORG καταβληθεί η οριστική ή προσωρινή αποζημίωση διατηρούνται ακέραια όλα τα δικαιώματα του ιδιοκτήτη και δεν επιτρέπεται η κατάληψη.", "ORG αποζημίωση που ορίστηκε καταβάλλεται υποχρεωτικά το αργότερο μέσα σε ενάμισι έτος από την δημοσίευση της απόφασης για τον προσωρινό προσδιορισμό της αποζημίωσης και , σε περίπτωση απευθείας αίτησης για οριστικό προσδιορισμό της αποζημίωσης , από τη δημοσίευση της σχετικής απόφασης του δικαστηρίου , διαφορετικά η απαλλοτρίωση αίρεται αυτοδικαίως.", "... ”", "Legislative Decree no . CARDINAL of DATE and CARDINAL DATE is the main legislative provision governing expropriations . It applies the principles set out in the constitutional provisions .", "Chapter A of the legislative decree lays down the procedures and prerequisites for announcing expropriations .", "LAW ( a ) provides that expropriations of urban or rural properties and claims to rights in rem over them , if authorised by law in the public interest , are made known by a joint decision of the Minister having authority in the sphere concerned by the intended expropriation and the Minister of Finance .", "LAW sets out the prerequisites for a decision announcing an expropriation : in particular , ( a ) a cadastral plan showing the area to be expropriated , and ( b ) a list of the owners of the land , its surface area , its boundaries and the main characteristics of the buildings on it .", "Chapter B of the legislative decree specifies the procedures for carrying out an expropriation .", "Compensation must be paid to the person concerned in accordance with precisely worded conditions . The acquisition of ownership by the person for whose benefit the expropriation was ordered ( Articles CARDINAL § CARDINAL and CARDINAL § CARDINAL ) starts on the date of payment or ( in cases where the identification of the beneficiaries has not yet been completed , or where the property is charged or where the identity of the true beneficiary is in issue ) on the date of publication of notice in ORG that compensation has been deposited with ORG .", "If the expropriation does not take place in accordance with the foregoing conditions within a period of DATE from the date of the judgment determining the compensation , it automatically lapses ( LAW ) .", "Chapter D sets out in detail the procedure for assessing compensation .", "Article CARDINAL provides that the parties to the proceedings are ( a ) any party required to pay compensation ; ( b ) any party for whose benefit the expropriation is ordered ; ( c ) any party who claims ownership of , or other rights in rem over , the property .", "LAW lays down that compensation is to be assessed by the courts . It expressly provides that the court determines only the unit amount of compensation and not who is entitled to compensation or who is obliged to pay it .", "By LAW , compensation is calculated by reference to the real value of the expropriated property on the date of publication of the decision giving notice of the expropriation .", "Paragraph CARDINAL of that Article provides :", "“ Where part of a property is expropriated and the part remaining in the owner 's possession suffers substantial depreciation in value or is rendered unusable , the judgment in which compensation is assessed shall also include a determination of the special compensation for that part . This special compensation shall be paid to the owner together with the compensation for the expropriated part . ”", "“ Εν περιπτώσει αναγκαστικής απαλλοτριώσεως τμήματος ακινήτου , ως εκ της οποίας το απομένον εις τον ιδιοκτήτην τμήμα υφίσταται σημαντικήν υποτίμησιν της αξίας αυτού , ή καθίσταται άχρηστον δια την δι’ην προορίζεται χρήσιν , δια της αυτής περί καθορισμού της αποζημιώσεως αποφάσεως προσδιορίζεται και παρέχεται ιδιαιτέρα δι’αυτήν αποζημίωσις εις τον ιδιοκτήτην. ORG ιδιαιτέρα αυτή αποζημίωσις καταβάλλεται εις τον ιδιοκτήτην ομού μετά της καταβαλλομένης δια το απαλλοτριούμενον τμήμα. ”", "The procedure for assessing compensation may comprise CARDINAL phases .", "Firstly , the provisional assessment phase , in respect of which a single judge of the court of first instance for the area in which the expropriated property is situated has jurisdiction once a party concerned has lodged an application ( DATE ) .", "Secondly , the final assessment phase , in respect of which the court of appeal for the area in which the expropriated property is situated has jurisdiction on application by the parties concerned within DATE from the date on which the provisional assessment decision was served , or DATE from the date of its publication if it is not served ( Article QUANTITY CARDINAL ) .", "Paragraph CARDINAL of that LAW provides that only a person who has lodged such an application with a view to an increase or decrease in the provisionally assessed amount may benefit from it .", "The provisionally assessed amount becomes final for any person not filing an application expeditiously .", "Further , an application may be lodged directly with the court of appeal in order that a final decision may be obtained against which no appeal will lie ( LAW ) .", "Chapter E of the legislative decree provides a special procedure for obtaining a court order identifying persons entitled to compensation .", "A single judge of the court of first instance for the area in which the expropriated property is situated has jurisdiction to make such an order ( LAW .", "Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL provides that entitlement is determined on the basis of information on the cadastral plan and on the list of landowners drawn up by a qualified engineer duly approved by ORG , and any other information supplied by the parties or considered by the court of its own motion .", "No appeal lies against the decision taken at the end of this special procedure ( LAW ) .", "By paragraph CARDINAL of Article CARDINAL , the court shall not give a decision if", "( a ) it is established at the hearing or by means of a declaration by the ORG that a person can claim full ownership of the expropriated property or some other right in rem ;", "( b ) there is any dispute between CARDINAL or more persons allegedly entitled to compensation as to ownership or any other right in rem such that an inquiry has to be made into the claims put forward , which inquiry must include a hearing for each party concerned who has brought an action ;", "( c ) it is established at the hearing that a party claiming to be entitled to compensation is unable to show that he has any right in rem .", "By paragraph CARDINAL of LAW no . DATE , a final decision as to a given person ’s entitlement is necessary before ORG Deposits can pay out a sum deposited as compensation following assessment by the courts .", "The relevant provisions of LAW no . CARDINAL of DATE and CARDINAL DATE provide :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) Where a major road QUANTITY wide is built in an area not covered by a town development plan , adjoining owners who derive a benefit shall be required to pay for an area QUANTITY wide , thus contributing to the cost of expropriating the properties bordering the road . However , the area to which this obligation applies shall not exceed half the surface area of the property concerned .", "...", "( CARDINAL ) For the purposes of this section , adjoining owners whose properties front the roads that have been built shall be deemed to have derived benefit .", "( CARDINAL ) Where those entitled to compensation on account of an expropriation are themselves liable for payment of part of that expropriation , there shall be a set - off between rights and obligations .", "( CARDINAL ) The method and procedure for apportioning the compensation between the ORG and the adjoining owners shall be laid down in a decree to be published on a proposal by ORG .", "... ”", "“ ( CARDINAL ) ORG περί διανοίξεως , εκτός Σχεδίου πόλεων NORP οδών πλάτους καταλήψεως μέχρι τριάκοντα μέτρων , οι ωφελούμενοι παρόδιοι ιδιοκτήται εκάστης πλευράς , υποχρεούνται εις αποζημίωσιν ζώνης πλάτους δεκαπέντε μέτρων , δια συμμετοχής των εις τας δαπάνας απαλλοτριώσεως των καταλαμβανομένων υπό των οδών τούτων ακινήτων. ORG επιβάρυνσις αύτη δεν δύναται να υπερβαίνει το ήμισυ του εμβαδού του βαρυνομένου ακινήτου.", "...", "( CARDINAL ) ORG παρόδιοι ιδιοκτήται δια την εφαρμογήν του παρόντος άρθρου θεωρούνται εκείνοι των οποίων τα ακίνητα αποκτούν πρόσωπον επί των διανοιγομένων οδών.", "( CARDINAL ) PERSON οι δικαιούχοι αποζημιώσεως δια την απαλλοτρίωσιν είναι και υπόχρεοι δια την πληρωμήν αυτής , επέρχεται συμψηφισμός δικαιωμάτων και υποχρεώσεων.", "( CARDINAL ) Ο τρόπος και η διαδικασία καταμερισμού της αποζημιώσεως μεταξύ ORG και παροδίων ιδιοκτητών κανονίζονται δια ORG εκδιδομένων προτάσει του ORG ... ”", "NORP Under the case - law , the presumption created by Law no . CARDINAL is irrebuttable .", "The so - called “ objective ” value of property is calculated by reference to actual prices and indices , regard being had to the characteristic features of the property , and is determined periodically by ORG . This method of assessment must be used for calculating any taxes levied in connection with the purchase , possession or transfer of property ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[ "ORG Mr PERSON , a NORP citizen born in DATE , pursued a career as judge advocate in the air force . In DATE he was serving , with the rank of group captain , as the high command ’s director of legal affairs .", "ORG By an order of CARDINAL DATE ORG ( ORG ) , composed of the Prime Minister , the Minister of Defence , the Chief of Staff and the CARDINAL highest - ranking generals in the armed forces , ordered the compulsory retirement of CARDINAL officers , including Mr GPE , and QUANTITY non - commissioned officers for breaches of discipline and scandalous conduct . The decision , which was based on section CARDINAL ( c ) of LAW , section CARDINAL ( c ) of ORG and LAW on assessment of officers and non - commissioned officers , made the specific criticism , in the applicant ’s case , that his conduct and attitude \" revealed that he had adopted unlawful fundamentalist opinions \" .", "ORG In a decision of CARDINAL DATE the President of the Republic , the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defence approved the above order , which was served on the applicant on DATE . The Minister of Defence ordered the forfeiture of the applicant ’s social security ( health insurance ) card , his military identity card and his licence to bear arms .", "ORG On DATE Mr PERSON asked ORG of ORG PERSON idare GPE ) to set aside the order of CARDINAL DATE and the measures ordered by ORG .", "ORG In a judgment of CARDINAL DATE ORG of ORG ruled by CARDINAL votes to CARDINAL that it did not have jurisdiction to entertain the application to set aside the order of CARDINAL DATE , on the ground that under LAW the decisions of ORG were final and not subject to judicial review . In that connection it observed that under the Military Legal Service Act members of the military legal service had the status of military personnel . Their compulsory retirement for breaches of discipline was regulated in the same manner as that of other army officers .", "In their dissenting opinion the CARDINAL members of the minority referred to the principle of the independence of the judiciary enunciated in DATE LAW . They expressed the view that security of tenure for both civilian and military judges , which was protected by that LAW , formed a lex specialis in relation to the other provisions of LAW and that decisions of ORG which infringed that principle should therefore be subject to review by ORG of ORG .", "The court set aside , however , the refusal to issue social security cards to the applicant and his family .", "ORG On DATE the court dismissed an application for rectification lodged by Mr GPE .", "ORG The relevant provisions of the LAW are as follows :", "\" None of the rights and freedoms set forth in the LAW may be exercised with the aim of undermining the territorial integrity of the ORG or the indivisible unity of its people , imperilling the existence of ORG and the Republic , abolishing fundamental rights and freedoms , handing over control of the ORG to a single individual or group or bringing about the dominance of CARDINAL social class over the others , establishing discrimination on the grounds of language , race , religion or adherence to a religious sect or setting up by any other means a ORG order based on such beliefs and opinions . \"", "\" Everyone shall have the right to freedom of conscience , faith and religious belief .", "Prayers , worship and religious services shall be conducted freely , provided that they do not violate the provisions of", "No one shall be compelled to participate in prayers , worship or religious services or to reveal his religious beliefs and convictions ; nor shall he be censured or prosecuted because of his religious beliefs or convictions .", "...", "No one may exploit or abuse religion , religious feelings or things held sacred by religion in any manner whatsoever with a view to causing the social , economic , political or legal order of the ORG to be based on religious precepts , even if only in part , or for the purpose of securing political or personal influence thereby . \"", "\" All acts or decisions of the administration are subject to judicial review ... Decisions of the President of the Republic concerning matters within his sole jurisdiction and decisions of ORG shall not be subject to judicial review .", "... \"", "\" Judges and public prosecutors shall not be removed from office or compelled to retire without their consent before the age prescribed by LAW ; nor shall they be deprived of their salaries , allowances or other rights relating to their status , even as a result of the abolition of a court or post .", "The exceptions laid down by law concerning judges or public prosecutors who have been convicted of an offence requiring their dismissal from the service , those whose unfitness to carry out their duties for medical reasons has been finally established or those whose continued service has been adjudged undesirable shall remain in force . \"", "\" Supervision of judges and public prosecutors as regards the performance of their duties in accordance with laws , regulations , subordinate legislation and circulars ( administrative circulars , in the case of judges ) , investigations into whether they have committed offences in connection with , or in the course of , their duties , or whether their conduct and attitude are compatible with the obligations arising from their status and duties and , if necessary , inquiries concerning them shall be made by judicial inspectors with the permission of ORG . The Minister of ORG may also ask a judge or public prosecutor senior to the judge or public prosecutor in question to conduct the investigation or inquiry . \"", "\" The organisation and functions of military judicial organs , the personal status of military judges and the relations between judges acting as military prosecutors and the commanders under whom they serve shall be regulated by law in accordance with the principles of the independence of the courts and the security of tenure of the judiciary and with the requirements of military service . Relations between military judges and the commanders under whom they serve as regards their non - judicial duties shall also be regulated by law in accordance with the requirements of military service . \"", "Section CARDINAL ( c ) of ORG provides :", "\" Irrespective of length of service , servicemen whose continued presence in the armed forces is adjudged to be inappropriate on account of breaches of discipline or immoral behaviour on one of the grounds set out below , as established in one or more documents drawn up during their service in the last military rank they held , shall be subject to the provisions of LAW .", "...", "Where their conduct and attitude reveal that they have adopted unlawful opinions . \"", "Section CARDINAL ( c ) of LAW provides :", "\" Irrespective of length of service , servicemen whose continued presence in the armed forces is adjudged inappropriate on account of breaches of discipline and immoral behaviour shall be subject to the provisions of LAW .", "The Regulations for Military Personnel shall lay down which authorities have jurisdiction to commence proceedings , to examine , monitor and draw conclusions from personnel assessment files and to carry out any other act or formality in such proceedings . A decision of ORG is required to discharge an officer whose case has been submitted by ORG to ORG . \"", "ORG LAW on assessment of officers and noncommissioned officers provides :", "\" Irrespective of length of service , the compulsory retirement procedure shall be applied to all servicemen whose continued presence in the armed forces is adjudged to be inappropriate on account of breaches of discipline or immoral behaviour on one of the grounds set out below , as established in one or more documents drawn up during their service in the last military rank they held :", "...", "( e ) where by his conduct and attitude the serviceman concerned has provided evidence that he holds unlawful , subversive , separatist , fundamentalist and ideological political opinions or takes an active part in the propagation of such opinions . \"" ]

[]

[]

[]

[ "9" ]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "The applicant ’s lorry was forfeited by ORG FAC postaja ORG ) on DATE in connection with a suspicion held against the applicant of having committed an aggravated theft . The criminal complaint against the applicant was eventually dropped and on DATE the police invited the applicant to take delivery of the vehicle . They also noted that the vehicle was not in good working order . For that reason the applicant refused to take delivery of the vehicle .", "The applicant , represented by a lawyer , instituted civil proceedings on DATE in ORG ( PERSON ) against ORG ( ORG unutarnjih poslova PERSON , hereinafter “ the NORP ” ) , seeking repossession of the vehicle and damages .", "After holding a public hearing and hearing the evidence , in its judgment of DATE ORG ( PERSON ) ordered the ORG to return the vehicle to the applicant in good working order within DATE after the judgment became final . It found that the applicant ’s vehicle was in good working order at the time of its requisition . ORG also dismissed his claim for damages . The judgment was upheld by ORG ( Županijski sud u GPE ) on DATE and thus became final . Further appeals on points of law lodged by both parties were dismissed by ORG ( PERSON ) on DATE .", "The applicant ’s subsequent constitutional complaint was dismissed by ORG ( Ustavni sud PERSON ) on DATE .", "The applicant lodged a request for an enforcement order in ORG on DATE , seeking the enforcement of the above final judgment of DATE . On DATE ORG issued an enforcement order requiring the applicant ’s vehicle to be returned to him in good working order .", "On DATE the applicant withdrew his initial request and asked instead ORG to order the Ministry to pay a penalty for not complying with the enforcement order . On DATE the Ministry admitted that it had not complied with the initial enforcement order . In view of the applicant ’s new request , the proceedings concerning the enforcement order of CARDINAL DATE were terminated on DATE and the proceedings upon the applicant ’s request for penalty payments continued .", "On DATE ORG ordered the ORG to return the vehicle to the applicant within DATE , failing which it was to pay the applicant NORP kuna ( HRK ) CARDINAL for DATE of default from that point on . ORG lodged an appeal and on DATE the appellate court quashed the firstinstance decision , finding that ORG lacked territorial jurisdiction in the matter . The case was transferred to ORG ( PERSON u ORG ) , which on DATE ordered the Ministry to return the vehicle to the applicant within DATE , failing which it was to pay HRK CARDINAL for DATE of default . The appellate court , however , quashed that decision and ordered the first - instance court to establish whether the parties were willing to settle the case . On DATE the ORG offered a settlement , which the applicant refused .", "On DATE ORG ordered the Ministry to comply with the judgement of DATE within DATE failing which it was to pay HRK CARDINAL for DATE of default . This decision was upheld by ORG ( Županijski sud u ORG ) on DATE .", "The parties met on DATE in the presence of a court expert who established that the vehicle had been repaired and its value had increased .", "The parties met again on DATE in the presence of a court expert but the applicant refused to accept the vehicle , objecting that it had not been properly repaired . He sought payment of HRK CARDINAL and MONEY ( ORG ) in order to repair the vehicle and a further HRK CARDINAL,CARDINAL for its registration .", "On DATE a commission of ORG established in the presence of the parties and a court expert that the vehicle still had some defects , which had been in existence when the vehicle was examined on DATE . The applicant offered a settlement stipulating that the vehicle be driven to his address and that a sum of HRK CARDINAL be paid to him for the costs of further repair and the registration of the vehicle . On DATE the ORG agreed to deliver the vehicle to the applicant ’s home address , to remove all the remaining defects and pay the applicant a sum of HRK CARDINAL for the costs of registration .", "ORG held a hearing on DATE with a view to assisting the parties to reach a settlement . However , the applicant declined the settlement because the ORG refused to pay the court penalties ordered by ORG on DATE .", "On DATE a commission of ORG established in the presence of the parties and a court expert that the vehicle still had some defects . These were immediately removed , but the applicant nevertheless refused to take delivery .", "On DATE ORG ordered that the vehicle be kept by ORG in a closed garage at the applicant ’s expense , at a rental of HRK CARDINAL per day . The applicant appealed against this decision , arguing that the vehicle had not been properly repaired . On DATE ORG dismissed the applicant ’s appeal finding that the vehicle was in good working order and fit to pass the technical test necessary for its registration . The thus vehicle remained in the possession of ORG as the applicant refused to take possession of it .", "On DATE the applicant also sought payment of the court penalties ordered in ORG decision of DATE ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) up to DATE , in a total amount of HRK CARDINAL,CARDINAL together with costs of HRK CARDINAL . An enforcement order to that effect was issued on DATE and the above amounts were paid to the applicant .", "NORP In its decision of DATE , ORG ordered the Ministry to pay the applicant HRK CARDINAL,CARDINAL on account of court penalties for the period DATE and DATE as well as HRK QUANTITY for the costs of the proceedings . In its decision of DATE , the same court ordered the ORG to pay the applicant HRK CARDINAL on account of court penalties for the period between CARDINAL May and CARDINAL DATE together with HRK CARDINAL,CARDINAL for costs . However , on CARDINAL DATE the ORG quashed these orders and dismissed the applicant ’s request for the court penalties to be enforced , on the ground that the ORG had complied with their obligation to return the vehicle in good working order on DATE , that being the date when a court expert had found that the vehicle had been repaired .", "On an unspecified date the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint against ORG decision of CARDINAL DATE arguing that further court penalties had to be paid to him . These proceedings are still pending ." ]

[ "6", "P1" ]

[ "P1-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "Edificaciones DATE Gallego S.A. is a public limited company set up in DATE and its registered office is at GPE ) . Mr PERSON was its sole director .", "On DATE proceedings for payment ( juicio ejecutivo cambiario ) were brought against the applicant company and , as guarantor , Mr DATE in ORG of First Instance no . CARDINAL by another company , PERSON , which claimed the sum of MONEY on a bill of exchange . The court registry was instructed to inform the defendants that in default of payment their property would be seized and that they could apply to have the proceedings set aside .", "As the applicant company did not have its registered office at the address indicated on the bill of exchange , the plaintiff company requested the court on DATE to order , under Articles CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the Code of Civil Procedure , that the applicant company ’s property should be seized without any prior demand for payment and to summon the company to appear by edictos ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) .", "On DATE appeared before ORG , which assessed what part of his property could be seized and gave him DATE in which to indicate that he intended to apply to have the proceedings set aside , if he so wished ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . Notice of the proceedings and of the property to be seized was served on Mr DATE ’s wife .", "On DATE ORG appeared before the same court and declared their intention of applying to have the proceedings against the company set aside . The document giving notice of that intention , which was submitted by the company ’s lawyer ( procurador ) , PERSON , stated “ … on DATE last the summons and copies of the application for proceedings for payment were handed to my client … ” .", "On DATE the applicant company was given DATE by the court to make its submissions , adduce evidence and apply to set aside , in accordance with LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . The court noted that Mr DATE had not appeared within the DATE period he had been granted on DATE and declared that he was in default .", "On DATE PERSON , acting on behalf of Mr DATE in accordance with “ the authority to act in the file of the proceedings ” formally applied to have the proceedings in question set aside , within the DATE period granted to the applicant company by the court . In the application to set aside the court was requested to declare that the bill of exchange in question was void since , in view of the amount for which it had been drawn up , an insufficient amount had been paid in compulsory tax on bills of exchange .", "On DATE the court held that the application to set aside was inadmissible ( se QUANTITY por no formulada ) on the following grounds :", "“ CARDINAL . Mr PERSON did not appear timeously or comply with formal requirements ;", "NORP the lawyer [ who submitted the application to set aside ] had not received authority to act from the aforementioned person [ Mr DATE ] or , at the very least , that authority had not been formally submitted and is not in the file ;", "the only party which gave notice of intention to apply to set aside within the prescribed time is ORG , who had duly authorised PERSON [ I. ] , in accordance with requirements … ;", "NORP the debtors are CARDINAL persons that can be clearly distinguished : on the one hand , a company , ORG , and , on the other , a natural person , PERSON PERSON … ”", "It was also stated in the decision ( providencia ) that it was unnecessary to summon the applicant company by edictos , as PERSON ORG had requested on DATE since , although the applicant company did not have its registered office at the address indicated , it had appeared timeously in accordance with LAW . It was noted in the decision that Mr DATE had not appeared ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) , unlike the applicant company , which , however , had not formally applied to set aside ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) in accordance with Articles CARDINAL and DATE of the Code of Civil Procedure ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) .", "On DATE the applicant company ’s lawyer made a reposición application to ORG , arguing that the application to set aside had been made on behalf of the company , that the fact that Mr DATE ’s name appeared in the application had been merely a typing error and that it was clear that the intention had been to apply to set aside on behalf of the applicant company and not of PERSON DATE .", "In a decision ( auto ) of CARDINAL DATE the court upheld the impugned decision .", "On DATE the applicant company appealed . In a decision ( auto ) of CARDINAL DATE the FAC provincial upheld the decision of DATE . The court stated that the mistake went to the applicant company ’s and Mr DATE ’s locus standi in that although the first name , “ DATE ” , was identical in both cases , the second was different , the application to set aside having been made in the name “ DATE PERSON ” , the name of the natural person , and not of “ DATE PERSON ” , the name of the company of which the natural person was the sole director .", "In the meantime , on DATE , ORG , having found that Mr DATE had not appeared and that ORG – who had not been summoned but who , having indicated in time their intention of applying to set aside , had been deemed to have appeared – had in the end not applied to set aside , ordered that the proceedings for payment of the bill of exchange should continue ( sentencia de remate ) .", "On DATE the applicant company appealed against that judgment . On DATE the FAC provincial dismissed the appeal on the ground that the applicant company ’s application to set aside had been refused by ORG no . CARDINAL on DATE .", "On DATE Edificaciones March Gallego and Mr DATE lodged an amparo appeal with ORG on the basis of LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) , alleging that the ORG refusal to rectify the clerical error in the application to set aside was a breach of fair procedure .", "On DATE the amount of the bill of exchange was paid to the plaintiff company .", "On DATE ORG held , contrary to the opinion of its ORG office , that there had not been merely a rectifiable error in the identification of the persons who had applied to set aside but a want of diligence that could not be remedied and dismissed the applicant company ’s appeal .", "It pointed out , firstly , that as the right to bring an action and obtain a reasoned decision from the courts was subject to statutory requirements , the courts were bound to apply the rules of procedure in the light of the aim that had been sought to be achieved by the legislature , while avoiding both excessive formalism that would breach the fairness of procedure guaranteed by LAW and excessive flexibility such as would render nugatory the procedural requirements laid down in statutes .", "The court noted the difference in legal status between the applicant company ( a legal person ) and Mr PERSON ( a natural person ) , and said :", "“ The difference in legal status between the parties concerned – CARDINAL of them a legal person and a public limited company ( ORG ) and the other a natural person ( Mr PERSON ) DATE , the obvious identity or divergence of their interests due to the similarity of their names and the fact that PERSON PERSON , as sole director of the company , had given its statutory representatives authority to act DATE as was noted in the decision of CARDINAL DATE – do not justify holding , as the interested parties maintained , that there was an error in the identification of the persons that had formally applied to set aside . On the other hand , those factors do justify finding , like the ordinary courts , that there was a want of diligence in the proceedings that can not be remedied ; nor must it be overlooked that it would have to be remedied after [ the procedure of formally submitting ] the application to set aside had been completed . That fact makes it impossible for the ORG to hold that there was merely an irregularity , omission or imperfection that could be cured by supplying the missing element . In the instant case , apart from the fact that the omission in question concerned an essential element of the act and related to the person carrying it out , it would have to be cured outside the mandatory time - limits laid down for formally submitting an application to set aside ( Article CARDINAL of the Code of Civil Procedure , in conjunction with section CARDINAL of LAW ) , and in such cases of late rectification of an essential element of a procedural step subject to mandatory time - limits , this ORG has held that failure to rectify [ the error ] does not infringe the right to effective protection by the courts . ”", "Article CARDINAL § QUANTITY of the LAW provides :", "“ Everyone has the right to effective protection by the courts in the exercise of his rights and his legitimate interests , and in no circumstances may there be any denial of defence rights . ”", "NORP The relevant provisions of LAW are the following :", "“ Any service of process or summons that does not comply with the requirements of this section [ of this code ] shall be invalid .", "However , where the person on whom service is being effected or the summons served learns of it during the proceedings , the service of process shall be fully effective as if it had been carried out as prescribed by law .", "… ”", "“ If the debtor ’s permanent address or place of residence is unknown , the ORG may decide , on an application by the plaintiff , to order a seizure without giving notice to pay … ”", "“ If the debtor ’s permanent address or place of residence is unknown , the debtor shall be summoned by edictos … ”", "[ In the procedure of summons by edictos the summons is posted up on the notice - board of the judicial body concerned and , where appropriate , published in ORG and in the main newspapers of the province ( LAW ) . ]", "“ Within a period that may not be extended of DATE from DATE following the summons the debtor may apply to set aside the proceedings for payment by appearing in court assisted by a lawyer [ procurador ] . ”", "“ At DATE referred to in the foregoing CARDINAL Articles , a debtor who has not appeared , assisted by a lawyer , shall be deemed in default and the proceedings shall follow their course without it being necessary to summon him again or to send him any notifications other than those provided for in law … ”", "“ If , within the time laid down and having satisfied the formal requirements , the debtor gives notice of his intention to apply to set aside , he shall be deemed to be making such an application and must formally submit his application to set aside within DATE , which can not be extended , and shall raise such defences and submit such evidence as he considers necessary … ”", "“ Only the following objections shall be admissible in proceedings for payment :", "…", "All other objections that may be raised by a debtor shall be reserved for ordinary proceedings and shall not prevent delivery of the judgment in which payment is ordered [ de remate ] . ”", "“ Judgments delivered in proceedings for payment [ juicio ejecutivo ] shall not be final , the parties being entitled to bring ordinary proceedings relating to the same issue . ”", "The relevant provisions of LAW are the following :", "“ In accordance with the principle of effective protection laid down in LAW , the courts shall always rule on claims and may only dismiss them on the ground of a formal defect where that defect can not be remedied , or at least not in accordance with the procedure laid down by law [ for that purpose ] . ”", "“ Procedural steps carried out after a time - limit shall only be annullable if that is permitted by the nature of the time - limit in question . ”", "“ Manifest clerical errors and arithmetical errors shall be rectifiable at any time . ”" ]

[]

[]

[]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[ "On DATE the applicants were arrested and taken into police custody by officers of the GPE security police in connection with an investigation into an illegal organisation . On DATE the applicants were brought before the GPE public prosecutor and the investigating judge respectively , who remanded the applicants in custody .", "By an indictment dated DATE , the public prosecutor at ORG initiated criminal proceedings against the applicants and a number of others , accusing them , inter alia , of membership of an illegal armed organisation and of taking part in its activities .", "On DATE ORG sentenced the applicants to life imprisonment , pursuant to LAW . On DATE ORG quashed the judgment of the first - instance court and remitted the case . ORG were abolished by constitutional amendments introduced on DATE . Subsequently , the applicants’ case was resumed before the CARDINALth ORG of GPE .", "Referring to recent amendments in domestic law , on DATE the applicants requested to be released pending trial . Relying on the accusations against the applicants , the length of their detention and the content of the case file , the CARDINALth ORG of GPE refused the ORG request on DATE . The applicants appealed . On DATE the CARDINALth ORG of GPE dismissed their appeal without further reasoning .", "On DATE the applicants were released pending trial .", "On DATE the CARDINALth ORG of GPE sentenced the applicants as charged . According to the information in the case file , as submitted by the parties , the proceedings are pending before ORG ." ]

[ "5", "6" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in the city of GPE .", "On DATE ORG awarded the applicant ORG in industrial disease benefits arrears against the ORG - owned mining company “ PERSON ” , which on DATE was joined to the ORG - owned ORG “ Pavlogradvugillya ” .", "On DATE ORG ( hereinafter “ the Bailiffs ” ) instituted the enforcement proceedings .", "On DATE ORG assigned the “ Pavlogradvugillya ” as the debtor in the enforcement proceedings .", "On DATE ORG rejected the applicant 's complaint against the Bailiffs . The court indicated , inter alia , that the award could not be paid due to the debtor 's lack of funds . The scope of action for the Bailiffs was also limited by the funds allocated from ORG to ORG for payment of the industrial benefits .", "On DATE the debtor company was privatised .", "On DATE the judgment debt was paid to the applicant and the Bailiffs terminated the enforcement proceedings .", "The relevant domestic law is summarised in the judgment of ORG v. GPE ( no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , § CARDINAL , DATE ) ." ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "NORP The applicant , PERSON , is a GPE national who was born in DATE and lives in GPE . She was represented before ORG PERSON , a lawyer practising in GPE .", "CARDINAL", "NORP The applicant is the widow of the late Mr PERSON . Mr PERSON was born in DATE . He died on DATE of a gunshot wound .", "The applicant and her late husband lived in the GPE district of GPE . At the relevant time , PERSON was an inner - city area beset by social problems including disorder caused by juvenile street gangs .", "In TIME CARDINAL DATE , towards QUANTITY o’clock , the applicant telephoned the police to report a disturbance caused by a group of youths outside the front door of the Mulders’ residence . Mr PERSON and his friend , PERSON , both of whom had been drinking heavily , got into a fight with the youths , who would not be persuaded to take themselves elsewhere . They were fought to the ground . Both were hurt . Mr PERSON was bleeding from his nose and from the back of his head . They were freed by the applicant and by PERSON daughter , PERSON", "Mr PERSON then went indoors where the applicant attended to his injuries . Mr PERSON then grabbed a baseball bat which he kept in the hallway of his house and took it back into the street with him . His attackers having left , he smashed the baseball bat against the ground ; it broke into CARDINAL pieces .", "Mr PERSON was passed by a police officer on a motorcycle . He tried to attract the officer ’s attention but the officer did not stop . CARDINAL other police officers rode by on motorcycles ; both failed to stop when signalled by PERSON PERSON and turned the nearest corner . Annoyed at their failure to heed his signals , Mr PERSON then followed them around the corner .", "CARDINAL of the CARDINAL motorcycle - borne police officers who had followed the first was an officer identified in the documents made available to the applicant only as Officer PERSON ( his real name , where it appeared , being blacked out ) .", "Questioned afterwards , Officer PERSON stated that he had been stationary but still astride his motorcycle , which he was in the process of parking on its side stand , when he had seen a man with a bloody face and wearing a wild expression approach him holding a large knife above his body in an underhand grip , poised to strike downwards . Caught in an awkward position and fearing that the man would stab him in the neck , where he was protected by neither his protective clothing nor his helmet , Officer PERSON had drawn his service pistol and fired at close range .", "The applicant states that Officer PERSON fired entirely without warning in a situation where Mr PERSON posed no immediate threat .", "The bullet hit Mr PERSON in the chest , passing through his heart and out through his back . Mr PERSON staggered a few paces , dropped the knife and fell to the ground . Other police officers , who had by now arrived on the scene , tried to resuscitate him but were unsuccessful . After the arrival of the ambulance , TIME , the ambulance crew determined that life was extinct and there was nothing more to be done ; they covered PERSON PERSON ’s body with a white sheet and left .", "NORP The site was immediately cordoned off by the police . It proved necessary to restrain members of the public , some of whom tried to force their way through the cordon while others called the police officers “ murderers ” and “ killers ” .", "At TIME an officer of ORG ( rijksrecherche ) was ordered to take over the investigation from the GPE police force . The officer arrived on the scene at CARDINAL .", "Technical investigations were carried out on the spot by forensic experts of the GPE - Amstelland police force TIME . This is reflected in an official ORG report .", "Beginning on DATE , overall responsibility for the investigation was vested in a public prosecutor ( officier van justitie ) of ORG who had no ties with the police station to which Officer PERSON belonged . It was this public prosecutor who ordered officer PERSON ’s identity to be withheld from the public in view of the likelihood of threats to his safety .", "Beginning on DATE the investigation was conducted by the GPE - Amstelland police force , though still under the responsibility of ORG .", "On DATE , at TIME , the applicant telephoned the police to report a group of rowdy youths outside her front door . Her husband , Mr PERSON aforementioned , and his friend Mr T.W. were trying to persuade the youths to leave ; this however was proving difficult because the group was growing bigger as other youths , summoned by telephone , joined them . The police telephonist informed the applicant that there would be a police presence shortly ; in the meantime , if things got out of hand , the applicant was to call again using the emergency number .", "At TIME a woman whose name and telephone number are not recorded called the police on the emergency number to report that fighting had broken out . This information was passed on to a police patrol unit .", "At TIME a woman whose name and telephone number are not recorded called the police on the emergency number to report fighting at a slightly different location ( just around the corner from the first reported fight ) . This too was passed on to patrolling police officers .", "At CARDINAL.CARDINAL.CARDINAL TIME a patrolling police officer , having arrived on the spot , reported that a fight had taken place between CARDINAL gangs of youths .", "At TIME a police officer reported a man with a knife . Almost immediately afterwards , the police officer asked for an ambulance to be sent immediately as there had been a shot fired .", "Interviews of witnesses began DATE after the fatal shooting . Except as otherwise stated , all witnesses were interviewed by an officer or officers of ORG ; their statements , in so far as relevant to the case before the ORG , are summarised below .", "The first to be interviewed was Officer PERSON , at TIME . He had arrived at the same time as Officer PERSON on a motorcycle and had witnessed events from close by . He had seen a man with a knife making stabbing movements and run towards Officer PERSON . He had seen Officer PERSON draw his service weapon and fire . He estimated the distance between the CARDINAL at the time when the shot was fired as QUANTITY . Officer PERSON had tried to resuscitate the man but had desisted when he saw someone approach him with a piece of wood . Officer PERSON had taken Officer PERSON across the road and made him sit down on the kerb , and had reported the events to the police station by radio .", "Mr PERSON was interviewed at TIME He had got into the fight with the youths alongside Mr PERSON . He had seen Mr PERSON leave his house holding a shiny object and pursue the youths around the corner , where the police officers on motorcycles had already gone . He had then heard a bang from around the corner ; when he arrived there , Mr PERSON was lying on the ground with a policeman trying to resuscitate him .", "Police Officer H. , interviewed at TIME , stated that he had heard a colleague on the radio call out that there was someone brandishing a knife . He had arrived after the shot had been fired and had tried to resuscitate him .", "Police Officer PERSON was heard as a witness , but cautioned that he was not required to incriminate himself . He stated that he had had to draw his weapon DATE before , when a burglar who had been caught red - handed had threatened him with a screwdriver and a crowbar ; he had managed to resolve the situation without firing by kicking the man to the ground . DATE he had disarmed someone of a cocked pistol with which the latter had just committed a robbery ; this had required Officer PERSON to threaten to draw his own service weapon .", "On TIME Police Officer PERSON had been patrolling with Police Officer O. on a ORG FCARDINAL motorcycle . His service pistol had a round chambered . When trouble was reported in the area where the shooting later took place , he had gone there , followed by Officer O. Arriving there , he had seen a group of people and had heard shouting ; he had stopped to investigate . As he was shifting gear into neutral and making to park the motorcycle on its side stand , a man had come running towards him from the right , shouting threats and abuse . After checking that the motorcycle was in neutral gear , Officer PERSON had looked up and seen that the man was CARDINAL or QUANTITY away . The man ’s face had been covered in blood , he had been wearing a furious expression and he had brandished a knife with a large blade . Officer PERSON had pointed at the man and shouted at him to drop the knife ; the man had not reacted but had continued towards Officer PERSON . Feeling threatened , and holding the motorcycle upright against his left leg , he had drawn his pistol and fired . The man had staggered and fallen , still holding the knife . Officer PERSON had then parked the motorcycle on its side stand and had attempted to administer first aid . It was only then that he realised that he had shot the man . There had been a smell of alcohol .", "Officer PERSON remembered little after that . Police colleagues had taken him off to the police station .", "Officer PERSON , interviewed at TIME , had been the first police motorcyclist to arrive in the area . He had pursued a youth , then returned when he had heard about a knife . He had seen a man lying on the ground . He had seen Officer PERSON ’s motorcycle parked on its side stand . He had helped administer first aid to the man .", "Officer PERSON was interviewed a second time at CARDINAL . He confirmed his earlier statement and that of Officer PERSON . He added that he too had drawn his service pistol .", "Officer PERSON , a woman police officer , was questioned at TIME She had arrived after the shot had been fired . She and another woman police officer , Officer Ha . , had followed the applicant home to take a statement from her . The applicant had told her about the trouble caused by the youth gangs and about Mr PERSON ’s tendency to become aggressive when drunk . Others had been in the house at that time ; the atmosphere had turned threatening and the QUANTITY police officers had had to be escorted out of the house .", "Officer Ha . was interviewed the following day , CARDINAL DATE , at TIME She had arrived after the shot had been fired and had helped to cordon off the area . She had met the applicant , who had told her that PERSON PERSON had come home drunk and there was a baseball bat missing from the hallway . She had accompanied the applicant home ; when other inhabitants of the neighbourhood started to arrive , the atmosphere had turned emotional .", "Ms V.P. , interviewed on DATE at TIME , was the wife or companion of Mr T.W. She had been told by her daughter , PERSON , that Mr PERSON and Mr PERSON had been beaten up and Mr PERSON had been shot .", "The applicant was interviewed on DATE at TIME She stated that the neighbourhood had deteriorated since the decision had been taken to demolish it ; longtime residents had left and youth gangs , previously unknown , had come from elsewhere to make trouble .", "She related how she had called the police to complain about the youths in front of her house . She described the fight between Mr PERSON and told how Mr PERSON had gone after the youths with the baseball bat . She had heard the shot , but not seen it fired . She had been very surprised to learn that Mr PERSON had had a knife ; she did not understand and was not aware of a knife being missing from her kitchen .", "PERSON , interviewed on DATE at TIME , was the daughter of PERSON She confirmed her father ’s statement . She described the way in which Mr PERSON had held the knife in an underhanded grip , behind his forearm ; she had tried to take it from him but had not been able to .", "Mr GPE , interviewed on DATE at TIME , lived across the street from the applicant and Mr PERSON . He had seen Mr PERSON fight the youths , enter his home and come back outside with a piece of wood and he had seen the QUANTITY police officers pass on motorcycles . He had heard , but not seen , the shot fired ; he had heard a woman screaming ; and he had seen the police raise a tent .", "PERSON , an DATE girl , was interviewed on DATE by a female vice squad officer belonging to the NORP police force , with a male vice squad officer of the GPE police force in attendance . She stated that she had followed the events from her bedroom window . She said , without being asked , that the police officer had held a weapon and pointed it at a man who had not been holding a knife . Under questioning , she stated that the police officer had held the weapon in both hands and the man might perhaps have been holding a knife after all . She had not seen the police officer straddling a motorcycle . This interview was transcribed by an officer of ORG .", "Ms M.J.M. was interviewed on DATE at TIME She lived just across the road from the applicant and Mr PERSON .", "She had seen a group of people including QUANTITY women . CARDINAL of the women had been wearing a blouse in a red and white floral pattern ; PERSON had subsequently been told that that was the wife of the later victim , holding a knife . Her sister - in - law , visiting with her husband , had drawn her attention to it . She had heard the shot , but not seen it .", "PERSON , interviewed on DATE at TIME , lived in the same street as the applicant and Mr PERSON . She had seen QUANTITY police motorcyclists passing and had heard the shot fired . Very shortly afterwards she had seen a young woman get into a car and drive away . This woman had been wearing something pink or red .", "PERSON , who was interviewed on DATE at TIME by the GPE police ( i.e. not by ORG ) , was the Mulders’ next - door neighbour . She had seen Mr PERSON getting beaten up by the youths . She had seen the baseball bat but no knife , and she had not seen the applicant holding anything .", "Mr DATE , interviewed on DATE at TIME also by the GPE police , had witnessed a man being beaten up . He had gone home to go to bed . He had later been woken by his wife who had told him that PERSON PERSON had been shot dead .", "Mr M. , interviewed on DATE at TIME by the GPE police , was the companion of PERSON He had witnessed the fight , but had seen neither a baseball bat nor a knife .", "PERSON was interviewed anew on DATE at TIME , this time by an officer of ORG . She confirmed the statement which she had made earlier to the GPE police .", "Ms M.J.M. , who had said earlier that she had seen a woman with a knife , was interviewed again on DATE at TIME She again stated that she had seen a woman with a knife , wearing a blouse in a floral design , standing next to another woman whom she could not identify . She had not seen the knife handed over . She drew a picture showing the CARDINAL women in front of the house inhabited by the applicant and Mr PERSON .", "Mr P.C.M. was interviewed on DATE at TIME He had been visiting his sister PERSON He had seen QUANTITY men and QUANTITY women , he had seen a man striking the ground with a baseball bat , which a woman had picked up and taken indoors . He had seen a police officer pass on a motorcycle and a man shouting to draw his attention , and he had heard a shot shortly after the police officer had turned the corner .", "Ms S.H. was interviewed on DATE at TIME She was the wife of Mr P.C.M. and sister - in - law of PERSON She had seen a woman with a knife during the fighting . She had seen another woman pick up the baseball bat . She had seen the police officers on motorcycles turn the corner and heard the shot .", "The applicant was interviewed again on DATE at TIME She stated that she had got Mr PERSON out of the fight and taken him indoors to clean him up . He had been drunk . He had picked up a baseball bat and taken it out , then broken it on the pavement . She had then picked up the longer piece and disposed of it .", "The first police officer had ridden past on a motorcycle . Mr PERSON had tried to make him stop and shouted to draw his attention . CARDINAL others had ridden past . Mr PERSON had gone after them , followed by the applicant . The applicant had just turned around to close the door when she had heard the shot fired . She had run to the corner . She had seen Mr PERSON lying on the pavement . A police officer had stopped her getting any closer .", "The applicant had been wearing black trousers and a sweater in black and white stripes . PERSON had been wearing tight trousers and , as she recalled , a brown sweater . She knew nothing of a blouse in a red and white floral print and there had been no other women present .", "When it was suggested to her that PERSON might have had a knife , she stated that she had not seen any knife that evening . PERSON and Mr PERSON had told her about the knife afterwards .", "Interviewed again DATE , the applicant stated that she had moved to another dwelling . She was prepared to show her kitchen knives to the police . Photographs of knives were included in the file .", "Mr PERSON was interviewed anew on CARDINAL DATE at TIME He had seen Mr PERSON holding a baseball bat in his left hand and a knife in his right . He did not remember where the applicant and PERSON had been at that moment . Nor did he recognise the knife . He had been drunk that night .", "PERSON was interviewed on DATE at TIME She and the applicant had intervened in the fight . After fighting had stopped , she had seen Mr PERSON holding a baseball bat . He had gone round the corner . She thought that the applicant might have gone back indoors at that point . She had seen a police officer pass on a motorcycle and had tried to wave him down . At that point she had seen Mr PERSON holding a knife . She had tried unsuccessfully to take it from him . He had been holding it by the grip , blade upwards , inside his lower arm . He had been overwrought . She did not know where the knife had come from ; maybe from one of the youths . Nor did she understand how Officer PERSON could have felt threatened ; she thought the distance between him and Mr PERSON had been QUANTITY , but she admitted that she had not seen the shot fired .", "Officer PERSON had submitted a written statement ( see below ) . Interviewed on DATE at TIME , he stated that he had seen Mr PERSON get drunk and become aggressive in a football club canteen .", "PERSON was interviewed a second time on DATE at TIME She stated that she had seen a woman aged DATE , wearing grey and pink , run after the youths , get into a car and drive away at high speed .", "Ms B.C.Z. was interviewed on DATE at TIME She had been visiting her friend PERSON She had heard QUANTITY shots fired . She and PERSON had gone to the window . They had seen a woman leaving the house of the applicant and Mr PERSON ; the woman had got into a car and driven off , then returned later with a man in a different car . Together they had entered the applicant ’s home .", "Police Officer PERSON was interviewed by the investigating judge ( rechter - commissaris ) on DATE . He confirmed what he had said earlier . He was still very upset by what had happened .", "Officer PERSON submitted a written statement , dated DATE , of the events as he had witnessed them . He had been patrolling in a police car when he was informed of the disturbance caused by the youths . He had heard shouts about a knife on the police radio . Having arrived , he learned that a man had been shot ; the man had been breathing heavily . He had tried to resuscitate the man . When the ambulance arrived , it had driven over the knife . The man having died in the meantime , the ambulance crew had covered the body with a white sheet and left .", "Officer PERSON had later gone into the applicant ’s home ; he and woman police officers PERSON and Ha . had been able to leave only with difficulty . They had been addressed as “ killers ” by persons present in the house .", "Officer PERSON submitted a written statement dated DATE . He had known Mr PERSON personally . Mr PERSON had told him about the nuisance caused by the youth gangs ; Officer PERSON had advised him to call the police or mobilise the neighbourhood to involve the police in the matter . Mr PERSON had subsequently told him that the annoyance caused by the youth gangs had decreased as a result .", "Officer He . submitted a written statement also dated DATE . He had been the emergency aid co - ordinator at the time . He had been patrolling in a car when he had heard shouting about a knife on the radio , and later that there had been a shooting incident . Arriving at the scene of the incident , he had seen a man lying in the recovery position and a motorcycle parked next to him . He had been directed towards Officer PERSON , who had been seated on the kerb across the street and obviously in great distress . He had had ORG taken to the police station and had had the area cordoned off in order to preserve it for forensic investigation . He had had Officer PERSON removed to a different police station from that where Officer PERSON had been taken , so that he could be de - briefed . When the situation threatened to get out of hand – he mentioned a professional criminal who had telephoned his henchmen DATE he had summoned up reinforcements .", "Officer Ha . submitted a written statement dated DATE . It relates how she and her woman colleague PERSON had accompanied the applicant to her home . The applicant had told them that she had called the police in anticipation of her husband ’s return , expecting him to be drunk , and had described the fight with the youths . Mr PERSON had gone back into the house , after which the baseball bat had been gone . She had heard , but not seen , the shot . When other people had crammed into the applicant ’s home , the atmosphere had turned aggressive .", "Skin and clothing samples taken from Mr PERSON ’s body were tested by a forensic expert of the GPE - Amstelland police force for the presence and concentration of gunshot residue . In a report dated DATE it was determined that the fatal shot had been fired from a distance of QUANTITY .", "Officer PERSON ’s service weapon and the spent cartridge and bullet found at the scene of the shooting incident were examined by a forensic expert of the GPE - Amstelland police force . A report dated CARDINAL DATE concluded “ with virtual certainty ” ( met aan zekerheid grenzende waarschijnlijkheid ) that the cartridge and bullet had been fired using that particular weapon .", "Mr PERSON ’s body was subjected to autopsy at ORG ( FAC ; “ ORG ” ) on DATE . Following the autopsy , the body was released to Mr PERSON ’s next - of - kin for disposal .", "Samples of body tissue and fluids were taken and examined by a toxicologist . In the resulting report , dated CARDINAL DATE , it is stated that alcohol was found in Mr PERSON ’s femoral blood , in a concentration of CARDINAL milligrammes per millilitre , and in his urine , in a concentration of CARDINAL milligrammes per millilitre . These amounts were quite enough to have influenced Mr PERSON ’s consciousness and behaviour .", "DATE . The knife found on the ground close to Mr PERSON ’s body was tested at the ORG . In a report dated DATE it was found to bear DNA matching that of Mr PERSON . There was a chance of CARDINAL in CARDINAL that the DNA was someone else ’s , and no match had been found among the DNA profiles stored in the national database .", "Photographs were made of the scene of the incident , both before and after Mr PERSON ’s body was removed ; some show Mr PERSON ’s body , both clothed and naked . Others identify objects such as the spent cartridge , the bullets and blood spots . The investigation file also contained detailed street plans showing the location , in so far as they can be determined , of vehicles and witnesses at relevant times .", "On DATE ORG officer conducting the investigation sought permission to tap fixed - line and mobile telephones used by witnesses to the shooting incident , including the applicant , PERSON and PERSON , in the hope that information thus obtained might clarify , in particular , the identity of the woman whom certain other witnesses had seen holding a knife .", "A preliminary judicial investigation ( gerechtelijk vooronderzoek ) was opened on DATE .", "On DATE the same officer requested the termination of the measures , since they had yielded no usable information .", "The coroner ( lijkschouwer ) arrived on DATE at TIME and examined Mr PERSON ’s body . He found that the likely cause of death was a gunshot wound caused by a projectile passing through the body .", "Other official reports summarise interviews by telephone with other witnesses who had known Mr PERSON in life and with the ambulance crew .", "One report , dated CARDINAL DATE , relates that further attempts were made to interview PERSON anew but that these had been abandoned after they had proved unfruitful .", "DATE . On DATE in the early afternoon officers of ORG determined the lines of sight from the window of PERSON bedroom ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) .", "It is also recorded in official reports that the precise trajectory of the bullet could not be determined for lack of sufficient reference points , and that a reconstruction of the incident took place on DATE in a shed outside GPE .", "On DATE ORG ( PERSON ) , informed of the public prosecutor ’s provisional intention not to prosecute , issued an advisory opinion . It stated , among other things , that PERSON statement was unusable , inter alia because she had volunteered the information that she had not seen any knife without waiting to be asked . Conversely , the statements of Officer PERSON and Officer PERSON were considered plausible .", "ORG considered that since Officer PERSON had not warned Mr PERSON that he might fire , his use of his firearm had not conformed with official instructions , but it had constituted legitimate self - defence in the circumstances . It was noted in this connection that police officers were expected to resist violence rather than evade it ; seen in this light , and even assuming that flight had been an option open to Officer PERSON , it was completely understandable that Officer PERSON had first attempted to persuade Mr PERSON to desist and drop the knife rather than flee .", "NORP The public prosecutor ’s intention not to prosecute Officer PERSON was thus endorsed .", "On DATE the public prosecutor wrote to the applicant ’s counsel informing him of the decision not to prosecute Officer PERSON .", "On DATE the applicant , through her counsel , lodged a written complaint against this decision with ORG . She alleged that PERSON statement ( paragraph CARDINAL above ) cast doubt on the version of events according to which officer PERSON had been constrained in his actions through standing astride his motorcycle . Be that as it might , Officer PERSON had placed himself in an awkward position through failing to maintain sufficient distance from Mr PERSON despite the threat posed by the latter . The net result of not prosecuting Officer PERSON was moreover to deny the applicant the opportunity to be heard as a victim and claim damages as an injured party .", "On DATE , following a hearing in camera during which Officer PERSON was heard in the absence of the applicant or her counsel , ORG gave a decision declaring the complaint unfounded . It was sufficiently established that Officer PERSON had acted in legitimate self - defence ; the investigation had been extensive , detailed and independent .", "The standard service firearm issued to the GPE police is a version of the NORP - made PERSON PCARDINAL double - action semi - automatic pistol . It fires CARDINALxCARDINAL PERSON ( also known as QUANTITY or QUANTITY ) cartridge rounds .", "The weapon has a number of safety features , including an internal firing - pin retaining mechanism which prevents the firing - pin from striking the primer of the cartridge unless the trigger is pressed all the way through . This enables the weapon to be carried safely with a round chambered and ready for immediate use while preventing its being fired accidentally .", "Standing advice to police officers is to carry the weapon with a round chambered so as to have it ready for immediate use in case of need .", "The relevant domestic law is set out in ORG and Others v. the GPE [ ORG ] , no . CARDINAL , § § CARDINAL - CARDINAL , ORG DATE ..." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicants were born in DATE . PERSON died in DATE . Mr Arapov lives in GPE . He decided to pursue the application of his late wife PERSON .", "From DATE to DATE the applicants received their old - age pensions , totalling CARDINAL and MONEY ( RUB ) per month , DATE in arrears .", "On DATE each applicant lodged an action against ORG of GPE for index - linking of their delayed pension payments in line with inflation .", "On DATE the ORG of GPE granted the applicants ' claims and awarded the applicants RUB PERSON ( Mrs Arapova ) and RUB CARDINAL ( Mr Arapov ) . Both judgments came into force on DATE .", "ORG issued writs of execution and forwarded them to ORG of GPE for execution .", "NORP In DATE ORG returned the writs of execution to the applicants advising them to apply to the local office of ORG . The ORG refused to execute the judgments .", "In DATE the applicants applied to ORG on numerous occasions . ORG refused to accept the writs of execution because the defendant did not have funds .", "It was not before DATE that the writs of execution were accepted for payment by ORG of GPE .", "NORP The money awarded by the judgments was transferred to the applicants ' bank accounts on DATE , and received by the applicants on DATE ." ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "At the material time , the first applicant , Mr PERSON was the major shareholder in ORG ve PERSON , a NORP company which owns a DATE review entitled Haberde Yorumda Gerçek ( ORG and Comments ) , published in GPE . The second applicant , Mr PERSON was the editor - in - chief of the review .", "In the CARDINAL DATE and DATE issues of the review , an interview with a leader of ORG ( “ the NORP ” ) , an illegal organisation , was published in CARDINAL parts . In the edition of CARDINAL DATE a joint declaration by CARDINAL socialist organisations was published .", "The relevant parts of these publications read as follows ( translation ) :", "“ Q : What do you mean when you say [ the elections present ] dangers ?", "A : NORP The GPE say : ‘ The NORP are oppressed . PERSON is slaughtering them . We are protecting the NORP against PERSON ’s massacres . Their survival is in our safekeeping.’ But it is quite obvious that this is a big swindle . If they were really protecting the NORP against massacre as they claim , they ought to be protecting them against ORG , too . Since the massacre which ORG is carrying out against our people in the GPE is as horrible as that of PERSON . In fact , there are practices which are much more extreme than those of PERSON . So the GPE ought to be doing the same thing against GPE . The double standard is clear for all to see . The GPE take action against PERSON , but support GPE ’s massacres against the NORP people in both the LOC and the LOC . There have been many signs of this and our people are aware of it . They want to make the NORP an instrument for gaining their own ends . Their aim in the elections is both to contain the positive developments in the LOC through the organisations they want to promote and to block the fight for independence and freedom which is developing in GPE in general . They want to bring all the NORP movements under the control of those CARDINAL organisations already controlled by them [ the GPE ] . So that is why they all present a danger for the NORP people .", "Q : Laws will be enacted once a parliament has been established in LOC . Treaties will be signed , on the one hand with neighbours , i.e. GPE and GPE , and , on the other hand , with the GPE . GPE can have only one demand from these countries , that the ORG be excluded . If NORP parties take part in such an environment , what would be the ORG ’s attitude ?", "A : It is a well - known fact that GPE and/or imperialism wants to divert our people from its national identity and struggle . But we want to achieve our identity as a nation and have a fatherland . That is what we are fighting for . They want to uproot us and drive us out of our territory ; they want to annihilate us or force us to change . But we fight to live in freedom in our own territory . If either the GPE or GPE or any other power which claims to be acting in the name of NORP identity attempts to force us out of any part of our country , we will fight in order to stay where we are . That is what we are fighting for right now . ORG wants to oust us from our territory . It is driving people out of their villages . It wants GPE to become a totally uninhabited area . But we are resisting . No one can tell us or ask us to get out . We are not on anyone else ’s territory ; we are on our own territory . No one can tell us to leave our own territory . We make no distinction between the LOC and the LOC ; we are in GPE . We are amongst our own people . If they want us to leave our territory , they must know that we will never agree to it . We are a people who have lost everything we had and who are fighting to regain what we have lost . That is the purpose of our action . We have nothing to lose . We shrink from nobody and are afraid of no one . All we can lose is our slavery . That is why we act without fear .", "Q : It is said that broadcasting programmes in NORP on NORP State television would be interpreted as making a concession to the ORG . Could that be true ? It is also rumoured that the ORG is going to set up a TV station . Is that right ?", "A : It is not true that the ORG is going to broadcast on television . We have no such facilities . Television broadcasting either by satellite or through any other channel is not an issue for the ORG . It was PERSON who brought up the issue of NORP TV in GPE when he went to the GPE . That is what is being debated . A very small fraction of people say that GPE was right , but a very large proportion are against it . Those who are suggesting NORP TV are doing so deliberately . The aim is supposedly to influence and win over the masses and thus to isolate the ORG . That is what the idea is . But even if NORP TV became a reality , it would do them no service . That is why they are against it . The purpose of those who want to create NORP TV is to isolate the ORG . For there is no mention of any argument such as ‘ Here is a people who have their own language and we must broadcast in their language . There is need for respect for that people . It is wrong to ban a people ’s language , that also harms ORG Far from it . The debate has revealed the real intentions : ‘ How can we wipe out the influence of the ORG ? How can we isolate the ORG ? How can we pull the wool over the NORP people ’s eyes?’ It is a tactical approach . It is a trick . But no matter what steps they take , they will be working to the advantage of the ORG . ORG has now lost GPE . That is a fact . Any move the ORG makes in GPE after this will turn out to the advantage of the ORG and to the disadvantage of ORG ... .The NORP press has no principles . We consider that there is no longer any point in communicating with that unethical press . We shall not be satisfied with abstaining from any contact with the press ; we shall endeavour to stop the press from entering GPE .", "Q : A different tactic was applied in the Uludere attack . Previously , attacks were always carried out at TIME . But this time , the attack was carried out during DATE and the clashes continued throughout DATE . It is said that this entails more risk for the guerrillas . What was the reason for it ?", "A : What they say is right . Our combat has reached a certain level . Tactics have to be developed which match that level , because it is a mistake to wage war with less developed tactics . Progress can be achieved in the war by using tactics in keeping with the level of warfare which has now been reached . That is why an action of that nature was planned . The idea was to attack in TIME and hold our ground , continuing the clashes throughout DATE and it was successful in the end . It was an experiment . From our point of view there are conclusions to be drawn from it . We are studying the matter . We shall benefit from that in the actions we carry out in the future . ”", "“ Q : What do you think about the assassinations by unknown perpetrators in GPE and the actions ascribed to the ‘ LOC ?", "A : It is true that there is an organisation known as ORG . But it is a weak organisation . It is not that organisation which is carrying out the massacres , contrary to what is being said . Since the organisation is weak , GPE has captured its members in many places . Many massacres are carried out in the name of that organisation , but it is actually ORG itself which is doing the killings . We say this to the members of ORG : ‘ If you are really NORP , [ you should know that ] the NORP faith is against repression and injustice and advocates what is right and PERSON It is a well - known fact that ORG is repressive and carries out massacres and inhuman actions . They [ the ORG ] must respect those who oppose these acts . If they want to wage war , they must join forces with them . That is what we are asking of them . We warn them as friends that they must throw out the contra - guerrillas who infiltrate their ranks . For unless they do that , they will come to grief . We have not , as yet , reacted more seriously , we have just warned them . We say that that phenomenon has served ORG and we have received a favourable response from DATE . They have said that ORG people or NORP have not in fact been involved in that sort of action and that the acts have not been carried out by ORG people . That is favourable as far as we are concerned . But it [ the ORG ] is still carrying out massacres in some places in ORG ’s name ...", "Q : On what lines will the struggle be carried out from now on ?", "A : NORP The climate does affect a war , although the effects are not decisive . The DATE was very hard and that affected our movements , the capacity for combat and caused several difficulties DATE both for us and for ORG . But they have the advantage of using technology and they used that advantage to the full . To no avail , however . They intended to deal us murderous blows DATE . They thought they would have overthrown us and ousted us by DATE . But they did not achieve what they wanted . Our capacity for movement was reduced by the hard DATE conditions and , as a result , steps could only be taken late as compared to DATE . The DATE is gradually becoming more suitable , however . There is still snow on the ground in many places , but it is presenting less and less of an obstacle . DATE will be more different compared to other DATE , but we never say : ‘ Let us improve our armed combat , let us expand it further.’ If we continue the war , we do so because we have to . Because there is no possibility of achieving a different life and developing . All roads have been blocked for us . We are waging war because we are forced to . Any further expansion of the war will depend on the attitude of ORG . The ORG is intensifying the war . So we have to extend the war to that degree . The war will escalate . Before the ORG , there was a CARDINAL - sided war being waged in GPE . In DATE that war has begun to be a CARDINAL - sided war . In DATE , ORG used to achieve whatever ends it intended to achieve in the war it was waging , and the NORP people was being rapidly wiped out as a result . But the NORP people have begun to say ‘ Stop!’ . They began to resist in order to avoid annihilation . It was the ORG which started the war and the ending of the war will also depend on ORG . We did not start the war . We developed a defensive war against the war of annihilation that was being waged on us . This war will continue as long as ORG refuses to accept the will of the people of GPE : there will be not CARDINAL single step backwards . The war will go on until there is CARDINAL single individual left on our side . …", "The ORG colonialist authority has completely disappeared in some places … As the government of war we want the people ’s will , which makes itself increasingly known , to be able to express itself officially . We shall make our way towards that objective CARDINAL step at a time . We shall reach it by destroying or weakening the sovereignty of the ORG different ways and in various forms , by setting up a popular regime in certain places and favouring a dualistic regime in others . That is what we call the power of the people , the government of war . …", "The ORG encounters all kinds of problems and resolves them . No questions are put to ORG . No one speaks to it . Everyone speaks to ORG or the local ERNK official . The ORG is considered competent . For the moment , we are in the process of electing the representatives of the people . ”", "“ ORG of GPE ( TDKP ) , ORG of GPE ( TKEP ) , ORG for the Liberation of Northern Kurdistan ( TKKKÖ ) and ORG of GPE ( TKP / ML Hareketi ) have called on all revolutionaries and NORP to unite forces .", "‘ Let us unite against ORG terrorism , against the repression and oppression of the NORP people , against the massacres , the street killings , the dismissals and unemployment ; let us unite and step up our efforts for freedom , democracy and socialism!’ Such is the heading of the appeal in which it is stated that the only means of action for the ruling classes is that of force and violence . And the ‘ democratisation’ initiatives of the ORG and ORG government are described as a manoeuvre , purely a means of concealing their attacks . ”", "The appeal goes on to state the following views :", "“ Workers , labourers and young people of the NORP and NORP nation !", "It is possible and perfectly feasible for us to drive back the attacks levelled on us by imperialism and the collaborating ruling classes and to obtain our economic and political rights and freedoms . To do so we must rally our forces around our common demands and join battle . Aware of its historic revolutionary role , the working class must take action , must lead that action , must call the bluff of the trade union bosses of every camp and smash the barriers they have put up to curb our movement and must develop the fight and action .", "- The NORP army must withdraw from GPE . Action must be taken to put an end to the double standards in the legal system and all NORP prisoners must be released .", "- The NORP parliament must end its authority over GPE . NORP people must be free to determine their own destiny , including the establishment of a separate ORG .", "- The ORG terrorism and street executions , carried out by ORG [ ORG ] agents , contra - guerrillas and special squads , must stop immediately and they must be called upon to account for the massacres and murders .", "- The servicing of external debts to imperialists must be stopped , and those resources must be used for the benefit of the proletariat .", "- Dismissals must be stopped and sacked workers must be given their jobs back . All the obstacles which have been placed in the way of trade union organisation must be removed and the right to organise without restriction must be granted .", "- Measures must be taken to prevent ORG , which are the resources of the country and of the people , from being sold for a song to imperialists . Labour sub - contracting , which is a means of eliminating trade union coverage , must be stopped immediately .", "- The strike bans must be lifted and lockout must be prohibited . The right to hold general strikes , political strikes , strikes to obtain rights and sympathy strikes must be recognised . And all the bans on freedom of assembly , freedom to demonstrate , freedom of opinion and of the press must be ended .", "- Act no . CARDINAL pertaining to civil servants must be repealed and all working people must be granted the right to join a trade union with the right to strike and to conclude collective agreements .", "- All working people must have insurance coverage ; all workers must be granted unemployment insurance and the facilities must be provided for free health services and health care for everyone .", "- The discrimination based on sex which prevails in working and social life and the pressure exerted on working women must be ended .", "- The NORP [ High Council for Education ] must be done away with and young people in higher education must be allowed to have a say and to participate in decision - making in university administration . All the obstacles that have been placed on youth organisations must be removed and education and training must be free of charge at every level .", "- ORG boards must be given full autonomy ; textbooks must meet contemporary requirements and must be re - written with democratic contents .", "- All debts owed to the ORG by the peasantry must be cancelled and the rural population must be allowed to set the minimum prices of products . ”", "On DATE ORG ( PERSON ) ordered the seizure of all copies of the CARDINAL DATE issue of the review , since it allegedly contained a declaration by terrorist organisations and disseminated separatist propaganda .", "NORP In an indictment dated DATE ORG at ORG charged the applicants with having disseminated propaganda against the indivisibility of the ORG by publishing an interview with a ORG leader and a declaration made by CARDINAL terrorist organisations . The charges were brought under sections CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the Prevention of Terrorism Act DATE ( hereinafter “ the DATE LAW : see paragraph CARDINAL below ) .", "In another indictment dated DATE , the applicants were further charged on account of having published the second part of the interview in the issue of DATE with disseminating propaganda against the indivisibility of the ORG . The charges were brought under section LAW .", "On DATE the criminal proceedings were joined in view of the fact that the incriminated articles were considered to constitute a single interview published in CARDINAL parts .", "In the proceedings before ORG , the applicants denied the charges . They pleaded that the interview had been published with the aim of providing the public with information within the scope of journalism and the freedom of the press . As regards his freedom of expression , the first applicant referred to the LAW and the case - law of the ORG and the ORG . He stated that pluralism of opinion was essential in a NORP society including opinions which shock or offend . He argued that the provisions of sections CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the CARDINAL Act restricted freedom of expression in contravention of LAW and the criteria laid down in the case - law of the Commission and the ORG .", "In a judgment dated DATE ORG found the applicants guilty of offences under sections CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the DATE Act . The first applicant was sentenced under section CARDINAL to a fine of MONEY and under section CARDINAL to a further fine of MONEY . The second applicant was sentenced under section CARDINAL to a fine of MONEY and under section CARDINAL to CARDINAL months’ imprisonment and a further fine of MONEY .", "In its reasoning , the court held that the interview with the ORG leader was published in the form of a news commentary . It further held that the interviewee had referred to a certain part of NORP territory as “ GPE ” , had asserted that certain NORP citizens who are of NORP origin form a separate society and that GPE expels NORP people from their villages and massacres them . The court further considered that the interviewee had praised NORP terrorist activities and had claimed that the NORP should form a separate ORG . On these grounds , the court found that the interview , as a whole , disseminated propaganda against the indivisibility of the ORG . The court further held that another page of the review contained a declaration by terrorist organisations and its publication constituted a separate offence under section CARDINAL of the CARDINAL Act .", "The applicants appealed against their conviction . In addition to the defence which they invoked before ORG , their legal representative emphasised that in a democratic society opinions must be freely expressed and debated . Noting that there had been no prosecutions for the publication of other interviews with the leaders of the ORG in other newspapers or magazines , the ORG representative asserted that the applicants had not been convicted for having published the incriminated interview , but for publishing a NORP review .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the appeal . It upheld ORG assessment of the evidence and its reasons for rejecting the applicants’ defence .", "Following the amendments made by PERSON no . CARDINAL of DATE to the DATE LAW see paragraph CARDINAL below ) ORG ex officio re - examined the applicants’ cases . The court confirmed the sentences imposed on them .", "NORP The relevant provisions of LAW read as follows :", "“ Where the legislative provisions in force at the time when a crime is committed are different from those of a later law , the provisions most favourable to the offender shall be applied . ”", "“ The term ‘ heavy fine’ shall mean payment to the ORG of from CARDINAL to MONEY , as the judge shall decide ... ”", "“ In the event of conviction , the court shall order the seizure and confiscation of any object which has been used for the commission or preparation of the crime or offence … ”", "“ Harmful propaganda", "A person who by any means whatsoever spreads propaganda with a view to establishing the domination of CARDINAL social class over the others , annihilating a social class , overturning the fundamental social or economic order established in GPE or the political or legal order of the ORG shall , on conviction , be liable to a term of imprisonment of from DATE .", "A person who by any means whatsoever spreads propaganda in favour of the ORG ’s being governed by a single person or social group to the detriment of the underlying principles of the LOC and democracy shall , on conviction , be liable to a term of imprisonment of from DATE .", "A person who , prompted by racial considerations , by any means whatsoever spreads propaganda aimed at abolishing in whole or in part public - law rights guaranteed by the LAW or undermining or destroying patriotic sentiment shall , on conviction , be liable to a term of imprisonment of from DATE .", "… ”", "“ Public incitement to commit an offence", "Where incitement to commit an offence is done by means of mass communication , of whatever type – whether by tape recordings , gramophone records , newspapers , press publications or other published material DATE by the circulation or distribution of printed papers or by the placing of placards or posters in public places , the terms of imprisonment to which convicted persons are liable shall be doubled … ”", "“ Non - public incitement to commit an offence", "A person who expressly praises or condones an act punishable by law as an offence or incites the population to break the law shall , on conviction , be liable to between six months’ and CARDINAL years’ imprisonment and a heavy fine of from CARDINAL MONEY .", "A person who incites the people to hatred or hostility on the basis of a distinction between social classes , races , religions , denominations or regions , shall , on conviction , be liable to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment and a fine of from CARDINAL to MONEY . If this incitement endangers public safety , the sentence shall be increased by DATE .", "The penalties to be imposed on those who have committed the offences defined in the previous paragraph shall be doubled when they have done so by the means listed in LAW . ”", "The relevant provisions of the Press Act DATE read as follows :", "“ For the purposes of the present PERSON , the term ‘ periodicals’ shall mean newspapers , press agency dispatches and any other printed matter published at regular intervals .", "‘ Publication’ shall mean the exposure , display , distribution , emission , sale or offer for sale of printed matter on LOC to which the public have access where anyone may see it .", "An offence shall not be deemed to have been committed through the medium of the press unless publication has taken place , except where the material in itself is unlawful . ”", "“ Where distribution of the printed matter whose distribution constitutes the offence is prevented … by a court injunction or , in an emergency , by order of the principal public prosecutor … the penalty imposed shall be reduced to CARDINAL of that laid down by law for the offence concerned . ”", "The relevant provisions of LAW DATE read as follows :", "“ It shall be an offence , punishable by a fine of from CARDINAL to MONEY , to announce , orally or in the form of a publication , that terrorist organisations will commit an offence against a specific person , whether or not that person ’s ... identity is divulged provided that it is done in such a manner that he or she may be identified , or to reveal the identity of civil servants who have participated in anti - terrorist operations or to designate any person as a target .", "It shall be an offence , punishable by a fine of from CARDINAL to MONEY , to print or publish declarations or leaflets emanating from terrorist organisations .", "…", "Where the offences contemplated in the above paragraphs are committed through the medium of periodicals within the meaning of section CARDINAL of LAW ( Law no . CARDINAL ) , the publisher shall also be liable to a fine equal to MONEY of the income from the average sales for DATE if the periodical appears more frequently than DATE , or from the sales of the previous issue if the periodical appears DATE or less frequently , or from the average sales for DATE of the DATE newspaper with the largest circulation if the offence involves printed matter other than periodicals or if the periodical has just been launched . However , the fine may not be MONEY . The editor of the periodical shall be ordered to pay a sum equal to CARDINAL the fine imposed on the publisher . ”", "“ Written and spoken propaganda , meetings , assemblies and demonstrations aimed at undermining the territorial integrity of GPE or the indivisible unity of the nation are prohibited , irrespective of the methods used and the intention . Any person who engages in such an activity shall be sentenced to not CARDINAL and not more than five years’ imprisonment and a fine of from CARDINAL to MONEY .", "Where the crime of propaganda contemplated in the above paragraph is committed through the medium of periodicals within the meaning of section CARDINAL of LAW ( Law no . CARDINAL ) , the publisher shall also be liable to a fine equal to MONEY of the income from the average sales for DATE if the periodical appears more frequently than DATE , or from the average sales for DATE of the DATE newspaper with the largest circulation if the offence involves printed matter other than periodicals or if the periodical has just been launchedCARDINAL . However the fine may not be MONEY . The editor of the periodical concerned shall be ordered to pay a sum equal to CARDINAL the fine imposed on the publisher and sentenced to not less than six months’ and not more than CARDINAL years’ imprisonment . ”", "“ Written and spoken propaganda , meetings , assemblies and demonstrations aimed at undermining the territorial integrity of GPE or the indivisible unity of the nation are prohibited . Any person who engages in such an activity shall be sentenced to not CARDINAL and not more than three years’ imprisonment and a fine of from CARDINAL MONEY . The penalty imposed on a re - offender may not be commuted to a fine .", "Where the crime of propaganda contemplated in the first paragraph is committed through the medium of periodicals within the meaning of section CARDINAL of LAW ( Law no . CARDINAL ) , the publisher shall also be liable to a fine equal to MONEY of the income from the average sales for DATE if the periodical appears more frequently than DATE . However , the fine may not be MONEY . The editor of the periodical concerned shall be ordered to pay a sum equal to CARDINAL the fine imposed on the publisher and sentenced to not less than six months’ and not more than CARDINAL years’ imprisonment .", "Where the crime of propaganda contemplated in the first paragraph is committed through the medium of printed matter or by means of mass communication other than periodicals within the meaning of the second paragraph , those responsible and the owners of the means of mass communication shall be sentenced to not CARDINAL six months’ and not more than two years’ imprisonment and a fine of from CARDINAL MONEY …", "… ”", "“ The penalties for the offences contemplated in the present law may not be commuted to a fine or any other measure , nor may they be accompanied by a reprieve . ”", "“ The penalties for the offences contemplated in the present PERSON may not be commuted to a fine or any other measure , nor may they be accompanied by a reprieve .", "However , the provisions of this section shall not apply to convictions pursuant to section CARDINAL . ”", "“ Persons convicted of the offences contemplated in the present law who ... have been punished with a custodial sentence shall be granted automatic parole when they have served DATE of their sentence , provided they have been of good conduct .", "…", "The first and second paragraphs of section CARDINAL … of LAW ( Law no . CARDINAL ) shall not apply to the convicted persons mentioned above . ”", "The following amendments were made to LAW DATE following the enactment of PERSON no . CARDINAL of DATE :", "“ In DATE following the entry into force of the present PERSON , the court which has given judgment shall re - examine the case of a person convicted pursuant to LAW CARDINAL of the Prevention of Terrorism Act ( Law no . CARDINAL ) and , in accordance with the amendment … to section CARDINAL of PERSON no . ORG , shall reconsider the term of imprisonment imposed on that person and decide whether he should be allowed the benefit of sections CARDINAL and CARDINAL of Law no . CARDINAL of DATE . ”", "The following provisions are relevant to sentences in respect of offences under LAW :", "“ The execution of sentences passed on those who were convicted under Press Law no . CARDINAL or other laws as editors for offences committed before DATE shall be deferred .", "The provision in the first paragraph shall also apply to editors who are already serving their sentences .", "The institution of criminal proceedings or delivery of final judgments shall be deferred where no proceedings against the editor have not yet been brought , or where a preliminary investigation has been commenced but criminal proceedings have not been instituted , or where the final judicial investigation has been commenced but judgment has not yet been delivered , or where the judgment has still not become final . ”", "“ If an editor who has benefited under the provisions of the first paragraph of section CARDINAL is convicted as an editor for committing an intentional offence within DATE of the date of deferment , he must serve the entirety of the suspended sentence .", "The part of the postponed conviction which was served by the responsible editor until the date on which this PERSON enters into force shall be deducted from the sentence to be served as indicated in LAW . The provisions concerning conditional release are reserved .", "Where there has been a deferment , criminal proceedings shall be instituted or judgment delivered if an editor is convicted as such for committing an intentional offence within DATE of the date of deferment .", "Any conviction as an editor for an offence committed before DATE shall be deemed a nullity if the aforesaid period of DATE without any further conviction for an intentional offence . Similarly , if no criminal proceedings have been instituted , it shall no longer be possible to bring any , and , if any have been instituted , they shall be discontinued . ”", "The Execution of Sentences Act provides inter alia :", "“ The term ‘ fine’ shall mean payment to the ORG of a sum fixed within the statutory limits .", "…", "If , after service of the order to pay , the convicted person does not pay the fine within the time - limit , he shall be committed to prison for a term of DATE for every MONEY owed , by a decision of the public prosecutor .", "…", "The sentence of imprisonment thus substituted for the fine may not exceed DATE … ”", "“ … persons who ... have been ordered to serve a custodial sentence shall be granted automatic parole when they have served CARDINAL of their sentence , provided they have been of good conduct ... ”", "The Code of Criminal Procedure contains the following provisions :", "“ An appeal on points of law may not concern any issue other than the lawfulness of the impugned judgment .", "Non - application or erroneous application of a legal rule shall constitute unlawfulness . ”", "“ Unlawfulness is deemed to be manifest in the following cases :", "CARDINAL- where the court is not established in accordance with the law ;", "CARDINAL- where one of the judges who have taken the decision was barred by statute from participating ;", "… ”", "The Government supplied copies of several decisions given by the prosecutor attached to ORG withdrawing charges against persons suspected of inciting people to hatred or hostility , especially on religious grounds ( LAW ) , or of disseminating separatist propaganda against the indivisible unity of the ORG ( section CARDINAL of PERSON no . PERSON – see paragraph CARDINAL above ) . In the majority of cases where offences had been committed by means of publications the reasons given for the prosecutor ’s decision included such considerations as the fact that the proceedings were time - barred , that some of the constituent elements of the offence could not be made out or that there was insufficient evidence . Other grounds included the fact that the publications in issue had not been distributed , that there had been no unlawful intent , that no offence had been committed or that those responsible could not be identified .", "Furthermore , the ORG submitted a number of decisions of ORG as examples of cases in which defendants accused of the above - mentioned offences had been found not guilty . These were the following judgments : DATE ( no . CARDINAL ) and DATE ( no . CARDINAL ) ; DATE ( no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) , DATE ( no . CARDINAL ) , DATE ( no . PERSON ) , CARDINAL DATE ( no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) and DATE ( no . CARDINAL ) ; CARDINAL DATE ( no . GPE ) , DATE ( no . CARDINAL ) , DATE ( no . GPE ) , DATE ( no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) and DATE ( no . CARDINAL ) .", "As regards more particularly proceedings against authors of works dealing with the NORP problem , ORG in these cases have reached their decisions on the basis of the absence of the element of “ propaganda ” , an element of the offence , or on account of the objective nature of the incriminated parts .", "The constitutional provisions governing judicial organisation of ORG are worded as follows :", "“ In the performance of their duties , judges shall be independent ; they shall give judgment , according to their personal conviction , in accordance with the LAW , statute and the law .", "No organ , authority , ... or ... person may give orders or instructions to courts or judges in the exercise of their judicial powers , or send them circulars or make recommendations or suggestions to them . ”", "“ Judges … shall not be removed from office or compelled to retire without their consent before the age prescribed by LAW … ”", "“ ORG shall be established to try offences against the Republic , whose constituent qualities are enunciated in the LAW , against the territorial integrity of the ORG or the indivisible unity of the nation or against the free democratic system of government , and offences which directly affect the ORG ’s internal or external security .", "ORG shall be composed of a president , CARDINAL other regular members , CARDINAL substitute members , a prosecutor and a sufficient number of assistant prosecutors .", "The president , CARDINAL of the regular members , CARDINAL of the substitutes and the prosecutor , shall be appointed from among judges and public prosecutors of the first rank , according to procedures laid down in special legislation ; CARDINAL regular member and CARDINAL substitute shall be appointed from among military judges of the first rank and the assistant prosecutors from among public prosecutors and military judges .", "Presidents , regular members and substitute members ... of ORG shall be appointed for a renewable period of DATE .", "Appeal against decisions of ORG shall lie to ORG .", "... ”", "“ Military legal proceedings", "The personal rights and obligations of military judges … shall be regulated by law in accordance with the principles of the independence of the courts , the safeguards enjoyed by the judiciary and the requirements of military service . Relations between military judges and the commanders under whom they serve in the performance of their non - judicial duties shall also be regulated by law ... ”", "Based on LAW , the relevant provisions of LAW no . CARDINAL on ORG provide as follows :", "“ In the capitals of the provinces of … ORG shall be established to try persons accused of offences against the Republic , whose constituent qualities are enunciated in the LAW , against the territorial integrity of the ORG or the indivisible unity of the nation or against the free , democratic system of government and offences directly affecting the ORG ’s internal or external security . ”", "“ The ORG shall be composed of a president , CARDINAL other regular members and CARDINAL substitute members . ”", "“ The president of a ORG , CARDINAL of the [ CARDINAL ] regular members and CARDINAL of the [ CARDINAL ] substitutes ... shall be civilian … judges , the other members , whether regular or substitute , military judges of the first rank … ”", "“ The appointment of military judges to sit as regular members and substitutes shall be carried out according to the procedure laid down for that purpose in ORG .", "Except as provided in the present PERSON or other legislation , the president and the regular or substitute members of ORG … may not be appointed to another post or place , without their consent , within DATE …", "…", "If , after an investigation concerning the president or a regular or substitute member of a ORG conducted according to the legislation concerning them , competent committees or authorities decide to change the duty station of the person concerned , the duty station of that judge or the duties themselves … may be changed in accordance with the procedure laid down in that legislation . ”", "“ ORG shall have jurisdiction to try persons charged with", "( a ) the offences contemplated in LAW ,", "…", "( d ) NORP offences having a connection with the events which made it necessary to declare a state of emergency , in regions where a state of emergency has been declared in accordance with LAW ,", "( e ) NORP offences committed against the Republic , whose constituent qualities are enunciated in the LAW , against the indivisible unity of the State – meaning both the national territory and its people DATE or against the free , democratic system of government and offences directly affecting the ORG ’s internal or external security .", "… ”", "“ ORG shall hear appeals against the judgments of ORG . ”", "“ The rules governing the rights and obligations of … military judges appointed to ORG and their supervision … , the institution of disciplinary proceedings against them , the imposition of disciplinary penalties on them and the investigation and prosecution of any offences they may commit in the performance of their duties ... shall be as laid down in the relevant provisions of the laws governing their profession …", "The observations of ORG on military judges , the assessment reports on them drawn up by ORG assessors … and the files on any investigations conducted in respect of them … shall be transmitted to ORG . ”", "“ A ORG may be transformed into a ORG , under the conditions set forth below , where a state of emergency has been declared in all or part of the territory in respect of which ORG concerned has jurisdiction , provided that within that territory there is CARDINAL ORG … ”", "The relevant provisions of ORG provide as follows :", "“ The aptitude of military judges … appointed as regular or substitute members of ORG that is required for promotion or advancement in salary step , rank or seniority shall be determined on the basis of assessment reports drawn up according to the procedure laid down below , subject to the provisions of the present PERSON and ORG ( Law no . CARDINAL ) .", "( a ) The first superior competent to carry out assessment and draw up assessment reports for military judges , whether regular or substitute members … shall be the Minister of State in ORG , followed by PERSON .", "… ”", "“ Members … of ORG belonging to ORG … shall be appointed by a committee composed of the personnel director and the legal adviser of ORG , the personnel director and the legal adviser attached to the staff of the arm in which the person concerned is serving and ORG at ORG … ”", "“ Military judges … shall be appointed by a decree issued jointly by the Minister of Defence and the Prime Minister and submitted to the President of the Republic for approval , in accordance with the provisions on the appointment and transfer of members of the armed forces …", "…", "The procedure for appointment as a military judge shall take into account the opinion of ORG , the reports by ORG assessors and the assessment reports drawn up by the superiors … ”", "“ The rules governing the salary scales , salary increases and various personal rights of military judges … shall be as laid down in the provisions relating to officers . ”", "“ The Minister of Defence may apply to military judges , after considering their defence submissions , the following disciplinary sanctions :", "A. A warning , which consists in giving the person concerned notice in writing that he must exercise more care in the performance of his duties .", "…", "B. A reprimand , which consists in giving the person concerned notice in writing that a particular act or a particular attitude has been found to be blameworthy .", "…", "The said sanctions shall be final , mentioned in the assessment record of the person concerned and entered in his personal file … ”", "“ When military judges … sit in court they shall wear the special dress of their civilian counterparts … ”", "Article CARDINAL of the Military Code of CARDINAL DATE provides :", "“ It shall be an offence , punishable by DATE imprisonment , to abuse one ’s authority as a civil servant in order to influence the military courts . ”", "Under LAW , ORG of ORG has jurisdiction to hear applications for judicial review and claims for damages based on disputes relating to the personal status of officers , particularly those concerning their professional advancement ." ]

[ "10", "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant is a NORP national who was born in GPE in DATE and lives in GPE ( GPE ) .", "NORP In DATE , at DATE , the applicant settled in NORP territory for work - related reasons . DATE , DATE of her divorce , she was married to a man resident in GPE . In DATE she gave birth to a son , PERSON , who has lived with her until DATE .", "In DATE , having lost the NORP passport issued to her in DATE , the applicant obtained a new passport . In DATE she found the lost passport , but did not return it to the relevant authorities .", "In DATE GPE regained full independence . In DATE GPE , the State of which the applicant had hitherto been a national , broke up . The applicant therefore became stateless . In DATE her name was entered in the register of residents ( ORG reģistrs ) as a permanent resident . Her son was subsequently granted the status of “ permanently resident non - citizen ” of GPE .", "NORP In DATE a NORP bridgebuilding firm offered the applicant a job as a crane operator in ORG and ORG , regions of the GPE bordering on GPE and belonging to GPE . In view of the difficulties caused by tighter supervision in these regions by the NORP authorities on account of the troubles in GPE , the firm advised her to obtain NORP nationality and a formal registration of residence in GPE before signing the employment contract . In DATE the applicant consulted a broker who put a false stamp in her first NORP passport , the CARDINAL which had been found but not disclosed to the authorities , stating that the registration of her residence in GPE had been cancelled ( pieraksts , or dzīvesvietas reģistrācija in NORP ) .", "NORP In DATE the applicant was registered as being resident in GPE in the Kursk region of GPE , at her brother ’s address . In DATE she obtained NORP nationality . In DATE and DATE she travelled to GPE , working there for CARDINAL periods of DATE respectively .", "In DATE the applicant applied to ORG Nationality and Migration Directorate ( GPE ministrijas GPE un migrācijas lietu pārvalde – “ the ORG ” ) for a passport based on the status of “ permanently resident non - citizen ” . In accordance with the regulations in force , she submitted alongside the application the second NORP passport issued to her in DATE . On examining the file , the ORG discovered that she had registered a second residence in GPE and had completed certain formalities on the basis of the old passport which had been mislaid and found again . Accordingly , by decision of DATE , the ORG removed the applicant ’s name from the register of residents . On DATE the head of the ORG issued an order for the applicant ’s deportation ( izbraukšanas rīkojums ) , requesting her to leave GPE for GPE by DATE . The deportation order was accompanied by a prohibition on re - entering GPE for DATE . It was served on the applicant on DATE .", "After appealing unsuccessfully against the deportation order to the head of the ORG , the applicant lodged an application with FAC seeking to have the order set aside . In her memorial she submitted that , as the false stamp in her passport had been put there without her knowledge and she had therefore been unaware of it , she should not have to bear the consequences . In addition , since the registration of her residence in GPE had been merely temporary , it could not affect her existing registration in GPE . She further argued that there were no legislative or regulatory provisions in force prohibiting her from having addresses in CARDINAL different countries . Accordingly , the applicant requested the court to set aside the order for her deportation and to instruct the ORG to issue her with a permanent residence permit .", "In a judgment delivered on DATE following adversarial proceedings , the court rejected the request , finding that the deportation order had been lawful and well founded . As to the applicant ’s request that she be issued with a residence permit , the court declared that part of the application inadmissible on the ground that she had not applied for a permit to the relevant authorities , nor had she lodged an administrative appeal before applying to the courts , as required by LAW ( Entry and Residence ) Act ( “ LAW ” ) .", "On DATE the NORP authorities cancelled the applicant ’s residence registration in GPE , at her request .", "The applicant lodged an appeal with ORG against the judgment of DATE . In a judgment delivered on CARDINAL DATE following adversarial proceedings , ORG dismissed the appeal on the ground that , as the applicant had been illegally resident in GPE since her return from GPE , her deportation was in accordance with LAW . ORG also upheld ORG findings as to the inadmissibility of the request for a residence permit .", "In a judgment of DATE the ORG of ORG dismissed an appeal by the applicant on points of law , finding that the interference complained of had been lawful and proportionate . In particular , the ORG observed that , in the instant case , the applicant ’s right to have CARDINAL addresses or places of residence in CARDINAL different countries had not been in dispute ; the order for her deportation had been based solely on the fact that she had been resident in GPE without a residence permit .", "With the delivery of the ORG ’s judgment the order for the applicant ’s deportation became enforceable .", "In CARDINAL letters sent on DATE and DATE , the applicant and her son requested the head of the ORG to rescind the deportation order and to issue the applicant with a permanent residence permit . In support of their request , they argued that they did not have family ties in any country other than GPE and that the expulsion of the applicant from NORP territory , where they had lived together for DATE , would constitute a serious infringement of their right to respect for their family life . They made explicit reference in that regard to LAW and to similar provisions of LAW .", "NORP By letters dated DATE and DATE respectively , the head of the ORG refused this request and reminded the applicant that she was required to leave GPE immediately or be forcibly expelled .", "After attempting without success to challenge this refusal by means of an administrative appeal to the Interior Minister , PERSON and her son lodged a fresh application with GPE to have the deportation order set aside . By order of DATE the court declared the application inadmissible . On CARDINAL DATE ORG upheld the order . An appeal on points of law by the applicant and her son was dismissed by an order of the ORG of ORG dated DATE .", "On DATE the applicant was arrested by the immigration police ( GPE policija ) and placed in a detention centre for illegal immigrants . On DATE officials of the ORG served a forcible expulsion decision on her ( lēmums par piespiedu izraidīšanu no valsts ) .", "On DATE the applicant was admitted to hospital with acute hypertension . Consequently , on DATE , the head of the ORG stayed execution of the forcible expulsion decision and requested the immigration police to formally order the applicant ’s release from the detention centre . The deportation order of CARDINAL DATE was also suspended at the same time .", "As execution of the forcible expulsion decision had been stayed indefinitely , the applicant continued to reside illegally in GPE .", "On DATE the head of the ORG wrote a letter to ORG in the following terms :", "“ ... [ T]he ... Directorate ... has received your letter concerning the application lodged by PERSON with ORG ... and requesting [ us ] to consider the possibility of issuing her with a permanent residence permit ... under section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW . The reason you cite for your request is the existence of a real risk that a violation of LAW might be found in this case . However , if PERSON were to be granted a sufficiently secure legal status in GPE , ORG would be justified in requesting ORG to dismiss the application .", "...", "I would like first of all to draw your attention to the fact that section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW does not apply to the circumstances of the PERSON case . The ORG has therefore explored other possible solutions .", "...", "Regard being had ... to the relevant circumstances of the PERSON case , and in particular the fact that PERSON has lived and worked within NORP territory for DATE a fact which undoubtedly testifies to the existence of sufficiently strong private and social ties ... – the ORG is prepared , once it has obtained the necessary documentation from PERSON ... , to address an opinion to the Minister of the ORG proposing that she be issued with a temporary residence permit valid for DATE , in accordance with section CARDINAL ) of LAW ...", "...", "Under the terms of ORG [ of ORG ] Directive CARDINAL/CARDINAL/EC concerning the status of third - country nationals who are long - term residents , Member PERSON are required to grant long - term resident status to third - country nationals who have resided legally and continuously within their territory for DATE immediately prior to submission of the relevant application . Accordingly , on expiry of the period of validity of her temporary residence permit , PERSON would be entitled to apply for and obtain the status of permanent resident and to be issued with an ORG residence permit . Remedying PERSON situation in this way would be sufficient to put an end to any possible violation of her rights under LAW .", "With this aim in mind , the ORG has already drawn up a letter inviting PERSON to submit to it the documents required in order to apply for a residence permit . This letter will be sent to her in DATE . It should be pointed out that , in accordance with section CARDINAL of Regulation no . CARDINAL ... on residence permits , [ the person concerned ] in such cases must submit a letter from a legal entity attesting to the necessity ... of his or her remaining in GPE . The ORG notes in that connection that PERSON will in all likelihood be unable to produce such a document . In any event , a positive ... outcome to the case can be achieved only if PERSON herself displays an interest in such a solution .", "Should PERSON herself fail to take steps towards implementing the solution proposed by ORG , [ it should be borne in mind that ] ORG has already acknowledged that , where applicants knowingly decline to take the appropriate measures suggested by the authorities ... , they can not claim to be victims of a violation of their right to respect for their private and family life ... The reference to LAW ... , made in PERSON request , would therefore be without foundation . ”", "By Decree no . CARDINAL of DATE , ORG instructed the Minister of the ORG to issue the applicant with a permanent residence permit “ once the documents required to make such an application have been received ” ( LAW ) .", "NORP By letter of CARDINAL DATE the ORG explained to the applicant how she could regularise her stay by obtaining a permanent residence permit , and invited her to submit the documents required for that purpose under the relevant regulations . It is clear from the case file , however , that the applicant has to date not taken the steps indicated by the ORG .", "NORP legislation on nationality and immigration distinguishes several categories of persons , each with a specific status .", "( a ) NORP citizens ( Latvijas Republikas pilsoņi ) , whose legal status is governed by LAW ( GPE likums ) ;", "( b ) “ permanently resident non - citizens ” ( nepilsoņi ) – that is , citizens of the former GPE who lost their NORP citizenship following the break - up of the GPE in DATE , but have not subsequently obtained any other nationality DATE who are governed by LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) ;", "( c ) asylum - seekers and refugees , whose status is governed by LAW ( Patvēruma likums ) ;", "( d ) “ stateless persons ” ( bezvalstnieki ) in the narrow and specific sense of the term . Prior to DATE their status was governed by ORG , read in conjunction with LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) and , after DATE , with LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . Since DATE their status has been governed by the new LAW , also read in conjunction with LAW ;", "( e ) “ aliens ” in the broad sense of the term ( ārzemnieki ) , a category which includes foreign nationals ( ārvalstnieki ) and stateless persons ( bezvalstnieki ) falling solely within the ambit of LAW ( before DATE ) , and LAW ( since DATE ) .", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of the LAW on the Status of Former GPE Citizens without NORP or other Citizenship ( ( NORP “ PERSON to bijušo ORG pilsoņu statusu , kuriem nav Latvijas vai citas valsts pilsonības ) reads as follows :", "[ Version in force before DATE ] : “ This Act governs citizens of the former GPE resident in GPE ... , who were resident within NORP territory prior to DATE and whose place of residence is registered there , regardless of the status of their housing , and who are not citizens of GPE or any other ORG ; it also governs the minor children of such persons who are not citizens of GPE or any other ORG . ”", "[ Version in force since DATE ] : “ The persons governed by this LAW ‘ non - ORG – shall be those citizens of the former GPE , and their children , who are resident in GPE ... and who satisfy all the following criteria :", "( CARDINAL ) on DATE they were registered as being resident within the territory of GPE , regardless of the status of their housing ; or their last registered place of residence by DATE was in GPE ; or a court has established that before the above - mentioned date they had been resident within NORP territory for not less than DATE ;", "( CARDINAL ) they do not have NORP citizenship ;", "( CARDINAL ) they are not and have not been citizens of any other ORG . ... ”", "...", "The relevant provisions of the Aliens and ORG ( NORP “ ORG ārvalstnieku un bezvalstnieku ieceļošanu un uzturēšanos GPE ) , in force prior to CARDINAL DATE , read as follows :", "“ Any foreigner or stateless person shall be entitled to stay in GPE for DATE [ version in force since CARDINAL DATE : ‘ DATE in the course of CARDINAL of a calendar PERSON ] , provided that he or she has obtained a residence permit in accordance with the provisions of this LAW . ... ”", "“ Aliens or stateless persons may be issued with ...", "( CARDINAL ) a temporary residence permit ;", "( CARDINAL ) a permanent residence permit . ... ”", "“ Permanent residence permits may be obtained by aliens who , on DATE , were officially registered as being resident for an indefinite period within GPE if , at the time of applying for a permanent residence permit , they are officially registered as being resident within GPE and are entered in the register of residents .", "Citizens of the former GPE who acquired the citizenship of another ORG DATE must apply for a permanent residence permit by DATE . ORG of the former GPE who acquired the citizenship of another ORG after DATE must apply within DATE on which they acquired the citizenship of that ORG . ... ”", "“ The person concerned may , within DATE of notification of the decision to refuse a residence permit , appeal against the decision to the head of the ORG , who shall examine the appeal within DATE .", "The Minister of the ORG may , by decree , set aside an unlawful decision by the ORG or the head of the ORG ordering a residence permit to be issued or refused .", "An appeal may be lodged with the courts against the above - mentioned decision or decree by", "( CARDINAL ) ORG the person concerned if he or she is legally resident within the territory of GPE ;", "( CARDINAL ) ORG the person resident in GPE who invited the alien ... whose application for a residence permit has been refused , where the invitation was in connection with family reunification . ... ”", "“ No residence permit shall be issued to a person who", "...", "( CARDINAL ) was deported from GPE during DATE preceding the application ;", "( CARDINAL ) has knowingly supplied false information in order to obtain such a permit ;", "( CARDINAL ) is in possession of false or invalid identity or immigration documents ;", "... ”", "“ The head of the ORG or of the regional office of the ORG shall issue a deportation order ...", "...", "( CARDINAL ) if the alien ... is in the country without a valid visa or residence permit ; ... ”", "“ The individual concerned shall leave the territory of GPE within DATE after the deportation order has been served on him or her , provided that no appeal is lodged against the order in accordance with this section .", "Persons in respect of whom a deportation order is issued may appeal against it within DATE to the head of the ORG , who shall extend the residence permit pending consideration of the appeal .", "An appeal against the decision of the head of the ORG shall lie to the court within whose territorial jurisdiction the ORG ’s headquarters are situated , within DATE after the decision has been served . ”", "At the material time the practical arrangements concerning registration of residence were governed by Regulation no . CARDINAL of CARDINAL DATE on registration of residence for residents of GPE and cancellation thereof ( ORG pierakstīšanas un izrakstīšanas noteikumi Latvijas PERSON ) . Section CARDINAL required any existing registration of residence to be cancelled in order to obtain a new registration in GPE .", "Since DATE LAW cited above is no longer in force ; it was repealed and replaced by LAW ( GPE likums ) of DATE . The relevant provisions of the new Act read as follows :", "“ The present Act uses the following definitions :", "an alien [ ārzemnieks ] – a person who is neither a NORP citizen nor a “ [ permanently resident ] non - citizen ” of GPE ; ... ”", "“ In cases not covered by LAW , the temporary residence permit shall be granted by the Minister of the Interior , where the relevant decision accords with the provisions of international law or the interests of ORG , or on humanitarian grounds . ”", "“ In cases not covered by LAW , the permanent residence permit shall be granted by the Minister of the Interior , where it accords with the interests of the ORG . ”", "“ ... When the time - limit set down [ for submitting an application for a residence permit ] has passed , the head of the ORG may authorise [ the person concerned ] to submit the [ relevant ] documents , where such authorisation accords with the interests of ORG , or on grounds of force majeure or humanitarian grounds . ”", "“ CARDINAL . Within DATE of establishment of the facts detailed in the first and second subparagraphs of the present paragraph , the [ relevant ] official of the ORG shall take a forcible expulsion decision ... , where :", "( CARDINAL ) the alien has not left GPE within DATE of receiving the deportation order ... , and has not appealed against the order to the head of the Directorate ... , or the head of the ORG has dismissed the appeal ;", "...", "NORP In the cases referred to in the first subparagraph of paragraph CARDINAL of this section , no appeal shall lie against the forcible expulsion decision ...", "...", "In the event of a change of circumstances , the head of the ORG may set aside a forcible expulsion decision . ”", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW ( NORP procesa likums ) , in force since DATE , provides :", "“ An administrative act may not be enforced if DATE have elapsed since it became enforceable . In calculating the limitation period , any period during which implementation of the administrative act was suspended shall be deducted . ”", "At the time of the facts reported by the applicant , the relevant provisions of LAW ( Administratīvo pārkāpumu kodekss ) read as follows :", "“ ... Use of a passport which has been replaced by a new passport shall be punishable by a fine of CARDINAL lati [ approximately CARDINAL euros ] . ”", "“ Failure to provide the offices of the NORP ORG ... with the information to be entered in the register of residents within the time allowed shall be punishable by a fine of between CARDINAL and QUANTITY lati [ DATE ] . ”" ]

[ "8" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant is an NORP citizen , born in DATE . He is currently detained in ORG ( GPE ) with a view to his extradition to GPE . He is represented before the ORG by PERSON , a lawyer practising in PERSON - en - GPE .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "On DATE the applicant was arrested at GPE airport under a warrant for his arrest , dated DATE , on charges of inter alia obtaining property by deception . The arrest warrant had been issued by ORG at the request of ORG .", "On DATE the applicant was extradited to GPE and was remanded in custody in FAC , GPE .", "The criminal charges brought against the applicant concerned events which occurred at DATE resulting in a loss of MONEY to ORG at GPE . The applicant , who was highly experienced in shipping , banking and international trade , was suspected of having purported , with the assistance of others , to be able to supply a large confinement of sugar to a NORP Company . There was no sugar , but the applicant by selecting a vessel about to sail from GPE to GPE with a cargo of sugar and , with reference to that vessel and its cargo , forged the documentation which ORG required to support the letter of credit before it would advance the money . Because the bank ’s payment was made before the due date , it was made before the absence of a sugar cargo could become apparent .", "In DATE , a NORP national , PERSON , who according to the prosecution was the applicant 's agent , pleaded guilty to obtaining from ORG a bill of exchange by deception , and to procuring the execution of a valuable security by deception . He received a DATE prison sentence .", "Soon after his arrival in GPE the applicant engaged and personally paid for the services of a large firm of primarily commercial law solicitors . He secured the payment of ORG CARDINAL,CARDINAL.CARDINAL into the solicitors’ client account between CARDINAL DATE and DATE . CARDINAL of this amount went on fees before DATE . A guarantor , PERSON , had also pledged the sum of GBP CARDINAL . PERSON subsequently agreed to increase the amount pledged to ORG and gave security for her guarantee in the form of a mortgage on a residence in GPE , GPE , where she lived together with the applicant . The applicant had provided the money for PERSON to purchase the property from her former husband . The value of the property was estimated to be GBP QUANTITY . It was not subject to a mortgage .", "On DATE the applicant signed an application form for legal aid to cover the costs of his defence . The form submitted by the applicant contained no information as to income or assets . According to the applicant he could not realise any of his assets while in detention . Since the application form was incomplete the applicant ’s legal aid request could only be considered by ORG on DATE , DATE on which the trial was due to commence . The applicant ’s solicitor helped him to prepare a detailed Statement of Assets and Liabilities for submission to ORG .", "Meanwhile , on DATE the applicant 's ORG ( “ FAC ) informed the trial judge , Judge PERSON , at a hearing in chambers in the presence of prosecution counsel , that a successful application for legal aid would necessarily be fraudulent . The applicant ’s counsel stated before the court :", "“ I do not think in all conscience a legal aid application can be filled in with sufficient openness to satisfy the court . It certainly could not satisfy me and , if it were to be filled in and signed as a result of my enquiries , I would feel so squalidly unhappy as to be positively professionally embarrassed and have to say to the court that I would be disinclined to act on that legal aid basis . ”", "The applicant ’s junior counsel agreed with this view .", "Counsel for the prosecution observed at the hearing that the applicant needed to be formally asked about his intentions concerning his legal representation , because once his defence counsel had withdrawn , he would be entitled to have alternative counsel . Counsel for the prosecution further observed that it would be helpful if the court record mentioned the applicant ’s views about this since he would not like it to be said later that the applicant misunderstood the situation and felt that he was obliged to go on and defend himself and had therefore been put at a grave disadvantage when other possible options were open to him .", "The Statement of Assets and ORG finally submitted to ORG disclosed that the applicant had the following assets :", "- The applicant was the owner of a shoe factory in GPE which , according to him , was no longer profitable .", "- The applicant had opened a bank account in GPE into which he had paid MONEY , the purpose of which was to invest in a shoe factory there . However , following his arrest in GPE , the money was not returned to him . He had instructed his lawyers in GPE to try to recover this money on his behalf .", "- The applicant had an interest in CARDINAL football teams in GPE . He had received an offer for CARDINAL of the teams of CARDINAL . He was reimbursed MONEY ( ITL ) in DATE , after having made a deposit of ITL MONEY for a second football team , and he did not make any money from the third football team .", "- The applicant owned a Mercedes Spider which , according to his estimation , was worth GBP CARDINAL .", "- The applicant ’s ORG watch originally worth CARDINAL had been damaged and was therefore worthless . His PERSON watch was worth about GBP CARDINAL,CARDINAL . All of this jewellery was in GPE .", "- A house in which the applicant lived in GPE , GPE , and which was worth MONEY was owned by PERSON , the woman with whom he lived and the above - mentioned guarantor . The applicant had personally paid MONEY for the house DATE .", "- A large flat in the most expensive area of Genoa , where the applicant ’s ex - wife and daughter lived , was worth MONEY . It was owned by a company . His daughter was the holder of the shares and PERSON was the manager of the company . The applicant was unable to remove the bank charges on this property .", "- The applicant had bought a country property worth MONEY . There was a mortgage on this property of CARDINAL of its value . The property was registered in the name of PERSON parents .", "- In DATE the applicant made an investment in DATE of MONEY in a warehouse in GPE . Because he was detained it had not been possible to arrange for any reimbursements .", "- The applicant ’s only income was the money he received from his activity as a consultant and amounted officially to MONEY per year ; unofficially it was CARDINAL as much .", "- The total cost of university fees which he had to pay was MONEY CARDINAL per year . Maintenance to his ex - wife was about GBP DATE .", "- Since his arrest the applicant had no income at all and large sums of arrears had built up . In the period from DATE to DATE , Ms. NORP and his business associates had paid a total of GBP CARDINAL to his NORP solicitor .", "The Government drew attention to the fact that the Statement of Assets and Liabilities made no mention of the sum of GBP CARDINAL which remained in the applicant ’s solicitor ’s client account . Nor was any reference made to ORG guarantee to provide GBP CARDINAL towards the cost of the applicant ’s defence . The Government further stated that the Statement of Assets and Liabilities made mention of the applicant having in DATE ( date incorrectly stated by the Government , DATE ) MONEY in bank accounts outside GPE . The applicant replied that there is no evidence whatsoever of his having any such accounts at the time referred to by the Government .", "The applicant claimed that by DATE what was left of his property was no longer at his disposal .", "In a letter accompanying the submission to ORG , dated DATE , the applicant ’s solicitors stated , inter alia :", "“ … We understand that if a defendant is assessed to have CARDINAL CARDINAL worth of capital that a court will order that he pay a contribution to any legal aid ; it would appear on the details that Mr Caresana supplied to us DATE that he has CARDINAL in capital in GPE .", "We are unable to verify any of the valuations given by PERSON but would stress that PERSON does not share the optimistic view of PERSON as to the assets’ worth .", "In the circumstances , it appears to us that if any legal aid certificate were granted by the court , due to the serious and complex nature of the case , it would involve a substantial contribution being ordered . From our own experience of the case , we are of the opinion that whilst PERSON remains in custody at FAC he would not be able to satisfy any such condition .", "It is regrettable that in the circumstances my firm is not prepared to represent Mr ORG without private funding . Counsel can not represent Mr Caresana unless their fees are met . It would appear that he is unlikely to obtain a legal aid certificate and therefore in the circumstances the only way forward would appear to be for PERSON ORG to represent himself .", "… Mr Caresana knows the case very well . He is an intelligent individual and whilst he has no knowledge of LANGUAGE legal procedure , he has an in - depth knowledge of the facts of the case . Given all assistance by the court , he should be able to conduct his own Defence . ”", "At the hearing on the legal aid application before Judge PERSON in chambers on CARDINAL DATE , the applicant ’s solicitor described the difficulties which the applicant was experiencing in procuring funding for his defence either through the sale of his own assets or other means . The solicitor informed Judge PERSON that an unsuccessful attempt had been made to sell PERSON ’s flat in GPE , GPE . As to the possible sale of CARDINAL of the applicant ’s football clubs , the solicitor observed that the applicant was concerned as to whether the offer he received of GBP CARDINAL was genuine and that in any event the club was saddled with debts in excess of that sum . Judge PERSON referred the applicant ’s solicitor to LAW of ORG DATE according to which representation shall not be granted to a person for any purpose unless it appears that his financial resources are such that he requires assistance in meeting the costs of the defence . Judge PERSON asked the solicitor :", "“ ... would you contend that [ the applicant ’s ] financial resources are such that he requires assistance in meeting the costs of his defence ; or would you recognise that really is straining to the limit the words of the regulation ? ”", "The applicant ’s solicitor replied :", "“ I would say we would be straining the regulation . I have no doubt about that ... ”", "In deciding to reject the applicant ’s request for legal aid , Judge PERSON pointed out that he was very reluctant to embark upon a trial involving an unrepresented defendant and was “ positively straining to find a way to grant [ the applicant ] legal aid ” . However , in his opinion the applicant ’s Statement of Assets and Liabilities showed that he had substantial assets upon which he could call if necessary . In the judge ’s opinion , the applicant ’s solicitor was unable to provide any satisfactory answers about the applicant ’s assets and even the solicitor seemed to acknowledge that it was unlikely that legal aid would be granted .", "Immediately before the trial opened Judge PERSON , in the absence of the jury , informed the applicant that if he needed his assistance in any way he should ask for it and that if he wanted to raise any points in the absence of the jury this facility could be granted to him .", "DATE and DATE the applicant stood trial at ORG . The applicant represented himself . During the trial CARDINAL documents were submitted to the court and CARDINAL witnesses heard . The transcript of the summing up , which was spread over DATE , runs to CARDINAL pages .", "On DATE the jury found the applicant guilty of all the charges , namely theft , obtaining property by deception , procuring execution of a valuable security by deception and using a false instrument with intent . The judge sentenced him to a total of DATE imprisonment .", "The applicant appealed against his conviction and sentence to ORG .", "In a letter dated DATE , the applicant ’s new solicitors , ORG , asked for legal aid in connection with the appeal .", "By letter dated DATE a case lawyer in ORG forwarded a Statement of Means for completion by the applicant .", "On DATE ORG was returned , signed and filled in by the applicant together with a handwritten memorandum which he had dictated to his solicitor . The applicant declared in ORG that he had no savings or articles of value . In the accompanying memorandum it was stated that PERSON had no assets apart from her home and that the applicant ’s Mercedes car could not be sold because the ownership documents were held by the NORP authorities .", "In taking its decision on legal aid , ORG relied only on the documentation submitted by ORG The latter confirmed that they did not have sight of the applicant ’s earlier Statement of Assets and ORG ; nor did they provide ORG with the transcript of the hearing in ORG on DATE before Judge PERSON . The Government are unable to confirm whether the transcript and the applicant ’s Statement of Assets and ORG came into the possession of ORG before or after the decision to grant the applicant legal aid . The applicant maintains that ORG was fully aware that that he had been refused legal aid for the purposes of his trial . He observes that the officials in ORG had full access to his case file including his Statement of Assets and Liabilities .", "On DATE , and on the sole basis of the applicant ’s new Statement of Means and the accompanying handwritten declaration , ORG granted the applicant legal aid for a conference with counsel and for the perfection of his grounds of appeal . Legal aid was later granted for the preparation and presentation of an application for leave to appeal and for the full hearing of the appeal once leave had been granted .", "The applicant produced extensive grounds of appeal ( CARDINAL hand - written pages ) . With the assistance of his defence counsel the applicant 's grounds of appeal were amended and reduced to CARDINAL grounds of appeal . The applicant alleged in particular that he was put at an unfair disadvantage in conducting his defence because his mother tongue was NORP . He also complained that he had no legal representation at his trial and that the trial judge refused to adjourn the trial to enable the key defence witness NORP to give evidence . In the applicant ’s submission , this witness , a NORP lawyer who speaks NORP , would have been able to prove that CARDINAL witnesses had not told the truth at his trial .", "The hearing before ORG took place on CARDINAL and DATE . The applicant was represented by counsel . On DATE ORG allowed his appeal against his conviction on the charge of theft but upheld the other convictions and the sentences imposed .", "ORG found that there was no substance whatsoever in the applicant 's allegation that he was put at an unfair disadvantage because the trial was conducted in LANGUAGE . In particular , the cross - examination of a witness showed the applicant to be not only astute but also at ease in the language which he was using to formulate the questions . Furthermore , he had the services of an interpreter whom he chose not to use . The applicant ’s arguments had been set out in detail and developed at considerable length in oral submissions before ORG . The jury had been told more than once to make every allowance for the applicant ’s lack of legal representation as well as for the fact that LANGUAGE was not his native language .", "As to the absence of legal representation and the refusal of legal aid , ORG observed , inter alia :", "“ … prosecution counsel and the trial judge took elaborate steps to assist the [ applicant ] to present his case . He was given advanced warning of when witnesses were to be called and procedural matters were carefully explained to him , such as the effect of formal admissions of fact , the effect of evidence being read , the need to put his case in cross - examination , and so forth . DATE the court sat at TIME to deal with any problem which the applicant might be experiencing before the trial continued . In addition the applicant was allowed time as and when he required it . …", "Originally the [ applicant ] had legal representation for which he paid . As the trial was about to start it became clear to the representatives that no more payment would be forthcoming . It is quite clear from the transcripts we have seen that if the [ applicant ’s ] legal representatives had been satisfied that the [ applicant ] could not pay they would have supported an application for ORG , but they were not so satisfied and that is what they told the judge . The [ applicant ] had in fact signed an application form for ORG on DATE , but it contained no information as to income or assets , and boldly asserted that the Appellant could not realise any assets because he was in custody in GPE . On DATE his solicitor assisted him to prepare a statement of assets and liabilities , and that document we have seen . Having seen it we can understand why the [ applicant ’s ] lawyers felt unable to support an application for ORG . In those circumstances it seems to us that the trial judge had really no alternative but to proceed as he did . In general , ORG can not be granted to anybody unless it appears to the body entitled to grant it that the financial resources of the applicant are such to make him eligible for it ( see section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) of LAW DATE ) . As was pointed out during the course of argument , were it otherwise a defendant of ample means facing serious charges could abuse the system with impunity . He could simply decline to pay for representation and fail to provide adequate information as to his resources confident in the knowledge that in order to facilitate the trial process ORG would be granted to him … . ”", "As regards the witness NORP whom the applicant wanted to call , ORG pointed out that DATE proposed , namely DATE , was not the only date on which this witness could have given evidence . Subsequent enquiries revealed that in reality NORP was simply not prepared to attend . The suggestion that the court was not prepared to wait for him was unfounded . According to ORG , the evidence called on behalf of the applicant did not finish until DATE , and the court in fact adjourned for DATE in order to enable the applicant ’s final defence witness to attend .", "On DATE the applicant was transferred from FAC to GPE in accordance with ORG . He served his sentence first in GPE , then in GPE . He was released from prison on CARDINAL DATE .", "On DATE the applicant was arrested in GPE ( GPE ) and remanded in custody in PERSON with a view to his extradition to GPE following his final conviction and sentence in bankruptcy proceedings in GPE ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , Mr PERSON , is a NORP national who was born in DATE and lives in GPE . ORG ( “ the Government ” ) are represented by their Agent , PERSON , former Representative of GPE at ORG .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "On DATE ORG upheld the applicant ’s action against ORG and awarded him a lump sum of MONEY ( RUB ) in compensation for health damage and RUB MONEY in DATE payments starting from DATE . ORG also noted that DATE payments were to be adjusted to increases of the minimum statutory wage . The judgment was upheld on appeal and became final on DATE .", "The lump sum was paid in DATE and DATE after the judgment became final . The DATE payments were made on time . However , the adjustment the authorities made was wrong and the applicant brought a civil action for damages .", "On DATE ORG , in the final instance , dismissed the applicant ’s claims .", "On DATE ORG of GPE granted the applicant ’s request for reopening of the proceedings due to newly discovered circumstances .", "On DATE ORG upheld the applicant ’s action against ORG , made an adjustment of the DATE payments the applicant asked for and awarded him a lump sum of RUB CARDINAL,CARDINAL.CARDINAL representing arrears in DATE payments of compensation for damage for the period from DATE to CARDINAL DATE and RUB CARDINAL,CARDINAL.CARDINAL in DATE payments from DATE . ORG noted that DATE payments were to be adjusted to increases of the coefficient of the minimum subsistence level in GPE . The judgment was not appealed against and became final .", "The lump sum was paid DATE and DATE after the judgment became final . The DATE payments were paid on time . The judgment was not enforced as regarded the adjustment and the applicant sued the authorities .", "On DATE ORG found for the applicant and awarded him RUB CARDINAL,CARDINAL.CARDINAL representing arrears in DATE payments for the period from DATE to CARDINAL DATE and RUB CARDINAL in DATE payments to be increased accordingly . The judgment was not appealed against and became final on DATE .", "The lump sum was paid DATE and DATE after the judgment became final . The DATE payments were paid on time , but the authorities again failed to adjust the DATE payments and the applicant brought another action against them .", "On DATE ORG awarded the applicant RUB CARDINAL,CARDINAL.CARDINAL representing arrears in DATE payments for the period from DATE to DATE and RUB CARDINAL,CARDINAL.CARDINAL in DATE payments to be increased according to the requirements of law . The judgment was not appealed against and became final on DATE . The lump sum was paid DATE and DATE after the judgment became final . The DATE payments were paid on time ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicants were born in DATE and DATE respectively and are currently being held in ORG and ORG in GPE .", "The applicants joined ORG in GPE ( “ the ORG ” , also known as the “ FAC ” ) in DATE and DATE respectively . They arrived in GPE on unspecified dates . They lived in PERSON , where ORG members were accommodated in GPE , until they left the organisation in DATE and DATE respectively , because they disagreed with the ORG ’s goals and methods . After leaving the ORG , they went to ORG ( “ TIPF ” ) , a camp created by GPE forces in GPE . This facility was subsequently named ORG ( “ ARC ” ) .", "On DATE and DATE , after being interviewed , the applicants were recognised as refugees by ORG in GPE during their stay in GPE . As regards the first applicant , the ORG found that he had a well - founded fear of persecution in GPE on grounds of his political opinion , his character and the firm conviction with which he held his political opinions . In particular , having regard to the applicant ’s link to the ORG for DATE , to the treatment of members of the FAC in GPE and to his explicit opinions on the need for a secular ORG in his country of origin , the ORG considered that the applicant had established to a reasonable degree that his situation would be followed up by the security agencies which would make his stay in GPE intolerable if he returned there .", "As regards the second applicant , the ORG found that he had a well - founded fear of violations by NORP authorities of , inter alia , his right to life through an arbitrary or unlawful deprivation of life , freedom from torture , ill - treatment , arbitrary arrest or detention , as well as his right to a fair and public trial . In particular , having regard to the applicant ’s membership of the ORG and to his political opinions and the treatment of actual and suspected members of the ORG and its sympathisers in GPE , the ORG considered that the evidentiary threshold of “ reasonable likelihood ” that the applicant would face treatment such as arbitrary detention and torture was satisfied .", "In DATE the ORG was closed down and the applicants , along with other former ORG members , were transferred to northern GPE .", "On an unspecified date the applicants arrived in GPE . They were arrested by security forces and , as they had entered NORP territory illegally , were deported back to GPE on DATE .", "They immediately re - entered GPE .", "On DATE they were arrested by road checkpoint gendarmerie officers from the GPE gendarme station , in GPE , as their passports were found to be false .", "On DATE the applicants made statements to the gendarmerie officers . The applicants contended that they would be executed if returned to GPE , due to their opposition to ORG policies , and that their lives had also been at risk in GPE . They stated that they wished to go to GPE in order to request asylum and leave for GPE .", "The applicants were subsequently placed in the ORG department at the police headquarters in the LOC district of GPE .", "On DATE the NORP public prosecutor filed a bill of indictment with ORG , charging the applicants with illegal entry into GPE .", "On DATE the applicants were brought before ORG . Noting that the applicants would be deported , the judge communicated the bill of indictment to the applicants and took their statements regarding the charge against them . The applicants submitted that they had left GPE as they faced a risk of death in that country and that they had come to GPE illegally , with the assistance of a smuggler , in order to go to GPE where they had family . The GPE court convicted the applicants as charged but decided to defer the imposition of a sentence for DATE in accordance with LAW . The applicants were subsequently taken back to the LOC police headquarters .", "According to the applicants’ submissions , on DATE the national authorities once again attempted to deport them , this time to GPE . The applicants prevented their deportation by speaking LANGUAGE and pretending not to understand LANGUAGE . Consequently , the NORP authorities refused to admit them to GPE . In their submissions to ORG , the Government made no mention of the purported deportation of the applicants to GPE . Instead , they noted that the applicants would be required to be deported to LOC , where they had come from .", "On DATE the director of the GPE branch of ORG , PERSON , went to the LOC police headquarters to visit the applicants at the request of the ORG office . According to PERSON submissions , on DATE of his visit the first applicant had attempted to commit suicide as he had been told by a police officer that he would be deported to GPE . The police had not allowed Mr Şengül to meet the applicants .", "On DATE and CARDINAL and DATE the applicants made further statements to the police and contended that they were former members of the ORG . The first applicant noted that he had had LANGUAGE , LANGUAGE and LANGUAGE lessons as well as military training when he was in the organisation . He also stated that , while in the ORG , he had been a photographer and taught LANGUAGE . He said that he had not been involved in any armed activity . The second applicant stated that , apart from the aforementioned languages , he had also learned NORP when he had been a member of the PMOI . He contended that he had lived in the TIPF for two years and had never been involved in any armed activity . Both applicants stated that they had come to GPE in order to apply to the ORG , following advice by ORG officials to do so .", "The applicants submitted identical petitions in NORP to the police in GPE , which read as follows :", "“ We entered GPE with the assistance of a smuggler from the city of PERSON . We are refugees and used to reside in GPE , GPE . We came to GPE in order to contact the ORG and ask it to process our [ resettlement ] cases . The ORG ’s headquarters in GPE was blown up by terrorists and it no longer has an office there . We request to stay in GPE temporarily so that our cases can be processed . Our friends advised us that the only way to contact the ORG was to come to GPE . We need a lawyer before we communicate [ with you ] further . ”", "The applicants signed these petitions . They also wrote down their ORG case numbers , the names of their parents and their dates of birth .", "The applicants were held at the LOC police headquarters , in GPE until DATE , when they were transferred to the ORG Foreigners’ Admission and ORG .", "On DATE the applicants drafted petitions addressed to the GPE governor ’s office and sought temporary asylum in GPE . According to the information in the case file , the applicants have not yet received any reply to their petitions .", "On DATE the second applicant married another NORP asylum seeker held in the GPE Foreigners’ Admission and ORG . The director of the ORG assisted them in obtaining their marriage certificate .", "On DATE the second applicant had a power of attorney notarised for PERSON , and subsequently PERSON , lawyers practising in GPE , to represent him in GPE . The notary agreed to notarise the power of attorney on the basis of the aforementioned marriage certificate .", "On DATE the second applicant ’s lawyer filed a petition with ORG , challenging the second applicant ’s detention . According to the information in the case file , the second applicant has not yet received any reply to his petition .", "On DATE , upon a request from the ORG , the Government of GPE agreed to examine the applicants’ cases for resettlement there . According to the information in the case file , that examination is still pending .", "Article CARDINAL of LAW provides , inter alia :", "“ All acts or decisions of the authorities are subject to judicial review ...", "If the implementation of an administrative act would result in damage which is difficult or impossible to compensate , and at the same time this act is clearly unlawful , a stay of execution may be decided upon , stating the reasons therefor ... ”", "Section CARDINAL of Law no . CARDINAL provides that anyone whose personal rights have been violated as a result of an allegedly unlawful administrative decision or act can bring an action for annulment of that decision or act .", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of the same PERSON stipulates that an application to the administrative courts does not automatically suspend implementation of the decision or act in question . Under section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) , the administrative courts can order a stay of execution if the decision or act in question is manifestly unlawful and if its implementation would cause irreversible harm .", "Sections CARDINAL and CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of PERSON no . DATE , in so far as relevant , read as follows :", "“ Foreigners who come to the NORP borders without a passport or identity documents or with an invalid passport or identity documents shall not be authorised to enter .", "Foreigners who claim that they have lost their passport or identity documents while travelling may be authorised , pending an investigation conducted by ORG , to enter ... and on condition that they can be accommodated at a place designated by the local governor . ... ”", "“ Persons who are forbidden to enter GPE are ...", "( CARDINAL ) Those who are perceived to have come for the purpose of destroying the security and public order of GPE or of assisting or conspiring with persons who want to destroy the security and public order of GPE . ”", "Sections DATE and CARDINAL of Law no . CARDINAL read as follows :", "“ Foreigners whose stay in the territory of GPE is considered to be incompatible with public safety and the political or administrative requirements of ORG Interior shall be invited to leave GPE within a fixed time - limit . Those who do not leave GPE after the expiry of the time - limit may be deported . ”", "“ Persons who are to be deported but can not leave GPE due to their inability to obtain a passport or for other reasons are obliged to reside at places designated by ORG . ”", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of PERSON no . PERSON , as amended by PERSON no . CARDINAL of CARDINAL DATE , provides as follows :", "“ ORG bodies , police departments , other public institutions and agencies , State economic enterprises , private and public banks , notaries , insurance companies and foundations are under an obligation to assist attorneys in carrying out their duties . These entities are obliged to submit requested information and documents to the lawyers for review , subject to any contrary provisions in the laws establishing these entities . Obtaining copies of such documents is subject to the presentation of a power of attorney . In pending cases , documents may be obtained from the court without waiting until DATE of the hearing . ”", "GPE has ratified the DATE Convention relating to ORG thereto . However , it maintains the geographical limitation provided for in LAW by which it assumes the obligation to provide protection only to refugees originating from LOC .", "On DATE the Regulation on the procedures and principles related to possible population movements and foreigners arriving in GPE , either as individuals or in groups , wishing to seek asylum either from GPE or requesting a residence permit in order to seek asylum from another country ( “ the DATE LAW ) , came into force by a decision of ORG no . DATE . Under LAW , although formally excluded from the protection of the DATE LAW , non - NORP asylum seekers may apply to ORG for “ temporary asylum seeker status ” pending their resettlement in a third country by the ORG .", "DATE Regulation defines a refugee and asylum seeker as follows :", "“ Refugee : A foreign national who , as a result of events occurring in LOC and owing to a well - founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race , religion , nationality , membership of a particular social group or political opinion , is outside the country of his or her nationality and is unable or , owing to such fear , is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country , or who , not having a nationality and being outside the country of his or her former habitual residence as a result of such events , is unable or , owing to such fear , is unwilling to return to it ;", "Temporary Asylum Seeker : A foreign national who owing to a well - founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race , religion , nationality , membership of a particular social group or political opinion , is outside the country of his or her nationality and is unable or , owing to such fear , is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country , or who , not having a nationality and being outside the country of his or her former habitual residence as a result of such events , is unable or , owing to such fear , is unwilling to return to it . ”", "On DATE Articles CARDINAL , CARDINAL , DATE , DATE and DATE of the DATE Regulation were amended by a decision of ORG ( decision no . CARDINAL ) .", "Articles DATE , CARDINAL and DATE of the DATE Regulation now provide as follows :", "“ Foreign nationals entering GPE legally to seek asylum or to request a residence permit in order to seek asylum in another country shall apply without delay to the governor ’s office of the city where they are present . Those who enter GPE illegally are required to apply without delay to the governor ’s office of the province through which they entered the country .", "Those who fail to apply to the authorities within the shortest reasonable time shall state the reasons for failing to do so and shall co - operate with the competent authorities . ”", "“ With regard to individual foreigners who either seek asylum from GPE or request a residence permit in order to seek asylum from another country the governors’ offices shall", "a ) identify the applicants and take their photographs and fingerprints .", "b ) conduct interviews with the applicants in accordance with the DATE LAW relating to ORG . For interviewing and decision making , staff shall be appointed at the governors’ offices which are authorised to conduct interviews and to take decisions .", "c ) send the interview documents along with the comments of the interviewer and the decision made on the case of the applicant , in accordance with the authority granted under LAW , to ORG .", "d ) pending further instructions from ORG , accommodate the foreigner in a centre or a guest house considered appropriate by ORG , or authorise the foreigner to reside freely in a place which shall be designated by ORG .", "e ) take further steps following instructions from ORG . ”", "“ Decisions on the applications of individual foreigners , either seeking asylum from GPE or requesting a residence permit in order to seek asylum from another country , shall be adopted by ORG in accordance with the DATE LAW relating to ORG DATE relating to ORG .", "When it considers it necessary , ORG may transfer the decision - making authority to the governors’ offices .", "The decision taken by a governor ’s office or ORG shall be communicated to the foreigner through the governor ’s office .", "Those foreigners whose applications are accepted shall be accommodated in a guesthouse deemed appropriate by ORG or shall freely reside in a place which shall be designated by ORG .", "Those whose applications are not accepted may appeal to the relevant governor ’s office within DATE .", "For a speedier decision , the period for lodging an appeal may be reduced by ORG , if deemed necessary .", "The statement , other information and documents supporting the claim submitted by the applicant appealing the decision shall be sent to ORG by the governor ’s office . Any appeal shall be decided by ORG and the final decision shall be notified to the foreigner .", "The situation of those whose appeals are rejected by a final decision shall be assessed within the framework of the general provisions regarding foreigners . Within this framework , those foreigners who are not eligible for a residence permit shall be notified that they must leave GPE within a time - limit determined by the administration . Foreigners who do not leave the country shall be deported from GPE by the governors’ offices upon receipt of instructions from ORG , or ex officio by the governors’ offices where the direct decision - making authority has been transferred to them . ”", "On DATE the Minister of the ORG issued a Circular containing a directive regarding the procedures and principles to be applied when implementing LAW Regulation ( “ Circular no . CARDINAL ” ) within the context of the process of GPE ’s accession to ORG . The ORG contains guidelines regarding , inter alia , asylum ORG access to asylum procedures , the manner in which asylum applications and interviews should be processed , the procedure as to the review of decisions refusing temporary asylum , the residence of asylum seekers in GPE and their transfers to other provinces , health assistance to asylum seekers , the education of their children and the relation between ORG and the ORG .", "Regarding the issue of access to the asylum and temporary asylum procedure , Circular no . CARDINAL reiterates the content of DATE and CARDINAL of the DATE Regulation . As to residence permits for asylum and temporary asylum seekers , section CARDINAL of the Circular provides that persons who have applied for asylum or temporary asylum in GPE , except for those listed in section CARDINAL , shall ex officio be granted a residence permit for DATE which shall subsequently be extended ex officio for DATE .", "Section CARDINAL of Circular no . CARDINAL , in so far as relevant , provides as follows :", "“ Applicants shall be informed by the governors’ offices of the decision of ORG regarding their requests . If the decision is positive , the refugee / temporary asylum seeker shall be granted a residence permit upon receipt of the instructions of ORG .", "Negative decision at first instance", "If the first decision taken by ORG applicant ’s request is negative , the applicant shall be informed that she or he may lodge an objection against the decision within DATE in accordance with LAW .", "The objection may be made in written form or at an interview , if the applicant requests CARDINAL .", "The residence permit of an applicant who has lodged an objection against the first decision given in his or her regard shall be extended and subsequent action shall be taken upon the instructions of ORG .", "The applicant can submit any information or document in support of his or her objection . The applicant may lodge an objection with the assistance of a legal representative or an adviser or directly through his or her representative .", "If the applicant has not lodged an appeal , he or she shall be ordered to leave the country within DATE . A check shall be carried out to ensure that he or she has left by DATE .", "If the person has not left within the specified period , action shall be taken to deport him or her pursuant to the general provisions regarding foreign nationals .", "Final decision", "The petition containing the applicant ’s objection or the information and documents concerning the additional interview shall be sent to ORG and action shall be taken upon the latter ’s instructions .", "If an applicant is given refugee or asylum seeker status following the examination conducted by ORG , he or she shall be granted a residence permit upon the instructions of ORG .", "An applicant whose objection has been rejected can leave the country voluntarily .", "Residence permits as a result of subsidiary protection and protection for humanitarian considerations", "The cases of applicants whose objections have been rejected by a final decision are assessed within the framework of the general provisions contained in LAW concerning foreigners .", "This assessment concerns whether the applicant risks incurring serious harm , in the light of LAW , and whether it is necessary to grant him or her subsidiary protection .", "Regard is also had to whether the applicant should be granted a residence permit for humanitarian reasons of health , education , family unity , etc . , or if he or she has applied to the administrative courts .", "Those who are not granted a residence permit within the context of subsidiary protection or protection for humanitarian reasons shall be notified of the decisions taken in their respect . They shall further be informed that they must leave the country within DATE , unless another time - limit is set by ORG .", "If the person has not left within the specified period , action shall be taken to deport him or her pursuant to the general provisions regarding foreign nationals .", "If the foreigner does not leave the country and applies to the administrative court , ORG Interior shall be informed . Action shall be taken upon receipt of instructions from the Ministry ... ”", "Section CARDINAL of Circular no . CARDINAL , in so far as relevant , provides as follows :", "“ ... In order to prevent abuse of international protection and to identify those who actually need international protection , those who belong to the categories below shall not be granted residence permits ex officio : ...", "Persons who claim asylum following their arrest by security forces ; ...", "Persons who claim asylum following their arrest by security forces while leaving GPE illegally ;", "... If the applicant ’s request is rejected following the first examination by ORG and if the applicant does not lodge an objection , he or she shall be deported .", "If the applicant wishes to object to the decision , he or she shall be given DATE in which to do so . The objection and the documents relating to the objection shall be sent to ORG as a matter of urgency . Action shall be taken upon receipt of instructions from the Ministry ... ”", "Under section CARDINAL of Circular no . CARDINAL , it is compulsory to provide identity documents for all applicants and asylum seekers / refugees residing in GPE within DATE of receipt of their applications .", "On DATE the Government of GPE adopted a National Action Plan for the adoption of ORG in the fields of asylum and immigration . LAW envisages , inter alia , the adoption of a new asylum law .", "On DATE the representative of PERSON , an NORP national recognised as a refugee under the ORG ’s mandate and who was held in a ORG Admission and ORG at the relevant time , lodged a case with ORG . He requested that the court annul the decision of the Ministry not to release his client and order a stay of execution of that decision pending the proceedings . On DATE ORG ordered a stay of execution of the decision of ORG and decided that PERSON should be released . On DATE he was released .", "In the report entitled “ Information Regarding Iranian Refugees in the Temporary Interview Protection Facility ( ex - TIPF / ARC ) at PERSON , GPE ” , submitted to the Court by the applicants , ORG noted , inter alia , the following :", "“ ... CARDINAL . NORP ... The NORP government ’s treatment of known or suspected members of or sympathisers with the ORG has reportedly been extremely severe , with long prison sentences and CARDINAL of executions in DATE that followed the Islamic revolution . Execution of ORG members continue to be reported on a sporadic basis , including extra - judicial killings in foreign countries . As a result many ORG NLA / ORG members , or even supporters or family members , are likely to have a well - founded fear of persecution on political grounds . ...", "NORP ex - PMOI refugees are considered at particular risk in GPE . The ORG has been perceived by some in GPE as having been affiliated with the former NORP regime of PERSON given the protection that the regime afforded . Others have alleged that ORG units were involved in the crushing of the DATE uprising by NORP and NORP groups which were supported by the NORP authorities . Groups that were either allied to or perceived to have received preferential treatment from the regime of PERSON are subject to threats and violence , the NORP being on example .", "With deepening links between GPE and the current NORP - led government coalition in GPE as well as links between the NORP government and NORP - based militias , there is a growing concern that the safety of the ex - PMOI refugees is increasingly at risk . In a meeting with ORG in GPE in DATE , the NORP authorities stated their intention to expel ORG NLA and former ORG members from GPE within DATE . In DATE ORG was informed that in DATE , threats had been made against the residents of FAC While these credible threats have not been directed towards the refugees at the ARC , but rather at those being maintained at camp PERSON , ORG considers the refugees at the ARC to be in similar danger given their shared past affiliation with the ORG . ...", "Given the changes in bilateral relations between governments of GPE and GPE noted above , as well as the perceived affiliation of ex - ORG members with the former regime , local integration in GPE , the country of asylum , is not a feasible durable solution for these refugees . This applies equally to the Northern NORP governorates ( KRG ) . PERSON also holds a hostile view towards former ORG members given the group ’s perceived connections to the former regime and refused to consider further ORG ’s relocation request . ...", "ORG currently does not facilitate or promote voluntary repatriation of refugees from GPE to GPE . In ORG ( “ ICRC ” ) facilitated with limited logistic support the voluntary repatriation to GPE of some CARDINAL ORG members from camp PERSON who transited through the ARC . Very little independent information is available as to what happened to these individuals , as neither PERSON nor ORG is able to monitor the situation of returnees . ORG received , however , credible reports that some of the returnees were forced/“invited ” to make public confessions and accusations against the ORG on television after their return . An organisation of victims of the ORG composed of persons presented as former ORG members ( including returnees ) called GPE has been reporting to ORG that returnees did not face any problem upon return to GPE . None of these returnees either from FAC or from the ARC has approached any ORG offices . The NORP authorities continue to designate in the media the ORG members as “ ORG ” ( i.e. the “ NORP ” ) .", "Reportedly , at CARDINAL point in time GPE was prepared to accept the return of ORG members from GPE , with the exception of CARDINAL high profile members , if they expressed regrets for their past acts . This promise of amnesty , however , has not been officially reiterated by President PERSON . In DATE , in a letter from ORG to ORG , ORG asked the NORP authorities to confirm this verbally - declared amnesty as well as to provide unhindered and direct access by ORG to returnees . No reply was ever received . ORG has reiterated this request without success to ORG on various occasions in DATE , DATE and most recently on DATE . Despite separation from family members remaining in GPE and DATE of limited freedom of movement in the ARC , the vast majority of former ORG members preferred to remain at the ARC in GPE , supervised by ORG ( “ MNF - I ” ) , than return to GPE . Recently , some have risked travelling to LOC or GPE so as to get out of the ARC and seek asylum elsewhere . Some of those who tried to go to GPE have been forcibly returned to GPE . ...", "Since DATE , the GPE military has been facilitating ex - PMOI refugees to depart the ARC . Most of these refugees travelled to LOC , while some attempted to enter GPE with CARDINAL way laissez passez issued by NORP authorities with the assistance of the GPE military . Some of these refugees were also in possession of letters signed by a ORG Colonel , stating that :", "“ Mr. or Mrs. ... will be travelling out of the country with a Government of GPE issued PERSON and is authorised to do so . It is his / her intent to obtain a visa at the border and cross into GPE . This action has been approved by ORG and the US Embassy GPE , in conjunction with ORG . ”", "ORG does not support the issuance of these documents and is concerned that refugees leaving the ARC based on inaccurate information that they will be accommodated by ORG in northern GPE or that they will be able to acquire visas to and enter GPE . This is not the case . Refugees who leave ARC are at risk of being stranded in northern GPE or subject to detention and deportation from another country , most notably GPE . CARDINAL ex - PMOI refugees have been detained in GPE after leaving the ARC and entering GPE illegally . CARDINAL of them were deported to northern GPE where many were detained in GPE . CARDINAL remain in detention in GPE in precarious circumstances . Some former refugees are reportedly missing and ORG fears that they may have been deported to their country of origin . Another refugee from the ARC who arrived illegally to GPE has been allowed by a court decision to enter the country and to be protected against refoulement . ...", "On DATE GPE and GPE signed a memorandum of understanding to enhance security cooperation and joint efforts to officially oppose drug trafficking and terrorism . ORG is concerned that such an agreement could be used to refoule former ARC refugees stranded in detention in GPE or at its borders . ... ”", "On DATE the ORG issued the following statement :", "“ ORG deplores refugee expulsion by GPE which resulted in CARDINAL deaths", "GPE - Four men , including an NORP refugee , drowned after a group of CARDINAL people were forced to cross a fast - flowing river by the NORP police at GPE ’s south - eastern border with GPE , witnesses have told the ORG refugee agency .", "The incident took place on DATE at an unpatrolled stretch of the border , near FAC ) official border crossing in GPE in south - eastern GPE . According to eyewitnesses , the NORP authorities had earlier attempted to forcibly deport QUANTITY people of various nationalities to GPE through the official border crossing . The NORP border authorities allowed CARDINAL NORP to enter the country , but refused to admit CARDINAL NORP and NORP nationals . The NORP police then took the QUANTITY , which included CARDINAL NORP refugees recognised by ORG , to a place where a river separates the CARDINAL countries , and forced them to swim across .", "According to the witnesses interviewed by ORG , CARDINAL persons , including a refugee from GPE , were swept away by the strong river current and drowned . Their bodies could not be recovered .", "ORG is in contact with the surviving refugees through its office in GPE , in northern GPE . They are deeply traumatized by the experience , ORG staff reported .", "ORG had sent previous communications to the NORP government requesting that the CARDINAL NORP refugees , who had all been detained after attempting to cross into GPE in an irregular manner , not be deported . Despite ORG ’s requests , the refugees were put in a bus , together with other persons to be deported , and taken on a CARDINAL trip to the NORP border DATE . ORG had expressed in a number of communications sent to the Government of GPE that it did not consider GPE a safe country of asylum for these refugees .", "ORG is seeking clarification from the Government of GPE on the circumstances surrounding the forced expulsion of the refugees and the tragic loss of life . ”", "In its Country of Origin Information Report on GPE of DATE , ORG noted , inter alia , the following :", "“ ... ORG , on DATE , reported that :", "‘ PERSON , a member of the opposition ORG outlawed in GPE , was executed on DATE at ORG ’s Gohardasht prison , ORG said DATE , after a trial that did not meet international standards.’", "ORG , in a public statement dated DATE , said :", "‘ Executions in GPE continue at an alarming rate . ORG recorded CARDINAL executions in DATE , although the true figure is likely to be much higher . So far in DATE , it has recorded CARDINAL executions . Most of the victims were sentenced for crimes such as murder but CARDINAL of those recently executed was a political prisoner , PERSON , a member of ORG ( ORG ) , who was forcibly returned to GPE from GPE in DATE and sentenced to death in DATE after conviction [ for ] involvement in a bomb explosion in GPE in DATE which killed CARDINAL people ( see Urgent Actions AI Index ORG CARDINAL/CARDINAL/CARDINAL , DATE and ORG ) . He was taken from his cell in PERSON prison and executed on DATE , though his execution was officially confirmed by NORP officials only on DATE .", "PERSON execution has fuelled fears that other political prisoners may be at risk of imminent execution . According to unconfirmed reports that have been circulating since DATE , a number of political and other prisoners who are under sentence of death have been told by prison officials that they would be executed if GPE should be referred to ORG over the resumption of its nuclear programme ... These [ prisoners ] are said to have included other members of the ORG , which is an illegal organization in GPE . ORG , of which the ORG is a member , was the source of evidence in DATE revealing GPE ’s nuclear programme to the outside world.’", "...", "According to ORG of DATE :", "‘ ORG in GPE reported that CARDINAL members of the NORP opposition organisation ORG had voluntarily returned to GPE . Their return was organised by PERSON . ORG had no information indicating that these persons had been legally persecuted .", "ORG in GPE reported that non - profiled members of ORG had returned to GPE but had no information indicating that these persons had been persecuted or legally persecuted .", "The Organisation for defending Victims of Violence ’s international department reported that many members of ORG had returned to GPE without experiencing problems of a penal character .", "ORG in ORG confirmed that members of ORG had returned to GPE , mainly from GPE . The source was not aware that they had been subjected to any reprisals . ORG had monitored the return of a number of failed asylum seekers from the GPE . According to the source , none had been persecuted.’", "...", "The ORG report for DATE states that : ‘ There were reports that the government held some persons in prison for DATE charged with sympathizing with outlawed groups , such as the terrorist organization , the Mujahedin - e - Khalq ( ORG ) ... The government offered amnesty to rank - and - file members of the NORP terrorist organization , ORG , residing outside the country . Subsequently , the ICRC assisted with voluntarily repatriating CARDINAL ORG affiliates in GPE under ORG - I protective supervision during the year.’ ... ”", "In CARDINAL press releases issued on DATE and DATE , ORG reported that a number of political prisoners in GPE , including CARDINAL ORG members , namely PERSON and ORG , had died in custody in suspicious circumstances and that no effective investigation had been conducted into their death .", "In DATE and DATE ORG and NORP government spokesman respectively made statements , according to which the NORP government was intending to deport the ORG members in FAC to their country of origin or to a third country , and asked the international community to find places for them other than GPE .", "Subsequently , on DATE the Chair of ORG PACE ) issued a press statement and urged the NORP government not to forcibly return to GPE the residents of FAC who would risk persecution there , not to expel these persons to another country that might send them to GPE afterwards , nor to forcibly displace them inside GPE .", "On DATE ORG adopted a resolution on the humanitarian situation of PERSON residents which reads , in so far as relevant , as follows :", "“ ORG", "... PERSON - whereas in DATE GPE forces in GPE disarmed GPE residents and provided them with protection , those residents having been designated \" protected persons \" under LAW , ...", "PERSON - whereas following the conclusion of the GPE / Iraqi Status of Forces Agreement , control of GPE was transferred to the NORP security forces as of DATE ,", "PERSON - whereas , according to recent statements reportedly made by ORG , the authorities intend gradually to make the continued presence of the GPE residents \" intolerable \" , and whereas he reportedly also referred to their expulsion / extradition and/or their forcible displacement inside GPE ,", "- Urges the NORP Prime Minister to ensure that no action is taken by the NORP authorities which violates the human rights of the GPE residents and to clarify the NORP government ’s intentions towards them ; calls on the NORP authorities to protect the lives and the physical and moral integrity of the GPE residents and to treat them in accordance with obligations under LAW , in particular by refraining from forcibly displacing , deporting , expelling or repatriating them in violation of the principle of non - refoulement ;", "- Respecting the individual wishes of anyone living in GPE as regards his or her future , considers that those living in GPE and other NORP nationals who currently reside in GPE having left GPE for political reasons could be at risk of serious human rights violations if they were to be returned involuntarily to GPE , and insists that no person should be returned , either directly or via a third country , to a situation where he or she would be at risk of torture or other serious human rights abuses ; ... ”", "Meanwhile , on DATE ORG decided to exclude the ORG from the list of individuals , groups and entities involved in terrorist acts , in accordance with the judgment of ORG dated DATE in Case T-CARDINAL/CARDINAL .", "On DATE ORG on ORG issued a report on its ORG to GPE ( Report of ORG on its Mission to Turkey , Report of DATE , A / HRC/CARDINAL/CARDINAL/Add.CARDINAL ) . Regarding the detention of foreigners awaiting expulsion in GPE , ORG noted the following :", "“ ... DATE . Foreigners who are in GPE without the documents necessary to allow them to stay lawfully in the country can be , and are in great numbers , arrested by the police or the ORG . After a brief period in police custody they are taken to a so - called “ guest house ” for foreigners run by ORG , where they are - in spite of the welcoming name of these institutions - to all effect locked up awaiting expulsion . However , no written decision to this effect is issued to them .", "DATE the Law on the Residence of ORG , providing that foreigners who have been issued an expulsion decision but can not be immediately expelled , shall reside in a location assigned to them by ORG , does not constitute a sufficient legal basis for this practice . Neither this law , nor any other , provides further details as to the preconditions for , modalities of or maximum duration of assignment to a residence for foreigners awaiting expulsion . As this is not a measure adopted within the criminal process , judges of the peace have no jurisdiction to rule on challenges against such measures . It would appear that administrative tribunals are competent . However , this remedy appears not to be exercised in practice . Challenges to the expulsion decision may have an impact also on the question of detention , but they simply do not constitute the remedy against the fact of deprivation of liberty required by LAW ORG .", "It is important to stress that this has nothing to do with the criminal proceedings which can be initiated against a foreigner for illegal entry into GPE . Such proceedings are not regularly pursued and , in case of a guilty finding , result in a fine , not deprivation of liberty .", "Another aggravating aspect is that , according to information provided by the police , not only foreigners who are actually the subject of an expulsion decision are assigned to guest houses ( i.e. deprived of their liberty ) , but also so assigned are many who - in the opinion of the police - are likely to receive an unfavourable outcome in expulsion proceedings initiated against them . This practice violates even article CARDINAL of the PERSON on the Residence of Foreign Citizens .", "To sum up , there is no remedy for the foreigners awaiting expulsion to challenge their detention , and no control over the detention by a judicial authority . It may be true that in some cases the person to be deported spends DATE at the guest house . But in others , where there are difficulties obtaining valid travel documents ( as appears to be the case for many NORP migrants ) , the detention can DATE and even DATE ... ”" ]

[ "13", "3", "5" ]

[ "5-1", "5-2", "5-4" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE - on - Don .", "On DATE criminal proceedings were instituted against the applicant , at the material time Deputy Head of ORG , and he was arrested on suspicion of bribe - taking . The arrest took place in the absence of the lawyer . A search was carried out at the flat where he was staying . The applicant was released on DATE .", "The applicant challenged the lawfulness of the institution of the criminal proceedings against him and of his arrest . However , on DATE and CARDINAL DATE respectively ORG in the final instance dismissed his claims .", "The applicant further challenged the lawfulness of the search carried out at his flat . On DATE ORG of Rostov - on - Don held that the search had been carried out in compliance with the domestic law . The applicant alleged that he had not been informed of the above decision until DATE . Thus , he had been prevented from lodging an ordinary appeal against it . Later , the applicant tried to initiate a supervisory review of the decision of DATE . However , on CARDINAL DATE the Rostov ORG found that there were no grounds for quashing the decision of DATE .", "On DATE ORG of Rostov - on - Don remanded the applicant in custody . The decision read as follows :", "“ ... From the material submitted by the prosecution , it follows that [ the applicant ] was charged with several particularly serious offences , and there are grounds to suspect him of having committed other similar crimes ... Besides , as it follows from the submitted material , during the search carried out at the applicant ’s flat on DATE , [ the applicant ’s wife ] went to the balcony and threw out [ documents ] , suggesting that she was therefore trying to hide material evidence from the investigation ... This gives grounds to believe that , if not detained , [ the applicant ] may interfere with the proper administration of justice by destroying or hiding evidence , preventing the investigative authorities from uncovering other instances of his illegal activities , as well as putting pressure on those witnesses who had not yet been identified or questioned .", "[ The applicant ] did not provide any medical documents certifying that his state of health prevented him from being held in detention ... ”", "The applicant ’s detention interrupted the inpatient treatment he had meanwhile been undergoing for an aggravated chronic kidney condition ( acute pyelonephritis ) .", "On DATE , on appeal , ORG upheld the detention order of DATE , finding that it had been lawful and justified .", "On DATE ORG , citing the gravity of the charges against the applicant , extended his detention until DATE . On DATE , on appeal , ORG upheld the above decision .", "On DATE ORG extended the applicant ’s detention until DATE . The court held as follows :", "“ ... [ The applicant ] is charged with several particularly grave crimes committed by an organised group ; until now , the investigating authorities have not identified all those involved in the criminal activities in respect of which [ the applicant ] has been charged ; [ the applicant ] knows the persons in question . In view of the above , the court considers that , if not detained , the applicant might threaten witnesses and destroy the evidence , thereby obstructing justice ... ”", "The applicant appealed , claiming that the above decision was groundless . In particular , the applicant did not know any of the witnesses , all the relevant documents were seized by the investigating authorities , the applicant was suspended from work , his access to documents was restricted and the key to his office was confiscated . Furthermore , the applicant stated that he had no criminal record , that he had a permanent place of residence and a family , that , prior to his detention , he had been undergoing medical treatment for pyelonephritis but that the treatment had been interrupted and thus the condition had been aggravated and that others involved in the case had been given more lenient preventive measures .", "On DATE , on appeal , ORG upheld the lawfulness of the decision of DATE without considering the arguments put forward by the applicant .", "On DATE , DATE and DATE ORG extended the applicant ’s detention until DATE , CARDINAL DATE and DATE respectively . The court again referred to the gravity of the charges against the applicant and the risk that he might put pressure on witnesses or otherwise obstruct justice .", "On DATE , DATE and DATE respectively , ORG upheld the above decisions on appeal .", "On DATE the pre - trial investigation was completed and the criminal case against the applicant and CARDINAL other co - defendants was referred for trial to ORG . The applicant remained in detention .", "On DATE the Rostov ORG scheduled a preliminary hearing for CARDINAL DATE . The issue of the applicant ’s detention was left unexamined .", "On DATE the Rostov ORG adjourned the preliminary hearing until DATE . The issue of the applicant ’s detention was again left unexamined .", "On DATE the Rostov ORG held the preliminary hearing , and on CARDINAL DATE the court ordered that the preventive measure applied to the applicant should remain unchanged .", "On DATE the applicant made an application for release , which on DATE was dismissed by ORG with reference to the absence of sufficient grounds for altering the preventive measure .", "On DATE ORG maintained the applicant ’s custodial measure and extended it until DATE . The court reasoned its decision by the fact that the criminal case against the applicant was being examined at the final stage of the judicial investigation , that the applicant was charged with several particularly serious offences and that , if released , he might abscond or otherwise obstruct the administration of justice .", "On DATE , on appeal , ORG upheld the lawfulness of the above extension order .", "Prior to the applicant ’s trial , some details of the applicant ’s criminal case were disclosed by the local media .", "On DATE the Rostov ORG convicted the applicant of abuse of office , bribe - taking and forgery and sentenced him to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment .", "On DATE ORG of GPE modified the qualification of the crimes committed by the applicant and reduced the sentence to DATE imprisonment .", "From DATE to CARDINAL DATE the applicant had been held in remand prison GPE of GPE - on - Don ( PERSON ИЗ-CARDINAL/CARDINAL ORG управления NORP службы исполнения наказаний по PERSON области ) . Throughout this period the applicant had been held in cells CARDINAL . DATE , FAC , CARDINAL , CARDINAL , CARDINAL , CARDINAL , CARDINAL and household service units ( жилые секции отряда хозяйственного обслуживания ) nos . CARDINAL and CARDINAL .", "As regards the ORG measurements and the number of inmates detained therein together with the applicant , the Government submitted as follows .", "( a ) cell no . CARDINAL measuring QUANTITY accommodated up to CARDINAL detainees ;", "( b ) cell no . CARDINAL measuring QUANTITY accommodated up to CARDINAL detainees ;", "( c ) cell no . CARDINAL measuring QUANTITY accommodated up to CARDINAL detainees ;", "( d ) cell no . CARDINAL measuring QUANTITY accommodated up to CARDINAL detainees ;", "( e ) cell no . CARDINAL measuring QUANTITY accommodated up to CARDINAL detainees ;", "( f ) cell no . CARDINAL measuring QUANTITY accommodated up to CARDINAL detainees ;", "( g ) cell no . CARDINAL measuring QUANTITY accommodated CARDINAL detainees ;", "( h ) cell no . CARDINAL measuring QUANTITY accommodated up to CARDINAL detainees ;", "( i ) household unit no . CARDINAL measuring QUANTITY accommodated up to CARDINAL detainees ; and", "( j ) household unit no . CARDINAL measuring QUANTITY accommodated CARDINAL detainees .", "In each cell the applicant had an individual bed and had been provided with bedding ( a mattress , a pillow , a blanket , CARDINAL bed sheets , a pillowcase and a towel ) and tableware ( a spoon , a mug and a plate ) .", "Each cell had windows measuring CARDINAL by QUANTITY . The windows had been barred from both the inside and the outside . The access of fresh air and day light had not been restricted . The level of natural lighting had corresponded to the established sanitary norms and allowed the inmates to read and write .", "The cells had been illuminated with QUANTITY filament lamps , which had been on from TIME on DATE and from TIME on DATE and holidays . At TIME - time the cells had been lit by QUANTITY security lights with tinted glass shades . Security lights had not disturbed the inmates’ sleep .", "All cells had been equipped with extractor fans and a heating system , both functioning properly at the relevant time . The average DATE temperature in the cells did not go below + QUANTITY , and DATE temperature did not go above + QUANTITY .", "The applicant had received food of adequate quality in accordance with the established legal norms .", "The applicant had not applied for medical assistance during his stay in the remand prison .", "In support of their submissions the Government provided several certificates issued by the director of GPE on DATE , the results of a laboratory examination of the microclimate of the cells ( illumination , temperature , relative air humidity and air circulation ) in DATE and statements by wardens ( although not dated ) . The Government further annexed to their submissions copies of documents certifying that registration logs of the detention facility had been destroyed due to the expiry of the time - limit for their storage .", "As regards the ORG measurements and the number of inmates detained therein the applicant submitted as follows :", "( a ) cell no . CARDINAL where the applicant had been held from DATE measured QUANTITY and housed from CARDINAL detainees ;", "( b ) cell no . DATE where the applicant had been held from DATE to DATE measured QUANTITY and housed from CARDINAL detainees ;", "( c ) cell no . CARDINAL where the applicant had been held from DATE to DATE and from DATE to DATE measured QUANTITY and housed CARDINAL detainees ;", "( d ) cell no . CARDINAL where the applicant had been held during DATE in DATE measured QUANTITY and housed from CARDINAL detainees ;", "( e ) no specifics were provided for the cell no . CARDINAL where the applicant had been held during DATE in DATE ;", "( f ) cell no . CARDINAL where the applicant had been held during DATE in DATE and from DATE to DATE measured QUANTITY and accommodated CARDINAL detainees ;", "( g ) cell no . CARDINAL where the applicant had been held from DATE measured QUANTITY and accommodated over CARDINAL detainees ;", "( h ) cell no . CARDINAL where the applicant had been held from DATE measured QUANTITY and accommodated up to CARDINAL detainees ;", "( i ) no specifics were provided for household units nos . CARDINAL and CARDINAL .", "The appalling sanitary condition of the cells had been aggravated by the arrangement of the lavatory , elevated by QUANTITY above the floor level and separated on one side by a CARDINAL - high brick or steel partition . As a result a person using the toilet was in plain view of his cellmates .", "The CARDINAL outside walks had not been available on DATE when the applicant had been taken to participate in investigative actions or court hearings . Likewise , on DATE the applicant had been deprived of shower , normally available once DATE . In the period from DATE when the applicant had been participating in the hearing of his case , he had waited up to DATE to take a shower .", "Besides CARDINAL superficial medical checkups no other medical assistance had been provided to the applicant .", "For a summary of the relevant domestic law and ORG documents see PERSON v. GPE , no . GPE , § § CARDINAL , DATE ." ]

[ "3", "5" ]

[ "5-3" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "NORP The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "On an unspecified date ORG , a company , applied to ORG for an order against the applicant for payment of MONEY ( MONEY ( ORG ) ) in performance of a contract for professional services . In a decision of CARDINAL DATE the president of the court granted the application . The order was served on the applicant by ORG DATE . On DATE the applicant challenged it in the same court .", "Preparation of the case for trial began on CARDINAL DATE . On DATE the case was joined to another case that was pending between the same parties . The immediate enforcement of the order was suspended . Of the CARDINAL hearings listed between DATE and CARDINAL DATE two were devoted to hearing evidence from the applicant , CARDINAL to hearing other evidence , CARDINAL were adjourned by the court of its own motion , CARDINAL was adjourned to allow the parties to reach a friendly settlement , CARDINAL were adjourned at the request of the applicant or both parties and CARDINAL was adjourned because ORG had failed to appear .", "NORP However , on an unspecified date the case was referred to the bench of judges dealing with the oldest cases ( sezione stralcio ) . Of the CARDINAL hearings listed DATE and DATE CARDINAL was adjourned because ORG had not appeared ( owing to the registry ’s failure to notify it of the date to which the hearing had been adjourned by the court of its own motion ) , one because of a ORG strike , CARDINAL to allow the parties to make their submissions , and CARDINAL by the court of its own motion .", "DATE , on DATE the court set the case down for hearing of oral submissions on DATE . On that date judgment was reserved . According to information provided by the applicant on DATE , the proceedings were still pending .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an application with ORG under PERSON no . CARDINAL of DATE , known as the “ Pinto Act ” , complaining of the length of the above - described proceedings . He asked the court to rule that there had been a breach of LAW and to order the NORP ORG to pay compensation for the pecuniary and non - pecuniary damage sustained . The applicant claimed ORG CARDINAL in pecuniary and non - pecuniary damages . He sought the reimbursement of his legal costs , including those incurred before the ORG , but did not quantify or give particulars of them .", "In a decision of DATE , the text of which was deposited with the registry on DATE , ORG found that the length of the proceedings had been excessive . It held as follows :", "“ ... Despite a number of adjournments for which the judicial authorities are not responsible because they were ordered at the request of the parties or because of a ORG strike , the length of the proceedings was unreasonable .", "Whilst the allegation of pecuniary damage and personal injury is not supported by any proof , the applicant very likely suffered mental distress on account of the unjustified length of the proceedings . The resultant damage , given the foregoing considerations , can be assessed at CARDINAL , and the legal costs , including those for the proceedings before ORG , at CARDINAL . ”", "ORG awarded the applicant ORG CARDINAL on an equitable basis in compensation for non - pecuniary damage , and EUR CARDINAL for costs and expenses , including those incurred before the ORG , but without giving a breakdown .", "In a letter of CARDINAL DATE the applicant informed ORG outcome of the domestic proceedings and asked the ORG to continue its examination of his application .", "The applicant did not indicate that he had appealed to ORG .", "ORG decision was served on DATE and became final on DATE . The applicant served the authorities with notice to comply on DATE . The applicant lodged an application for a garnishee order with the GPE judge responsible for enforcement proceedings and a hearing was held on DATE . After obtaining a garnishee order on CARDINAL May CARDINAL , the amounts were paid on an unspecified date after service of the order .", "Award of just satisfaction in the event of a breach of the requirement to dispose of proceedings within a reasonable time and amendment to LAW .", "CHAPTER II", "Just satisfaction Section CARDINAL Entitlement to just satisfaction", "“ CARDINAL . Anyone sustaining pecuniary or non - pecuniary damage as a result of a violation of ORG , ratified by PERSON no . CARDINAL of CARDINAL DATE , on account of a failure to comply with the ‘ reasonable - time’ requirement in LAW , shall be entitled to just satisfaction .", "NORP In determining whether there has been a violation , the court shall have regard to the complexity of the case and , in the light thereof , the conduct of the parties and of the judge deciding procedural issues , and also the conduct of any authority required to participate in or contribute to the resolution of the case .", "NORP The court shall assess the quantum of damage in accordance with LAW and shall apply the following rules :", "( a ) NORP only damage attributable to the period beyond the reasonable time referred to in subsection CARDINAL may be taken into account ;", "( b ) in addition to the payment of a sum of money , reparation for non - pecuniary damage shall be made by giving suitable publicity to the finding of a violation . ”", "Section CARDINAL Procedure", "“ CARDINAL . Claims for just satisfaction shall be lodged with the court of appeal in which the judge sits who has jurisdiction under LAW to try cases concerning members of the judiciary in the district where the case in which the violation is alleged to have occurred was decided or discontinued at the merits stage or is still pending .", "NORP The claim shall be made on an application lodged with the registry of the court of appeal by a lawyer holding a special authority containing all the information prescribed by LAW .", "The application shall be made against the Minister of ORG where the alleged violation has taken place in proceedings in the ordinary courts , the Minister of Defence where it has taken place in proceedings before the military courts and the Finance Minister where it has taken place in proceedings before the tax commissioners . In all other cases , the application shall be made against the Prime Minister .", "NORP The court of appeal shall hear the application in accordance with Articles CARDINAL et seq . of ORG . The application and the order setting the case down for hearing shall be served by the applicant on the defendant authority at its elected domicile at the offices of ORG ( Avvocatura dello Stato ) DATE prior to the date of the hearing before the ORG .", "The parties may apply to the court for an order for production of all or part of the procedural and other documents from the proceedings in which the violation referred to in LAW is alleged to have occurred and they and their lawyers shall be entitled to be heard by the court in private if they attend the hearing . The parties may lodge memorials and documents up till DATE before the date set for the hearing or until expiry of the time allowed by the court of appeal for that purpose on an application by the parties .", "The court shall deliver a decision within DATE after the application is lodged . An appeal shall lie to ORG . The decision shall be enforceable immediately .", "To the extent that resources permit , payment of compensation to those entitled shall commence on DATE . ”", "Section CARDINAL Time - limits and procedures for lodging applications", "“ A claim for just satisfaction may be lodged while the proceedings in which the violation is alleged to have occurred are pending or within DATE from the date when the decision ending the proceedings becomes final . Claims lodged after that date shall be time - barred . ”", "Section CARDINAL Communications", "“ If the court decides to allow an application , its decision shall be communicated by the registry to the parties , to ORG at ORG to enable him to start an investigation into liability , and to the authorities responsible for deciding whether to institute disciplinary proceedings against the civil servants involved in the proceedings in any capacity . ”", "Section CARDINAL Transitional provisions", "“ CARDINAL . Within DATE after the entry into force of this LAW , anyone who has lodged an application with ORG in due time complaining of a violation of the ‘ reasonable - time’ requirement contained in LAW , ratified by LAW . CARDINAL of CARDINAL DATE , shall be entitled to lodge a claim under LAW hereof provided that the application has not by then been declared admissible by ORG . In such cases , the application to the court of appeal must state when the application to the said ORG was made .", "NORP The registry of the relevant court shall inform the Minister for ORG without delay of any claim lodged in accordance with section QUANTITY and within the period laid down in subsection CARDINAL of this section . ”", "Section CARDINAL Financial provisions", "“ CARDINAL . NORP The financial cost of implementing this LAW , which is put at MONEY from DATE , shall be met by releasing funds entered in the DATE budget DATE in the chapter concerning the basic current - liability estimates from the ‘ special fund’ in DATE forecast of ORG . ORG deposits shall be set aside for that purpose .", "The Ministry of the ORG , ORG is authorised to make the appropriate budgetary adjustments by decree . ”", "On appeal from decisions delivered by the courts of appeal in “ Pinto ” proceedings , ORG , sitting as a full court ( ORG ) , gave CARDINAL judgments ( nos . CARDINAL , DATE , DATE and DATE ) on DATE , the texts of which were deposited with the registry on CARDINAL DATE , quashing the appeal court ’s decision and remitting the case for a rehearing . It held that “ the case - law of ORG is binding on the NORP courts regarding the application of PERSON no . CARDINAL ” .", "In its judgment no . CARDINAL it affirmed , inter alia , the principle that", "“ the court of appeal ’s determination of non - pecuniary damage in accordance with LAW no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , although inherently based on equitable principles , must be done in a legally defined framework since reference has to be made to the amounts awarded , in similar cases , by ORG . Some divergence is permissible , within reason . ”", "Extracts from the plenary ORG judgment no . CARDINAL deposited with the registry on DATE", "“ ... CARDINAL.- The present application poses the fundamental question of what legal effect must be given – in implementing the Law of DATE no . CARDINAL , and in particular in determining the non - pecuniary damage arising out of the breach of the reasonable length of proceedings requirement – to the judgments of ORG , whether considered generally as interpretative guidelines which the said ORG has laid down with regard to the consequences of the said violation , or with reference to a specific case in which ORG has already had occasion to give a judgment on the delay in reaching a decision . ...", "As stipulated in LAW , the legal fact which gives rise to the right to the just satisfaction that it provides for is constituted by the “ violation of ORG , ratified in accordance with LAW DATE no . CARDINAL , for failure to comply with the reasonable time referred to in DATE , paragraph CARDINAL of the LAW . ” In other words , PERSON no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL identifies the fact constituting the right to compensation by reference to a specific provision of ORG . This Convention instituted a ORG ( ORG , with its seat in GPE ) to ensure compliance with the provisions contained therein ( Article CARDINAL ) . Accordingly , the competence of the said court to determine , and therefore to interpret , the significance of the said provisions must be recognised .", "As the fact constituting the right conferred by PERSON no . ORG consists of a violation of LAW , it is for ORG to determine all the elements of such a legal fact , which thus ends by being “ brought into conformity ” by ORG , whose case - law is binding on the NORP courts in so far as the application of PERSON no . PERSON is concerned .", "It is not necessary therefore to pose the general problem of the relationships between LAW and the internal judicial system , which ORG ( Procuratore Generale ) has amply discussed in court . Whatever opinion one may have about that controversial issue and therefore about the place of LAW in the context of the sources of domestic law , it is certain that the direct implementation in the NORP judicial system of a provision of LAW , established by PERSON no . PERSON ( that is , by LAW in the part relating to “ reasonable time ” ) , can not diverge from the interpretation which ORG gives of the same provision .", "The opposite argument , which would permit a substantial divergence between the application accorded to PERSON no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL in the national system and the interpretation given by ORG to the right to reasonable length of proceedings , would deprive the said PERSON no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL of any justification and cause the NORP ORG to violate LAW , according to which ‘ The High Contracting Parties shall secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in LAW ( including the said LAW , which provides for the right to have a case decided within a reasonable length of time ) .", "The reason behind the enactment of PERSON no . PERSON was the need to provide a domestic judicial remedy against violations in respect of the duration of proceedings , so as to give effect to the subsidiary character of intervention on the part of ORG , expressly provided for by LAW CARDINAL : “ the ORG may only deal with the matter after all domestic remedies have been exhausted ” ) . The NORP system for the protection of human rights is founded on the said principle of subsidiarity . From it derives the duty of the GPE which have ratified LAW to guarantee to individuals the protection of the rights recognised by LAW , above all in their own internal order and vis - à - vis the organs of the national judicial system . And this protection must be “ effective ” ( LAW ) , that is , of a kind to remedy the claim without the need for recourse to ORG .", "The domestic remedy introduced by Law no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL did not previously exist in the NORP system , with the consequence that appeals against GPE in respect of a violation of LAW had “ clogged ” ( the term used by rapporteur PERSON in the sitting of the ORG of DATE ) ORG . ORG observed , prior to LAW no . PERSON , that the said failures to comply on the part of GPE “ reflect a continuing situation that has not yet been remedied and in respect of which litigants have no domestic remedy . This accumulation of breaches accordingly constitutes a practice that is incompatible with the Convention ” ( see the CARDINAL judgments of the ORG delivered on DATE in the cases of PERSON , PERSON , ORG and PERSON ) .", "Law no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL constitutes the domestic remedy to which a “ victim of a violation ” ( as defined by LAW CARDINAL ( failure to comply with the reasonable - time requirement ) must have recourse before applying to ORG to claim the “ just satisfaction ” provided for in LAW , which , when the violation exists , is only awarded by the ORG “ if the internal law of ORG concerned allows only partial reparation to be made ” . Law no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL has therefore allowed ORG to declare inadmissible applications lodged with it ( including before the LAW was passed ) and aimed at obtaining just satisfaction provided for in LAW for the excessive length of proceedings ( ORG v. GPE , decision of DATE ) .", "This mechanism for implementation of LAW and observance of the principle of subsidiarity in respect of interventions of ORG of GPE does not operate , however , in cases in which the ORG holds that the consequences of the established violation of LAW have not been redressed by domestic law or that this has been done only “ partially ” , because in such an event the said LAW provides for the intervention of ORG to protect the “ victim of the violation ” . In such cases an individual application to ORG on the basis of LAW is admissible ( Scordino and Others v. GPE , decision of DATE ) and the ORG acts directly to protect the rights of the victim whom it considers not to have been adequately protected by domestic law .", "The judge of the adequacy or inadequacy of the protection that the victim has had from domestic law is , obviously , ORG , whose duty it is to apply LAW of LAW to ascertain whether , in the presence of a violation of a provision of LAW , the internal law has been able to fully redress the consequences of this violation .", "The argument whereby , in applying PERSON no . PERSON , the NORP court may follow a different interpretation from that which ORG has given to the provisions of LAW ( violation of which is the fact giving entitlement to the right to compensation attributed by the said national law ) implies that the victim of the violation , if he or she receives reparation at national level considered inadequate by ORG , must obtain the just satisfaction provided for in LAW from the latter Court . This would defeat the purpose of the remedy provided for in NORP law by PERSON no . PERSON and entail a violation of the principle of the subsidiarity of the intervention of ORG .", "It is therefore necessary to concur with ORG , which , in the above - mentioned decision on the PERSON application ( concerning the inadequacy of the protection afforded by the NORP courts in implementing LAW no . PERSON ) , affirmed that “ it follows from the principle of subsidiarity ... that the national courts must , where possible , interpret and apply domestic law in accordance with the Convention ” .", "... The preparatory documents of PERSON no . PERSON are even more explicit . In the report concerning the bill of Senator PERSON ( proceedings of the ORG no . CARDINAL of DATE ) it is affirmed that the compensatory mechanism proposed in the legislative initiative ( and then adopted by the LAW ) secures for the applicant “ a protection analogous to that which he or she would receive in the international court ” , as the direct reference to LAW makes it possible to transfer to domestic level “ the limits of applicability of the same provision existing at international level , limits which depend essentially on the ORG and on the development of the case - law of the GPE authorities , especially that of ORG , whose decisions must therefore guide ... the domestic court in the definition of these limits ” .", "... CARDINAL . – The considerations expounded in sections CARDINAL of the document refer in general to the importance of the interpretative guidance of ORG on the implementation of PERSON no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL with regard to reparation for non - pecuniary damage .", "In this particular instance , however , any possibility for the national court to exclude non - pecuniary damage ( despite having found a violation of LAW of ORG ) must be considered as non - existent because such is precluded by the previous decision of ORG which , with reference to the same proceedings , had already ascertained that the unjustified delay in reaching a decision had had consequences involving non - pecuniary damage for the applicant , which the ORG itself redressed for a limited period . From such a decision of ORG it follows that , once the national court has ascertained that the violation has continued in the period following that considered in the said decision , the applicant has continued to suffer non - pecuniary damage , which must be compensated for in application of PERSON no . PERSON .", "It can not therefore be maintained DATE as ORG has done DATE that compensation is not due because of the small amounts at stake in the proceedings in question . Such a reason , apart from being rendered immaterial by the fact that ORG has already ruled that non - pecuniary damage had been sustained because of delay in the same action , is in any case incorrect , because the amount of what is at stake in an action in which non - compliance with reasonable time - limits has been ascertained can never have the effect of excluding non - pecuniary damage , given that the anxiety and distress resulting from the length of the proceedings normally also occur in cases in which the amounts at stake are small ; hence this aspect may have the effect of reducing the amount of compensation but not of totally excluding it .", "CARDINAL – In conclusion the decision appealed against must be quashed and the case remitted to ORG , which , in a different composition , will order payment to the applicant of the non - pecuniary damages payable as a result of the violation of the reasonable - time requirement for the period following DATE alone , taking as a reference point payments of the same kind of damages by ORG , from which it may diverge , but only to a reasonable extent ( ORG , DATE , PERSON GPE ) ” .", "ORG held as follows :", "“ ... Where the victim of unreasonably lengthy proceedings dies prior to the entry into force of Law no . CARDINAL of DATE [ known as the “ Pinto Act ” ] this shall preclude a right [ to just satisfaction ] from arising and passing to the heirs , in accordance with the general rule that a person who has died can not become entitled to a right conferred by an Act that is passed after their death ... ”", "ORG judges noted that the right to compensation for a violation of the right to a hearing within a reasonable time derived from LAW . The mechanism set in place by the NORP standard did not give applicants a cause of action before the domestic courts . Accordingly , the right to “ just satisfaction ” could neither be acquired nor transferred by a person who had already died by the time the Pinto Act came into force . The fact that the deceased had , while alive , lodged an application with ORG was not decisive . LAW did not constitute , as the applicants had maintained , a procedural standard bringing about a transfer of powers from ORG to the domestic courts .", "In this case , which concerned the possibility or otherwise of transferring to heirs the right to compensation deriving from a breach of LAW on account of the length of the proceedings , ORG referred the case to the full court indicating that there was a conflict between the case - law authorities , that is , between the restrictive approach taken by ORG in the earlier judgments regarding heirs and LAW and the CARDINAL judgments delivered by ORG , sitting as a full court , on DATE to the extent that a less strict interpretation would lead to the conclusion that this right to compensation has existed since GPE ratified LAW on DATE .", "In the case giving rise to the order mentioned above referring the case to the full court ( see preceding paragraph ) , ORG , sitting as a full court , established the following principles , thus preventing any further conflicting decisions being given by the courts :", "( i ) Law no . CARDINAL of CARDINAL DATE , which ratified the LAW and made it enforceable , introduced into domestic legal order the fundamental rights , belonging to the category of rights conferred on the individual by public law , provided for in the first section of the Convention and which correspond to a large extent with those set forth in LAW . In that respect the LAW provisions are confirmatory and illustrative . ...", "( ii ) It is necessary to reiterate the principle that the act giving rise to the right to reparation conferred by domestic law corresponds to a breach of the provision in LAW , which is immediately applicable in domestic law .", "The distinction between the right to a hearing within a reasonable time , introduced by LAW ( or even pre - existing as a constitutionally protected value ) , and the right to equitable reparation , which was allegedly introduced only by LAW , can not be allowed in so far as the protection provided by the domestic courts does not depart from that previously offered by ORG , the domestic courts being bound to comply with the case - law of ORG . ...", "( iii ) Accordingly , the right to equitable reparation for loss sustained as a result of the unreasonable length of proceedings prior to the entry into force of Law no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL must be acknowledged by the domestic courts even in favour of the heirs of a party who introduced the proceedings before that date , subject only to the condition that the claim has not already been lodged with ORG and the ORG has not ruled on admissibility . ...", "This judgment of ORG concerned an appeal by ORG challenging ORG award of non - pecuniary damages to a juristic person . ORG referred to the decision reached in the case of Comingersoll v. GPE [ ORG ] , no . CARDINAL , ORG CARDINALIV and , after referring to the CARDINAL judgments of the full court delivered on DATE , found that its own case - law was not in line with ORG . It held that there was no legal barrier to awarding just satisfaction to “ juristic ” persons according to the criteria of ORG . Accordingly , since ORG had correctly decided the case the appeal was dismissed .", "ORG made the following observations :", "“ ... [ Whereas ] non - pecuniary damage is the normal , albeit not automatic , consequence of a breach of the right to a hearing within a reasonable time , it will be deemed to exist , without it being necessary to specifically prove it ( directly or by presumption ) , on the basis of the objective fact of the breach , on condition that there are no special circumstances indicating the absence of any such damage in the actual case concerned ( PERSON . ORG CARDINAL DATE nos . CARDINAL and DATE ) .", "- the assessment on an equitable basis of compensation for non - pecuniary damage is subject DATE on account of the specific reference in section CARDINAL of Law no . CARDINAL of DATE to LAW ( ratified by PERSON no . CARDINAL of CARDINAL DATE ) DATE to compliance with the Convention , in accordance with the judicial interpretation given by ORG ( non - compliance with which results in a violation of the law ) , and must therefore , as far as possible , be commensurate , in substantive and not merely formal terms , with the amounts paid in similar cases by ORG , it being possible to adduce exceptional circumstances that suggest themselves in the particular case , on condition that they are reasoned , not excessive and not unreasonable ( PERSON . ORG DATE no . CARDINAL ) . ...", "- a discrepancy in the method of calculation [ between the ORG ’s case - law and LAW ] shall not affect the general vocation of PERSON no . CARDINAL of DATE to meet the objective of awarding proper compensation for a breach of the right to a hearing within a reasonable time ( vocation acknowledged by ORG in , inter alia , a decision of DATE in GPE ( application no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) ) , and accordingly shall not allow any doubt as to the compatibility of that domestic standard with the international commitments entered into by GPE when ratifying LAW and the formal recognition , also at constitutional level , of the principle stated in LAW ... ”", "In the report ORG , revised on DATE , the ORG deputies made the following indications regarding an assessment of the Pinto remedy :", "“ ... CARDINAL . As regards the domestic remedy introduced in DATE by the “ Pinto Act ” , a number of shortcomings remain , particularly in connection with the effectiveness of the remedy and its application in conformity with the Convention : in particular , the law does not provide yet for the acceleration of pending proceedings . ...", "In the framework of its examination of the CARDINALst DATE report , ORG expressed concern at the fact that this legislation did not foresee the speeding up of the proceedings and that its application posed a risk of aggravating the backlog of the appeal courts . ...", "It should be pointed out that in the framework of its examination of DATE report , ORG had noted with concern that the Convention had no direct effect and had consequently invited the NORP authorities to intensify their efforts at national level as well as their contacts with the different bodies of ORG competent in this field . ... ”", "In this interim resolution the ORG deputies indicated as follows :", "“ ORG", "Noting ...", "“ ... the setting - up of a domestic remedy providing compensation in cases of excessive length of proceedings , adopted in DATE ( the \" Pinto ” law ) , as well as the recent development of the case - law of ORG , increasing the direct effect of the case - law of ORG in the NORP legal system , while noting that this remedy still does not enable for acceleration of proceedings so as to grant effective redress to all victims ;", "Stressing that the setting - up of domestic remedies does not dispense states from their general obligation to solve the structural problems underlying violations ;", "Finding that despite the efforts undertaken , numerous elements still indicate that the solution to the problem will not be found in the near future ( as evidenced in particular by the statistical data , the new cases before both domestic courts and ORG , the information contained in the annual reports submitted by the government to ORG and in the reports of ORG at the Court of cassation ) ; ...", "Stressing the importance the LAW attaches to the right to fair administration of justice in a NORP society and recalling that the problem of the excessive length of judicial proceedings , by reason of its persistence and extent , constitutes a real danger for the respect of the rule of law in GPE ; ...", "URGES the NORP authorities to enhance their political commitment and make it their effective priority to meet GPE ’s obligation under the ORG and the ORG ’s judgments , to secure the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time to all persons under GPE ’s jurisdiction . ... ”", "ORG for the efficiency of justice was set up at ORG by Resolution Res(CARDINAL)CARDINAL with the aim of ( a ) improving the efficiency and the functioning of the justice of member GPE with a view to ensuring that everyone within their jurisdiction can enforce their legal rights effectively , thereby generating increased confidence of the citizens in the justice system and ( b ) enabling a better implementation of the international legal instruments of ORG concerning efficiency and fairness of justice .", "In its framework programme ( CEPEJ ( DATE ) CARDINAL Rev CARDINAL § ( CARDINAL ) the ORG noted that “ the mechanisms which are limited to compensation are too weak and do not adequately incite the GPE to modify their operational process , and provide compensation only a posteriori in the event of a proven violation instead of trying to find a solution for the problem of delays . ”" ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , ORG , is a NORP national who was born in DATE and lives in GPE . ORG ( “ the Government ” ) were represented by their Agent , Mr PERSON , from ORG .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "In DATE a certain C. repaired the applicant ’s DATE cottage , for which the applicant paid him CZK CARDINAL,CARDINAL ( EUR CARDINAL ) . However , this did not correspond to the real extent of the work C. had carried out . On the applicant ’s criminal complaint , the police started to investigate the case . However , they closed it on DATE , as C. was subject to a presidential amnesty .", "On DATE the applicant brought a civil action for damages against C. , seeking payment of CZK CARDINAL ( EUR CARDINAL ) .", "In a judgment of CARDINAL DATE ORG ordered C. to pay the applicant CZK CARDINAL,CARDINAL ( EUR CARDINAL ) with interest and dismissed the remainder of the applicant ’s action . On DATE and CARDINAL DATE respectively , the applicant and ORG appealed .", "On DATE ORG partly dismissed and partly granted the applicant ’s appeal and sent the relevant part of the case back to ORG .", "At a hearing held before FAC on DATE the applicant unsuccessfully requested the court to order a new expert opinion . At the end of the hearing the court delivered a judgment by which it rejected the remaining part of the applicant ’s action for damages . The applicant was ordered to pay court fees .", "In a judgment of DATE ORG upheld the merits of ORG judgment .", "On DATE ORG judgment was served on the applicant who , on DATE , was informed that the judgments had not yet become enforceable , as it was not possible to deliver ORG judgment to C. According to the Government , the judgment became final on DATE .", "On DATE the applicant applied for compensation pursuant to Act no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL as amended . She claimed CZK MONEY ( ORG CARDINAL ) in respect of pecuniary damage , CZK CARDINAL ( EUR CARDINAL ) in respect of non - pecuniary damage and CZK MONEY ( EUR CARDINAL ) in respect of court fees .", "In a letter of DATE ORG informed the applicant that her application had been accepted , that it had been found that her right to a determination of their civil claim within a reasonable time had been violated and that she had been awarded a sum of CZK CARDINAL,CARDINAL ( EUR CARDINAL ) in respect of non - pecuniary damage she might have sustained and CZK CARDINAL,CARDINAL ( EUR CARDINAL ) in respect of court fees . ORG refused , however , the applicant ’s claim regarding compensation for pecuniary damage .", "On DATE the applicant informed the Registry that she did not intend to turn to a court under section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of Act no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL as amended .", "The relevant domestic law and practice concerning remedies for the allegedly excessive length of judicial proceedings are set out in the ORG ’s decision in the case of PERSON v. GPE , no . MONEY ( dec . ) , § § CARDINAL - CARDINAL , DATE ) ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "On DATE the applicant was arrested on suspicion of robbery and assault and taken to a police station for questioning . He was released DATE on an undertaking not to leave town . On an unspecified date he retained a lawyer to represent him .", "According to the applicant , on CARDINAL DATE P. , one of the victims of the assault , identified the applicant as one of the perpetrators . P. confirmed his allegations during the confrontation with the applicant .", "On DATE the prosecutor authorised the applicant ’s detention pending investigation and trial . On DATE the applicant was taken into custody .", "The bill of indictment prepared by the police investigator on DATE was approved by the prosecutor on CARDINAL October CARDINAL and subsequently forwarded to ORG of GPE .", "On DATE ORG remitted the matter for additional investigation to the police . The court noted , inter alia , that the investigator had failed to communicate to the applicant the materials from the case file , including the forensic expert ’s reports . Following the completion of the investigation , the case file was resent to the court .", "On DATE ORG granted the applicant ’s request to appoint his mother to represent him before the court .", "On DATE ORG found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced him to DATE and CARDINAL months’ imprisonment . ORG quashed the applicant ’s conviction and remitted the matter for fresh consideration on DATE .", "It appears that during the new trial , ORG refused to appoint the applicant ’s mother to represent him . The applicant retained counsel PERSON as his defender .", "On DATE the applicant asked the court to release him pending trial . He referred to appalling conditions of his detention and his deteriorating health . The court dismissed the applicant ’s request .", "On DATE ORG found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced him to DATE and CARDINAL months’ imprisonment . The court based its findings , inter alia , on forensic evidence and the testimonies of the applicant ’s accomplice and CARDINAL of the victims of the assault , who testified in court . Their testimonies were corroborated by the statements made by P. , another victim of the assault . The court could not establish P. ’s whereabouts and relied on the transcripts of his earlier questioning by the police .", "The applicant appealed against his conviction . He challenged the lawfulness of the trial court ’s findings and alleged that the sentence imposed on him had been too severe . In that respect he mentioned that he had by then spent DATE in appalling conditions awaiting determination of the criminal charges against him .", "On DATE ORG upheld the applicant ’s conviction on appeal , dismissing , inter alia , the applicant ’s argument that the sentence was too severe .", "According to the Government , from DATE to CARDINAL DATE the applicant was detained at remand prison no . ORG in GPE . DATE and DATE he was placed in remand prison no . IZ-CARDINAL/CARDINAL in GPE . On DATE the applicant was transferred back to remand prison no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , where he stayed until DATE . The applicant did not dispute the information submitted by the Government .", "According to the applicant , at all times the number of inmates detained in each cell exceeded its capacity . The cells were designed to accommodate CARDINAL persons . Instead , there were CARDINAL inmates held there . The number of beds was not sufficient and the inmates had to take turns to sleep . As a result of being detained in such congested conditions for an extended period of time , the applicant contracted tuberculosis .", "The Government did not provide any information concerning the number of inmates detained with the applicant referring to the destruction of the official relevant records due to the expiration of the statutory time - limit for their storage .", "On DATE the applicant underwent an X - ray examination and was diagnosed with pulmonary tuberculosis . According to the excerpt from his medical file , submitted by the Government , he was examined by a phtisiologist who prescribed him the following medication : isoniazid , pyrazinamide , ethambutol , rifampicin , multivitamins and special food rations .", "On DATE the applicant was transferred to the hospital at remand prison no . IZ-CARDINAL/CARDINAL in GPE .", "According to the excerpt from the applicant ’s medical file , submitted by the Government , he received the following medication : isoniazid , streptomycin , pyrazinamide , rifampicin and vitamin B. On DATE the applicant had a blood test for HIV and syphilis with negative results . On DATE he had general blood and urine tests , which showed no anomalies .", "According to the excerpt from the applicant ’s medical file submitted by the Government , on DATE the applicant was examined by a doctor , who found him fit for transfer to the correctional colony and authorised his discharge from the prison hospital . The doctor further recommended that the applicant continue in - patient treatment at the colony and indicated that he should undergo another X - ray examination in DATE .", "According to the ORG , the applicant received special food rations as per applicable domestic standards . His health condition was satisfactory .", "From DATE to CARDINAL DATE the applicant was transported from GPE to medical colony no . ORG in LOC .", "According to the Government , the conditions of the applicant ’s transport were satisfactory . On the train he had an individual sleeping berth . The number of detainees on the train did not exceed the applicable standards . The carriage had natural ventilation , toilet facilities and electric light . The applicant received food and drinking water and was allowed to use the toilet facilities when required .", "According to the applicant , he did not receive any medical treatment during the whole period of the transfer to the colony .", "On DATE the applicant arrived at medical correctional colony no . ORG in GPE . He was held there until DATE .", "According to the excerpt from the medical file , on DATE the applicant was examined by a doctor who noted that the applicant ’s health condition was satisfactory and that he did not develop good tolerance to the prescribed medication . The doctor recommended special food rations and out - patient treatment . He compiled a list of medicines for the applicant to be given intermittently , notably DATE . It included ethambutol , rifadin and pyrazinamide .", "On DATE the applicant was examined by a phtisiologist , who noted that the applicant ’s condition was satisfactory , his temperature was CARDINAL , and he was receiving the necessary food rations . The doctor further recommended the same diet and out - patient treatment prescribed earlier .", "From DATE to CARDINAL DATE the applicant was being transported from LOC to medical correctional colony no . LIU-CARDINAL in LOC . According to the Government , the conditions of the applicant ’s transport were in compliance with the standards established by LAW .", "According to the applicant , he received no medical assistance during the whole period of the transfer .", "On DATE the applicant arrived at medical correctional colony no . LIU-CARDINAL in LOC . According to the Government , he underwent further treatment there and was cured of tuberculosis .", "On DATE the applicant was admitted to hospital in accordance with the decision of the medical panel . In - patient treatment was completed on CARDINAL DATE . The applicant continued to receive out - patient treatment and on DATE the medical panel found him completely cured of tuberculosis . The applicant was discharged from the medical colony .", "The ORG report on the visit to GPE carried out from DATE provides as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . The ORG is also seriously concerned by the practice of transferring back from GPE to ORG facilities prisoners diagnosed to have BK+ tuberculosis ( and hence highly contagious ) , as well as by the interruption of GPE treatment while at the ORG . An interruption of the treatment also appeared to occur during transfers between penitentiary establishments .", "In the interest of combating the spread of tuberculosis within the law - enforcement and penitentiary system and in society in general , the ORG recommends that immediate measures be taken to put an end to the above - mentioned practice .", "The relevant extracts from Treatment of Tuberculosis : ORG , DATE , provide the recommendations as follows :", "“ CARDINAL NORP Recommended standardized treatment regimens", "New cases", "Treatment regimens have an initial ( or intensive ) phase lasting DATE and a continuation phase usually lasting DATE . During the initial phase , consisting usually of isoniazid , rifampicin , pyrazinamide and ethambutol , the tubercle bacilli are killed rapidly . Infectious patients quickly become non - infectious ( within DATE ) . Symptoms abate . The vast majority of patients with sputum smear - positive TB become smear - negative within DATE . During the continuation phase , fewer drugs are necessary but for a longer time . The sterilizing effect of the drugs eliminates the remaining bacilli and prevents subsequent relapse . ”", "The relevant extracts from the CARDINALrd ORG [ ORG ( CARDINAL ) CARDINAL ] by ORG for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment ( “ the ORG ” ) read as follows :", "A prison health care service should be able to provide medical treatment and nursing care , as well as appropriate diets , physiotherapy , rehabilitation or any other necessary special facility , in conditions comparable to those enjoyed by patients in the outside community . Provision in terms of medical , nursing and technical staff , as well as LOC , installations and equipment , should be geared accordingly .", "There should be appropriate supervision of the pharmacy and of the distribution of medicines . Further , the preparation of medicines should always be entrusted to qualified staff ( pharmacist / nurse , etc . ) .", "DATE . A medical file should be compiled for each patient , containing diagnostic information as well as an ongoing record of the patient ’s evolution and of any special examinations he has undergone . In the event of a transfer , the file should be forwarded to the doctors in the receiving establishment .", "Further , DATE registers should be kept by health care teams , in which particular incidents relating to the patients should be mentioned . Such registers are useful in that they provide an overall view of the health care situation in the prison , at the same time as highlighting specific problems which may arise .", "The smooth operation of a health care service presupposes that doctors and nursing staff are able to meet regularly and to form a working team under the authority of a senior doctor in charge of the service . ”" ]

[ "3" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in FAC .", "On DATE the applicant was grievously injured in a car accident . She was unconscious for DATE and remained in hospital for DATE . Although she and her husband were separated at the time and were going through a divorce , he was also in the car and sustained some injuries .", "Section CARDINAL of LAW ( Zakon o kazenskem postopku ) read as follows :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) If criminal proceedings are terminated or a judgment is rendered by which the applicant is acquitted or the bill of indictment dismissed , or if a decision is rendered by which the bill of indictment is rejected , the court shall decide in the judgment or decision that the costs and expenses of the criminal proceedings , from clause CARDINAL to clause CARDINAL of the second paragraph of section CARDINAL of the present Act , as well as necessary expenses of the accused and necessary expenses and fees of defence counsel , shall be charged to the [ ORG ] budget ... ”" ]

[ "13" ]

[]

[]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[ "PERSON was born in DATE and lives in GPE , GPE . PERSON was born in DATE and lives in GPE , GPE .", "PERSON was granted an old - age pension in DATE and PERSON in DATE .", "NORP In DATE they moved from what is DATE GPE ( “ the Federation ” ) to what is DATE PERSON ( each of the Federation and PERSON being an “ Entity ” ) . While they were internally displaced , they received their pensions from ORG ( “ the ORG ” ) .", "Having returned to ORG respectively , the applicants unsuccessfully sought to have their pension entitlements transferred from ORG to ORG ( “ the ORG ” ) . Therefore , in DATE they lodged applications with ORG , a domestic human - rights body set up by ORG CARDINAL to ORG for Peace in GPE .", "On DATE ORG delivered a landmark decision concerning CARDINAL applicants , including CARDINAL of the applicants in the present case ( PERSON ) and the applicant in PERSON ( cited above ) , who had been granted pensions in what is DATE the Federation before the war , who had then moved to what is DATE PERSON during the war , and who , for that reason only , continued to receive ORG pensions despite their return to the Federation after the war ( pursuant to ORG , see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . They were thus treated differently from those who had stayed in what is DATE the Federation during the war . ORG considered that difference in treatment to be discriminatory and an obstacle to the return of displaced persons to their pre - war homes ( ORG pensions were normally lower than ORG pensions , and the cost of living was normally higher in ORG . Furthermore , it held that the situation complained of had racist connotations ( given the nature of the war , the population that had moved from what is DATE the GPE to what is DATE PERSON during the war had primarily been NORP , and those who had stayed were mostly Bosniacs and NORP ) . ORG ordered ORG ( a ) to take all necessary legislative and administrative actions by DATE to ensure that the applicants were no longer discriminated against , particularly in comparison to those pensioners who had remained in what is DATE the Federation during the war ; and ( b ) to compensate the applicants for the difference between their ORG pensions and the amount they would have received from ORG from DATE of their application to ORG until DATE the GPE ’s compliance with the order under ( a ) above .", "Having assessed that her pension from ORG would have been lower than the nominal amount of her pension from ORG , on DATE the ORG informed PERSON that she would not be paid any compensation . ORG disregarded the fact that , at that time , pensioners in PERSON , as opposed to those in the Federation , did not receive the nominal amount of their pensions , but only a fraction thereof , owing to fiscal difficulties in that Entity .", "Mr PERSON ’s case was still pending when ORG ceased to exist on DATE . ORG GPE ( “ the Constitutional Court ” ) took over his case and on DATE delivered a judgment similar to that in PERSON case .", "On DATE ORG decided to pay Mr MONEY ( BAM ) by way of compensation for the difference between the sum which he had received from ORG DATE and DATE and the sum which he would have received from ORG in DATE . It also decided to continue paying any such difference in the future . In DATE , for example , the applicant received BAM CARDINAL from ORG and BAM CARDINAL from ORG .", "After the ORG judgment , cited above , ORG revised its practice and agreed to compensate PERSON for the difference between the sum which she had actually received from ORG ( rather than the nominal amount of her ORG pension , see paragraph CARDINAL above ) and the sum which she would have received from ORG in DATE . In order to determine the amount due , on DATE and CARDINAL DATE ORG asked ORG to indicate the sums actually paid to PERSON . ORG failed to respond . On DATE and CARDINAL DATE ORG sent letters to PERSON ( one to an address in GPE and the other to an address in GPE ) , but they were returned as undeliverable ( addressee unknown ) . In DATE the applicant finally provided the necessary information and in DATE ORG paid PERSON CARDINAL,CARDINAL ( that is , BAM CARDINAL for DATE , BAM CARDINAL for DATE and BAM CARDINAL for DATE ) . Since DATE the applicant had apparently been receiving more from ORG than she would have received from ORG ( in DATE she thus received BAM CARDINAL from ORG whereas she would have received BAM CARDINAL from ORG ) .", "On DATE ORG held that its decision in PERSON case of DATE had not been enforced , because he had not yet been granted an ORG pension ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) .", "According to official figures , the average pension has always been lower in LOC than in the Federation . That difference has , however , decreased : while in DATE the average pension was BAM CARDINAL in PERSON and BAM CARDINAL in the Federation , in DATE the figures were BAM CARDINAL in ORG and PERSON in ORG . Furthermore , pensioners in PERSON now receive , as do those in the Federation , the nominal amount of their pensions ( until recently , the former , as opposed to the latter , were only receiving a fraction of their nominal pensions owing to fiscal difficulties in that Entity ) .", "The Pension Agreement between the local pension funds entered into force on DATE . Pursuant to LAW , persons who were receiving pensions from , for example , ORG on DATE will continue to receive their pensions from that ORG , even if they subsequently move to the GPE .", "All pensioners living in CARDINAL Entity have equal access to health care , regardless of whether they receive their pensions from that Entity or from the other Entity ( LAW ) .", "Pensions are not taxable in either of the ORG , regardless of whether they are received from the ORG concerned , from the other ORG or from abroad ( see LAW DATE and LAW ) .", "The former ORG and ORG rendered CARDINAL decisions concerning CARDINAL pensioners ( including the present applicants ) who had been granted pensions in what is DATE the Federation before the war , who had then moved to what is DATE PERSON during the war , and who , for that reason only , had continued to receive ORG pensions despite their return to the Federation after the war . They held that this amounted to discrimination and ordered that some general measures be taken by ORG see paragraph CARDINAL above ) . ORG considered that the full enforcement of those decisions required that the applicants be granted ORG pensions and that the applicable legislation be amended so as to render all others in that situation eligible to apply for ORG pensions ( see decisions CH/CARDINAL/CARDINAL of CARDINAL DATE and GPE of CARDINAL DATE ) .", "In contrast , as regards those who had been granted pensions in what is DATE the Federation before the war , who had moved to what is DATE PERSON during the war and who had not returned to ORG after the war , the same bodies held that the fact that they received ORG pensions ( instead of higher ORG pensions ) did not amount to discrimination ( ORG decision CH/CARDINAL/CARDINAL of CARDINAL DATE and ORG decision ORG of CARDINAL DATE ) ." ]

[ "14", "6", "P1" ]

[ "6-1", "P1-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicants are spouses . They were born in DATE and live in Tokmak .", "According to the applicants , in the period DATE the first applicant lived and worked outside Tokmak .", "On DATE an unknown person broke CARDINAL windows in a building near the applicants ' flat .", "On DATE the ORG ( “ the Police Office ” ) instituted a criminal investigation into that event .", "On DATE ORG , suspecting that the first applicant might have been involved in that event , ordered a search of his residence . The decision to carry out the search was based on the reason that evidence related to the event could be found in the first applicant 's home . On DATE the search order was approved by the local prosecutor .", "On DATE , when the applicants ' son was celebrating his birthday with a number of his friends , the police officers entered the applicants ' flat to carry out the search . The second applicant , who was in the early stage of pregnancy , objected to the search , stating that the search order contained no reasonable explanation for her or her husband 's possible involvement in the crime or for the need to search the flat . In response , the police officers allegedly threatened her and began the search operation in the presence of the guests . The first applicant was absent .", "In the course of the search nothing was identified or seized for the purpose of the investigation .", "On unspecified date the applicants complained to ORG ( “ ORG Office ” ) alleging that the search had been unlawful .", "On DATE ORG informed the applicants that following an inquiry it had been established that the search had been carried out without a valid reason , in breach of LAW .", "On DATE ORG informed the applicants that the police officers who had carried out the search had been disciplined .", "On DATE the applicants instituted proceedings in the ORG against ORG , ORG , and GPE , seeking to have the search operation declared groundless and unlawful . The second applicant additionally claimed compensation for non - pecuniary damage caused by the unlawful act . She relied on ORG CARDINAL - CARDINAL and CARDINAL of LAW and on LAW “ On the procedure for compensation for damage caused to citizens by unlawful acts of bodies of inquiry , pre - trial investigation authorities , prosecutor 's offices and courts ” ( “ LAW ” ) .", "On DATE the ORG considered the applicants ' claims . As to the first applicant , the court found that the search had been carried out DATE after the crime and there had not been sufficient grounds to believe that evidence could be found in the applicants ' home . The court therefore allowed his claim and declared that the search had been groundless and unlawful . As to the second applicant , the court examined the invoked provisions of LAW and LAW and concluded that damage caused by the procedural acts of bodies of inquiry , investigative authorities , prosecutor 's offices and courts could be compensated only in cases provided for by LAW . It further stated that the search had been carried out in connection with the suspicion against the first applicant only ; the second applicant was not entitled to claim damages for procedural acts which had been carried out in respect of another person . For those reasons it rejected the second applicant 's claim .", "On DATE the applicants appealed against the judgment of CARDINAL DATE , stating , inter alia , that the first applicant had not suffered any damage on account of the unlawful search , and that it had been the second applicant who had incurred damage , as she had been present in the flat at the time .", "On DATE ORG endorsed the rejection of the claim of the second applicant , reconfirming that it was only LAW that had to be applied and that under that provision the second applicant could not claim any damages , since the search had been carried out only in connection with the first applicant , who had been a suspect in the criminal proceedings . The court further quashed the judgment of CARDINAL DATE as regards the claim of the first applicant and dismissed it , stating that such a claim had to be considered in the course of relevant criminal proceedings .", "On DATE the applicants appealed in cassation against the decision of DATE , reiterating in particular that it had been the second applicant , but not the first , who had suffered damage on account of the unlawful acts . They asked ORG to adopt a new judgment satisfying the claim of the second applicant .", "On DATE ORG rejected the applicants ' cassation appeal as unsubstantiated .", "The relevant extracts of the LAW provide as follows :", "“ Acts and decisions of a body of inquiry can be challenged before the prosecutor , while their decisions on termination of criminal proceedings can also be challenged before the courts ... ”", "“ A search shall be carried out if there are sufficient grounds to believe that the means of committing an offence ... and other items and documents important for the case are kept on certain LOC . ... ”", "“ Investigators ' acts can be challenged before a prosecutor ... ”", "NORP In accordance with LAW , an application for review of the civil case may be submitted on the ground that an international judicial authority , whose jurisdiction was recognised by GPE , found that GPE violated its international obligations in the course of consideration of the civil case by the courts .", "The relevant extracts of the LAW provide as follows :", "“ Non - pecuniary damage caused to a citizen or an organisation ... shall be compensated by the person who has caused that damage unless the latter proves not to have been guilty . ... ”", "“ Damage caused to a citizen by unlawful conviction , unlawful bringing to criminal responsibility , unlawful pre - trial detention in the course of criminal proceedings , unlawful imposition of such administrative penalties as arrest or correctional labour shall be compensated for by the ORG in full regardless of the guilt of the officials of the bodies of inquiry , pre - trial investigation authorities , prosecutor 's offices and courts , in accordance with the procedure established by the law . ”", "The relevant provisions of the LAW can be found in the judgment of PERSON v. GPE ( no . CARDINAL , § CARDINAL , DATE ) .", "NORP In accordance with paragraph CARDINAL of this Resolution , moral ( nonpecuniary ) damage shall be compensated to the physical person or legal entity whose rights have been directly affected by the unlawful acts ( inactivity ) of the other persons ." ]

[ "13", "8" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in LOC .", "On DATE the applicant was remanded in custody by ORG on suspicion of murder . The court held that there had been a risk that the applicant might obstruct the proceedings or abscond , given the severity of the penalty he faced .", "Later , several other persons were detained and charged in connection with the same investigation conducted by ORG . The charges against the applicant were also extended .", "The applicant ’s detention was subsequently prolonged on the following dates : DATE , DATE , DATE , DATE , CARDINAL DATE , DATE , DATE , DATE , DATE , CARDINAL DATE , DATE , DATE , DATE , CARDINAL DATE and DATE . The courts relied mainly on the reasonable suspicion that the applicant had committed the offences in question and on he might obstruct the proceedings . Regard was also had to the number of suspects and the need to obtain further evidence .", "During the investigation and the trial the applicant filed several unsuccessful applications for release and appealed , likewise unsuccessfully , against the decisions prolonging his detention .", "From DATE until DATE and from CARDINAL DATE until DATE the applicant served prison sentences imposed in other sets of criminal proceedings against him .", "On DATE the ORG delivered a judgment in the case . The applicant appealed .", "On DATE the ORG partly quashed the first - instance judgment in respect of the applicant , sentenced him to CARDINAL imprisonment in respect of some of the charges , and remitted the remainder of the case for retrial .", "DATE the Gdańsk Regional Court held QUANTITY hearings in the case .", "The applicant was released on CARDINAL DATE . The ORG found that the necessary pieces of evidence had been obtained and the case was at its final stage , so there was no need to prolong the applicant ’s detention .", "The proceedings are pending .", "The relevant domestic law and practice concerning the imposition of detention on remand ( aresztowanie tymczasowe ) , the grounds for its prolongation , release from detention and rules governing other , so - called “ preventive measures ” ( środki zapobiegawcze ) are stated in the ORG ’s judgments in the cases of ORG v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , § § DATE , CARDINAL DATE and PERSON v. GPE , no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , § § DATE , CARDINAL DATE ." ]

[ "5" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "Mr. PERSON , an NORP citizen born in DATE , is a shepherd . He resides at GPE ( Province of GPE ) .", "On DATE , the applicant was tried , together with a certain Mr. PERSON , by ORG in connection with various offences . As regards some of the charges ( threatening use of arms , unauthorised possession and carrying of arms and ammunition ) , he was sentenced to CARDINAL months’ imprisonment ( reclusione ) and a serious - offence fine ( multa ) of CARDINAL GPE ; on the other charges ( unauthorised possession and carrying of military weapons , causing damage to property , causing a dangerous explosion in an inhabited area ) , he was acquitted for want of sufficient evidence .", "The offenders , the public prosecutor ( procuratore della PERSON ) and the senior public prosecutor ( procuratore generale ) attached to ORG all appealed . Mr. PERSON ’s grounds of appeal were drafted by CARDINAL of the CARDINAL lawyers who had defended him at first instance , namely Mr. PERSON .", "ORG set the hearing down for DATE , but Mr. PERSON did not appear , although he had been notified of the date . ORG assigned an officially - appointed lawyer , a Mr. PERSON , to act for the applicant and then adjourned the proceedings indefinitely for other procedural reasons . The President subsequently decided that the hearing should be held on DATE . On DATE , ORG once more ordered an adjournment , since Mr. PERSON had not been notified of the date . The record of the sitting discloses that Mr. PERSON appeared before the ORG assisted by a new lawyer of his own choosing , Mr. PERSON , but not whether the latter was the only lawyer representing the applicant at that time .", "On DATE , the President of ORG set the adjourned hearing down for DATE . DATE , the GPE senior public prosecutor asked the GPE public prosecutor , in whose district the applicant was resident , to notify the latter accordingly and to make the necessary arrangements for transporting him to GPE should he be under arrest .", "The bailiff was unable to serve the summons either on Mr. PERSON himself or on a person duly authorised by law to accept it and therefore lodged it at the town hall ; the bailiff informed the applicant both by notice left at his home and by registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt . The letter , which had been posted on DATE , was collected by the applicant in person on DATE .", "On DATE , pursuant to a warrant issued by the ORG public prosecutor , Mr. PERSON was arrested and placed in custody in GPE in order to serve a sentence of CARDINAL months’ imprisonment imposed on him by ORG on DATE .", "The hearing of DATE was held in the absence not only of the applicant and his lawyer but also of the party seeking damages , the co - accused and his lawyer , and the CARDINAL witnesses who had been summoned . ORG was , in fact , unaware of Mr. PERSON ’s recent arrest and declared him to be unlawfully absent ( contumace ) .", "The latter asserts , without adducing any proof that he had told the authorities of the criminal proceedings pending against him and of the date of the hearing - which assertion the authorities deny - but that they made no arrangements to enable him to attend .", "Mr. PERSON failed to appear , since he had not received the notification : it had been sent to Mr. PERSON and probably also to Mr. PERSON , the other lawyer who had defended the applicant at first instance . According to his own evidence , Mr. PERSON learnt of the hearing only on DATE , DATE after the event , when relatives of his client sought information from him as to the progress of the proceedings .", "At the hearing on DATE , ORG assigned another lawyer , Mr. PERSON , to act for Mr. PERSON . The public prosecutor ’s office sought an adjournment so that the witnesses who should have been present on DATE ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) could attend . After deliberating in private , ORG refused this request and resumed the proceedings .", "As regards Mr. PERSON , the public prosecutor ’s office submitted that he should be convicted on the charges which ORG had dismissed for want of sufficient evidence and that the remainder of the first - instance judgment should be confirmed . Mr. PERSON did no more than refer back to the grounds of appeal , which had been drafted by Mr. PERSON .", "The hearing was concluded on DATE . ORG accepted the senior public prosecutor ’s submissions and imposed on the applicant heavier sentences , namely CARDINAL years’ imprisonment and a serious - offence fine of CARDINAL GPE , together with CARDINAL months’ \" detention \" ( arresto ) and a minor - offence fine ( ammenda ) of QUANTITY .", "The applicant appealed on points of law ; CARDINAL of his grounds of appeal related to his own and his lawyer ’s absence at the hearing on DATE .", "ORG dismissed the appeal on DATE . It held that the notification sent to Mr. PERSON satisfied the requirements of LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . As to the finding that Mr. PERSON had been unlawfully absent , ORG noted that the appeal court had been unaware of the impediment on which he relied .", "Article CARDINAL of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as follows :", "\" An accused who is under arrest shall attend the hearing free from physical restraint , unless precautions are necessary to obviate the risk of escape or violence .", "If at any time the accused refuses to attend and none of the circumstances contemplated in LAW obtains , the court shall direct that the proceedings are to continue as though he were present ; in that event , he shall for all purposes be represented by the defence counsel .", "... \"", "Under LAW on the application of LAW , it is for the public prosecutor ’s office to request that an accused who is in custody be escorted to the hearing .", "The accused may , by written declaration , decline to appear . If he does not decline , the rules concerning his participation and his assistance or representation by a defence counsel must always be complied with , failing which the proceedings will be null and void ( LAW ) . However , ORG has held that this ground of nullity does not apply if the court was unaware that the person concerned was in custody ( CARDINALnd Chamber , DATE , no . CARDINAL , DATE Reports , p. CARDINAL ) .", "Under LAW , where an accused , even if he is in custody , can not attend the hearing on account of a legitimate impediment , the court has to adjourn the proceedings unless he agrees to their continuing without him . However , according to LAW , if the impediment is not a legitimate one and if the notifications have been duly effected , the court has to order that judgment shall be rendered in absentia .", "The Code of Criminal Procedure lays down that both the accused and his defence counsel shall be informed on DATE of the hearing .", "As regards notification to the lawyer , Article CARDINAL provides :", "\" In cases before a regional court , an assize court , a court of appeal or an appel court of assize , the registrar shall ensure that the date fixed for the oral proceedings is notified in writing to the defence counsel DATE in advance ... \"", "The summons to appear is null and void if this LAW has not been complied with ( LAW ) .", "On the other hand , ORG , taking its decision in plenary session , held on DATE that where an accused is represented by several lawyers it suffices to address the notice to appear to CARDINAL of them only ( LOC and Others judgment ) .", "LAW provides , inter alia , that the proceedings shall be null and void if the accused did not have the assistance of defence counsel ; there is an exception in the case of an offence punishable by a minor - offence fine not exceeding CARDINAL GPE or \" detention \" for not more than one month , even if these penalties are imposed together . During the trial , the accused can not have CARDINAL defence counsel .", "Under LAW paragraph , of MONEY , if the accused has changed the defence counsel of his choice or simply withdrawn his instructions , the change or withdrawal is of no effect if the judge or the public prosecutor ’s office investigating the case is not informed thereof ; during the oral proceedings , such a change or withdrawal is effected by means of a declaration recorded in TIME .", "If the accused has not appointed a defence counsel or if the appointed counsel fails to fulfil his obligations , a lawyer will be officially assigned by the court ( Article CARDINAL , first and last paragraphs , of LAW ) .", "ORG , for its part , has held that a lawyer loses his status of defence counsel if he does not take part in the oral proceedings and does not arrange to be replaced ( CARDINALth ORG , CARDINAL DATE , GPE ) . ORG stated :", "\" In that event , the accused will be defended by a lawyer officially assigned to him , unless he renews his instructions to his previous counsel : failing such renewal , ( the latter ) can not lodge an appeal , this rights being reserved to the defence counsel who assisted or represented the accused during the proceedings . Accordingly , notice of a further hearing must be served on the officially - assigned defence counsel ... \"" ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-3" ]

[ "6-3-c" ]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , PERSON , is a NORP national who was born in DATE and lives in GPE . ORG ( “ the Government ” ) were represented by their Agent , PERSON of ORG .", "The applicant arrived in GPE in DATE . He was granted leave to enter for DATE . In DATE he applied for leave to remain as a working holidaymaker . He was granted leave to remain until DATE .", "In DATE he began living with his partner , who is a NORP citizen . On DATE their daughter was born .", "On DATE the applicant claimed asylum . The application was refused by the Secretary of ORG for ORG on DATE on the ground that there was no evidence to substantiate the claim . The applicant remained in GPE without leave .", "On DATE he was sentenced to CARDINAL months’ imprisonment following his conviction of CARDINAL counts of burglary and a breach of a probation order . On DATE he was sentenced to CARDINAL ORG imprisonment for driving whilst disqualified and driving without insurance .", "On DATE the applicant and his partner married . On DATE the applicant applied for leave to remain on the basis of his marriage to a NORP citizen . On DATE he was granted CARDINAL months’ leave to remain on the basis of the marriage .", "On DATE his leave to remain expired and he made no application for an extension .", "On DATE he was convicted by a ORG of CARDINAL counts of conspiracy to defraud and was sentenced to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment .", "On DATE the applicant was served with notice of a decision to deport him .", "On DATE his application for indefinite leave to remain as the spouse of a NORP citizen was refused and the Secretary of ORG for ORG made a deportation order against him .", "On DATE the applicant was released from custody on licence . On DATE he was convicted by a ORG for possession of a false instrument . He was sentenced to a total of CARDINAL months’ imprisonment . He was released on DATE .", "On DATE he was sentenced to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment for significant offences of dishonesty ( including possession and use of a false instrument and attempting to obtain a money transfer by deception ) . His sentence came to an end in DATE but he remained in immigration detention until DATE , when he was granted bail by ORG .", "On DATE the applicant ’s appeal against the decision to deport him was dismissed by ORG , which found that in view of his criminal conduct and the separation that had already taken place between himself and his family due to his imprisonment , his deportation would not be a disproportionate interference with his right to respect for his family life . The ORG accepted , however , that the applicant ’s wife was a GPE citizen of NORP origin ; that she would not relocate to GPE with the applicant if he were deported ; that her mother was in poor health , requiring her to visit her CARDINAL times DATE ; that she was in part - time employment in GPE ; and finally , that she had not known that the applicant had no leave to remain when she married him .", "On DATE the applicant made a fresh claim to remain in GPE on human rights grounds , namely LAW . This was refused by the Secretary of ORG by letter dated DATE . He appealed to an Adjudicator . The Adjudicator dismissed the appeal on DATE , finding that the interference with the applicant ’s family life was proportionate in view of his criminal conduct .", "On DATE ORG allowed the applicant ’s appeal against the ORG ’s decision on the ground that the Adjudicator had misdirected himself on the appropriate standard of proof for a human rights claim and accordingly his determination was “ fatally flawed ” . The appeal was remitted to another Adjudicator to be considered afresh .", "On DATE a second Adjudicator dismissed the applicant ’s appeal against the refusal of his human rights claim .", "On DATE his application for reconsideration was refused by a ORG Judge on the ground that the Adjudicator ’s decision disclosed no error of law . On DATE ORG also refused the applicant ’s application for reconsideration of the decision .", "In DATE the applicant ’s daughter issued an application for judicial review challenging the decision to deport him . The application was based on a breach of domestic policy rather than LAW Permission was refused on the papers on DATE . An application to renew the application was made outside DATE time - limit prescribed by the relevant rule of court . Permission was finally refused on DATE .", "The applicant was deported to GPE on DATE .", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of the LAW DATE provides , insofar as material , as follows :", "“ A person who is not a NORP citizen in liable to deportation from GPE if : -", "the Secretary of ORG deems his deportation to be conducive to the public good ;", "... ”", "At the time of the applicant ’s deportation , paragraphs LAW of ORG CARDINAL ( as amended ) provided that after a minimum of DATE following his deportation , the applicant would be entitled to apply to have his deportation order revoked . Revocation of the deportation order did not entitle the applicant to re - enter GPE ; rather , it would entitle him to apply for admission under LAW .", "Following the applicant ’s deportation , paragraphs CARDINAL of ORG CARDINAL ( as amended ) were amended . They now provide as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . An application for revocation of a deportation order will be considered in the light of all the circumstances including the following :", "( i ) the grounds on which the order was made ;", "( ii ) any representations made in support of revocation ;", "( iii ) the interests of the community , including the maintenance of an effective immigration control ;", "( iv ) the interests of the applicant , including any compassionate circumstances .", "In the case of an applicant who has been deported following conviction for a criminal offence continued exclusion", "( i ) in the case of a conviction which is capable of being spent under LAW , unless the conviction is spent within the meaning of that LAW or , if the conviction is spent in DATE , DATE have elapsed since the making of the deportation order ; or", "( ii ) in the case of a conviction not capable of being spent under that LAW , at any time , unless refusal to revoke the deportation order would be contrary to LAW or LAW .", "will normally be the proper course . In other cases revocation of the order will not normally be authorised unless the situation has been materially altered , either by a change of circumstances since the order was made , or by fresh information coming to light which was not before , or the appellate authorities or the Secretary of ORG . The passage of time since the person was deported may also in itself amount to such a change of circumstances as to warrant revocation of the order .", "Revocation of a deportation order does not entitle the person concerned to re - enter GPE ; it renders him eligible to apply for admission under LAW . Application for revocation of the order may be made to ORG or direct to ORG . ”" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicants were born in DATE and DATE respectively . They were a married couple and lived in PERSON .", "On DATE the applicants lodged an action with the ORG ( ORG súd ) against their daughter ’s husband seeking restitution of his share in the ownership of a flat , which the applicants had donated to the defendant and their daughter , his wife . They argued that the defendant had been severely abusing their daughter , both psychologically and physically , thus behaving wrongly towards her and , thereby , also themselves .", "On DATE the applicants requested that a hearing be scheduled . ORG did so for DATE , CARDINAL DATE , CARDINAL DATE and DATE . It appears that the first of these hearings did not take place since it had proven impossible to have the summons served on the defendant . The later hearing was cancelled at the applicants’ request because there was an application pending before ORG for correction of the records concerning title to the property to be restored .", "Meanwhile , the applicants had been ordered to submit evidence ( DATE ) , which they did ( CARDINAL May CARDINAL ) . They also submitted further evidence ( DATE and DATE ) .", "On DATE a hearing was held , following which – on DATE ORG suspended the proceedings pending the outcome of criminal proceedings , which had been instituted against the defendant in the meantime .", "On DATE ORG ( PERSON súd ) quashed the decision of DATE following an appeal by the applicants .", "On DATE the applicants filed a complaint to the president of ORG submitting that since DATE ORG had been completely inactive which , in their view , constituted delays .", "The president of ORG replied by a letter dated DATE referring to the ORG complaint as a “ repeated ” complaint and finding it justified . He acknowledged that since DATE the judge in charge of the case had not taken any step with a view to resolving it , and advised the applicants that the judge had been reminded in writing to proceed with the case without delay .", "NORP The letter of the president of ORG of DATE was served on the ORG representative on DATE . On the latter date , the applicants challenged the length of the proceedings by way of a complaint under LAW no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL Coll . , as amended – PERSON ) to ORG ( Ústavný súd ) . The details are set out in paragraphs CARDINAL to CARDINAL below .", "On DATE ORG held a hearing , following which the applicants were ordered to produce further evidence . They did so on DATE .", "Further hearings were held on DATE and CARDINAL DATE and ORG allowed the action on DATE .", "The defendant ’s appeal of CARDINAL DATE was dismissed by ORG on DATE , following a hearing held on DATE . It became final and binding on CARDINAL DATE .", "NORP The applicants’ complaint to ORG ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) was received by ORG on DATE .", "In their complaint , the applicants submitted that not a single judgment had been given on their action despite its having been pending for DATE and DATE . They claimed a violation of their rights to a hearing without unjustified delay under LAW and LAW and the equivalent of MONEY ( ORG ) each in compensation for non - pecuniary damage .", "On DATE ORG declared the complaint inadmissible on the ground that the applicants had failed to satisfy the requirement of exhaustion of remedies under section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW ( Law no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL Coll . , as amended – PERSON o organizácii ORG súdu PERSON republiky , o konaní pred ním a o postavení jeho sudcov ) .", "Referring to its decisions in cases nos . IV . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , PERSON . ÚS CARDINAL , and II . ÚS DATE , ORG reiterated that a complaint under section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW ( Law no . PERSON . , as amended PERSON o súdoch ) to the president of the court concerned was considered to be a remedy to be used prior to the lodging of a constitutional complaint about the length of the proceedings before that court .", "The Constitutional Court further reiterated that the remedy in question could only be considered as having been duly used if the complainant had afforded the court in question adequate opportunity to take measures with a view to remedying and correcting the unlawful situation caused by its inaction or ineffective action .", "Observing that the applicants’ constitutional complaint had been received by ORG on DATE , it found that their complaint to the president of ORG had only been a formal step without any effect that it otherwise could have had , had the president of ORG been allowed adequate opportunity to take measures against unjustified delays in the impugned proceedings .", "The Constitutional Court ’s decision was served on the applicants’ lawyer on DATE .", "The relevant part of LAW provides :", "“ Everyone shall have the right to have his matter ... heard without undue delay ... ”", "Article CARDINAL reads as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . The Constitutional Court shall decide on complaints by natural or legal persons alleging a violation of their fundamental rights or freedoms ... unless the protection of such rights and freedoms falls within the jurisdiction of a different court .", "NORP If ORG finds a complaint justified , it shall deliver a decision stating that a person ’s rights or freedoms as set out in paragraph CARDINAL have been violated by a final decision , specific measure or other act and shall quash such decision , measure or act . If the violation that has been found is the result of a failure to act , ORG may order [ the authority ] which has violated the rights or freedoms to take the necessary action . At the same time it may remit the case to the authority concerned for further proceedings , order such authority to refrain from violating the fundamental rights and freedoms ... or , where appropriate , order those who have violated the rights or freedoms set out in paragraph CARDINAL to restore the situation to that existing prior to the violation .", "NORP In its decision on a complaint ORG may grant appropriate financial compensation to the person whose rights under paragraph CARDINAL have been violated . ”", "The relevant part of section CARDINAL :", "“ CARDINAL . A[n ] [ individual ] complaint is not admissible if the complainant has not exhausted legal remedies or other legal means , which a statute effectively provides to [ the complainant ] with a view to protecting [ the complainant ’s ] fundamental rights or freedoms , and which the complainant is entitled to use under special statute .", "The Constitutional Court shall not declare ORG ] [ individual ] complaint inadmissible even if the condition under sub - section CARDINAL has not been fulfilled , if the complainant establishes that [ the complainant ] has not fulfilled this condition owing to reasons worthy of particular consideration . ”", "The Act governs the system and powers of courts and courts’ administration . Its chapter ( PERSON ) CARDINAL in part ( Časť ) CARDINAL lays down the general rules on administration and management of courts . Its relevant part provides :", "“ Section CARDINAL", "...", "NORP The administration and management of courts may not interfere with their decision making activities .", "Section CARDINAL", "NORP The administration and management of courts shall be carried out by bodies of administration and management to the extent and by means laid down by statute .", "Bodies of administration and management of courts include the president and the vice - president of a court . ...", "...", "Section CARDINAL", "The ministry [ of justice ] is in charge of the management of courts as the central body of ORG administration for the judiciary ”", "LAW in Part CARDINAL deals with the powers of a president of a court . The relevant part of section DATE provides :", "“ CARDINAL . The president of a court oversees the judges’ compliance with ethical standards and the principles that judicial proceedings should be smooth and dignified and , for that purpose", "...", "( f ) monitors the decision - making activities of judges from the point of view of the smooth conduct of judicial proceedings ,", "( g ) examines complaints .", "...", "Should the president of a court establish a violation of the principle ... of the smooth conduct of judicial proceedings , the president is duty - bound to debate the shortcomings found with the judge concerned ... and , if necessary , to order measures ... to be taken with a view to eliminating the shortcomings found as well as their cause ...", "... ”", "Chapter CARDINAL in part CARDINAL deals with complaints about a court ’s conduct . Its relevant part provides as follows :", "“ Section CARDINAL", "A complaint may be brought by a participant or a party to proceedings . A complaint about a court ’s conduct may be brought following a breach of the right to a public hearing without unjustified delay or [ ... ]", "[ ... ]", "Section CARDINAL – Examination of complaints", "A complaint shall be dealt with by the president of the court concerned , unless [ LAW ] provides otherwise .", "Complaints against the president of the court shall be dealt with by the president of a higher court .", "Section CARDINAL", "NORP The purpose of dealing with a complaint is to establish whether there has been a delay in proceedings ... and to rectify any shortcomings found .", "NORP In order to establish the status of the matter , the body dealing with a complaint is duty - bound to examine all circumstances . Should the proper dealing with a complaint so require , the complainant shall be heard , as shall the persons against whom the complaint is directed and any other persons who may facilitate the examination of the complaint .", "Should the body entrusted with dealing with the complaint establish that it is justified , [ it ] shall take and ensure the taking of measures with a view to rectifying shortcomings and , if necessary , call those responsible for the shortcomings to account .", "Section CARDINAL", "A complaint shall be dealt with within DATE of the date on which it is received by the body liable to deal with it .", "[ ... ]", "Section CARDINAL", "The complainant must be informed in writing of the way in which a complaint has been dealt with and of the measures taken with a view to rectifying the shortcomings established . [ ... ]", "Section CARDINAL – Review of examination of complaints", "Should the complainant be of the view that a complaint which he filed to the competent body of a court has not been dealt with properly , [ the complainant ] may , within DATE of the service [ on the complainant ] of the reply [ to the complaint ] , demand that :", "( a ) the president of a ORG review the examination of the complaint by the president of ORG ,", "( b ) the ministry [ of justice ] review the examination of the complaint by the president of ORG or ORG .", "[ ... ]", "Section DATE Common provisions", "A complaint submitted to a court under section DATE or [ ... ] , shall be considered on its merits . ”", "The Act entered into force on DATE ( Article ORG ) . It replaced ( section CARDINAL ) , inter alia , ORG ( Law no . CARDINAL ORG . , as amended PERSON a obvodoch súdov PERSON republiky , štátnej správe súdov , vybavovaní sťažností a o voľbách prísediacich ( zákon o štátnej správe súdov ) ) , which had regulated the issue until then , according to a similar pattern ( see , for example , ORG v. GPE ( dec . ) , no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , CARDINAL DATE ; PERSON GPE DATE . ) , no . CARDINAL , DATE ; ORG and GPE v. GPE ( dec . ) , no . CARDINAL , DATE ; and PERSON GPE , no . CARDINAL , § DATE , CARDINAL DATE ) .", "LAW DATE ( PERSON o zodpovednosti za škodu spôsobenú pri výkone verejnej moci ) was enacted on DATE . It became operative on DATE and replaced , as from that date , LAW of DATE ( Law no . PERSON . PERSON o zodpovednosti za škodu spôsobenú rozhodnutím orgánu štátu alebo jeho nesprávnym úradným postupom ) .", "LAW DATE had no specific provisions for compensation for damage of a non - pecuniary nature ( see , mutatis mutandis , PERSON v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , § DATE , DATE with further references ) .", "The explanatory report on LAW DATE provides that the purpose of the LAW is to render the mechanism of compensation for damage caused by public authorities more effective and thus to reduce the number of cases in which persons are obliged to seek redress before ORG .", "Section CARDINAL provides :", "“ CARDINAL . The ORG is liable for damage caused by wrongful official conduct . Wrongful official conduct includes a public authority ’s failure to take action or issue a decision within the statutory time - limit , general inactivity in the exercise of public authority , unjustified delays in proceedings or other unlawful interference with rights and legally recognised interests of individuals and legal entities .", "NORP The right to compensation for damage caused by wrongful official conduct is vested in the person who sustained the damage . ”", "Section CARDINAL defines the manner and extent of compensation for damage . Its relevant part provides :", "“ CARDINAL . Damage and lost profit shall be compensated for , unless special legislation provides otherwise .", "NORP In the event that the finding of a violation of a right alone is not adequate compensation in view of the loss caused by the unlawful official action or wrongful official conduct , monetary compensation shall also be awarded for non - pecuniary damage , if it is not possible to compensate for it otherwise . ”", "Part CARDINAL of the Act contains common and transitional provisions . Section CARDINAL reads as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . Liability under this Act applies to damage caused by decisions [ issued ] and wrongful official conduct [ taking place ] after DATE of its entry into force .", "Liability for damage caused by decisions issued and wrongful official conduct [ having taken place ] before the entry into force of this Act shall be governed by the hitherto applicable statute . ”", "In connection with the present application , as well as CARDINAL other individual applications under the Convention of a similar kind , ORG produced a report .", "The report is dated DATE and concerns , specifically , the application of the rule of exhaustion of remedies under section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW , with reference to a complaint under LAW , in the context of a complaint under LAW of the LAW about the length of proceedings .", "The report can be summarised as follows .", "In applying section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW , the Constitutional Court relies on the principles of an “ available ” and “ effective ” remedy . By this is understood that the remedy is directly accessible to the complainant and that using it has direct procedural consequences capable of achieving redress in the form of restitution , compensation or at least prevention . As to a complaint under LAW in respect of the length of proceedings , its preventive ( accelerating ) effect for the future is central .", "In the exercise of their duties , should the presidents of courts establish unjustified delays in proceedings , they are duty - bound to debate them with the judge concerned and , if necessary , to prescribe measures to be taken with a view to rectifying the shortcomings found , as well as their cause . Moreover , they have the power to impose disciplinary sanctions .", "The effectiveness of a complaint under LAW and the requirement for it to be used are examined on the specific facts of every individual case , taking into account :", "( i ) the outcome of the complaint ( in particular whether it was found justified or not and whether the complainant has been informed of any measures taken ) ;", "( ii ) the conduct of the court subsequent to the introduction of the complaint ( whether the court has started examining the matter and begun taking specific procedural steps ) ;", "( iii ) the overall length and the subject matter of the proceedings ( whether any accelerating effect of the complaint is of importance and relevance from the point of view of the object and purpose of the right to a hearing without unjustified delay , in view of the past length of the proceedings and their subject matter ) ; and", "( vi ) the conduct of the complainants from the point of view of actively asserting their right to a hearing without unjustified delay .", "Application of the general criteria mentioned in the preceding paragraph results in CARDINAL contrasting situations , depicted in the following CARDINAL paragraphs .", "First , ORG has not required complainants to use the remedy in question in cases where the length of proceedings has been “ extreme ” or “ manifestly disproportionate ” , provided that , in the course of those proceedings , the complainants had been actively seeking their acceleration , even if not by way of a formal complaint under LAW .", "Second , ORG has declared inadmissible complaints under LAW on account of the ORG failure to comply with the requirement under section CARDINAL ) of LAW to exhaust remedies – the complaint under LAW – if the complainants lodged their complaints under LAW only formally , that is to say :", "( i ) after they had brought their complaints to ORG ,", "( ii ) at the same time as they brought their complaints to ORG , or", "( iii ) if they lodged their constitutional complaints so soon after their complaints under LAW that it was not objectively possible for the ordinary court to provide redress and for ORG to assess the effect of the complaint under LAW .", "A review by the president of the higher court of the examination of a complaint under LAW by the president of a lower court has never been required by ORG for the purposes of the exhaustion rule under section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW .", "A complaint under LAW , combined with an action for damages under LAW , and a complaint under LAW constitute a set of remedies to be considered compatible with the standards set out in the ORG ’s judgment in the case of GPE v. GPE ( [ ORG ] , no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , ORG CARDINALXI ) , including those under LAW of the LAW .", "NORP The report cites , inter alia , the following cases , which ORG declared inadmissible because a complaint under LAW ( or its equivalent under ORG ) :", "( i ) had not been lodged ( case no . II . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of DATE ; case no . III . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of CARDINAL DATE ; and case no . III . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of DATE ) ;", "( ii ) had not been lodged in the appropriate ( written ) form and , in any event , the alleged telephone complaint had been made DATE before the introduction of the constitutional complaint ( case no . IV . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of DATE ) ; and", "( iii ) could not be considered as having been properly used , as it had been lodged DATE ( case no . IV . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of CARDINAL DATE ) , DATE and DATE ( case no . III . ÚS CARDINAL , decision of DATE ) , and not DATE and DATE ( case no . III . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of DATE ) before the introduction of the respective constitutional complaint .", "As to ORG decisions , relied on by the applicants ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) , without further elaboration , the report suggests that they were not comparable and thus relevant to the applicants’ case because :", "- the proceedings had commenced on DATE , the complaint under LAW had been lodged on DATE , the president had replied on DATE and the constitutional complaint had not been lodged until DATE ( case no . IV . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) ;", "- a complaint under LAW could no longer have had any accelerating effect since , prior to it , the proceedings had been transferred to a different court for reasons of jurisdiction ( case no . III . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) ;", "- the proceedings had commenced in DATE , an application aimed at eliminating unjustified delays had been lodged on DATE and the constitutional complaint had been lodged on DATE ( case no . I. ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) ;", "- although the president of the court concerned had accepted that there had been unjustified delays in the proceedings , these were due to “ objective grounds ” , the proceedings having been conducted in a continuous manner , and no corrective measures were envisaged ( case no . I. ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) ;", "- the action had been lodged on DATE , a complaint under LAW had been lodged on DATE , the response of the president of the court concerned had been served on the complainant on DATE and the constitutional complaint had not been introduced until DATE ( on DATE ) ( case no . I ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) ;", "- in the course of the proceedings the complainants had several times demanded that hearings be scheduled and that the proceedings be conducted in a continuous manner , the proceedings at the relevant time having lasted for DATE ( case no . I. ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) ; and", "- although the complainant had not formally lodged a complaint under LAW , he had actively sought to have hearings scheduled and the proceedings conducted in a continuous fashion on numerous occasions ( case no . III . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) .", "The applicants argued that , in unrelated cases , which had however been represented by the same lawyer as in the present case , ORG had declared admissible the following constitutional complaints :", "( i ) which had been lodged DATE and DATE ( case no . IV . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of DATE ) , DATE ( case no . III . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of DATE ) , DATE and DATE ( case no . I. ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of DATE ) , DATE and DATE ( case no . III . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of DATE ) , DATE ( case ORG , decision of CARDINAL DATE ) , DATE ( case no . II . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of CARDINAL DATE ) , DATE ( case no . I. ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of DATE ) , DATE ( case no . IV . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of DATE ) , DATE and DATE ( case no . II . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , decision of DATE ) , and DATE ( case no . II . ORG , decision of DATE ) after the reply of the president of the court concerned who had accepted that there had been unjustified delays in the proceedings concerning actions of DATE , DATE , DATE , CARDINAL DATE , DATE , DATE , DATE , CARDINAL DATE , DATE and CARDINAL DATE respectively ; and", "( ii ) without examining whether or not prior to the constitutional complaint the complainant had asserted his rights by way of a complaint under LAW in an action of DATE ( case no . I. ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL ( decision of DATE ) ) , in an action of DATE ( case no . I. ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL ( decision of DATE ) ) and in an action of DATE ( case no . II CARDINAL/CARDINAL ( decision of CARDINAL DATE ) ) .", "In an unrelated case no . II . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL , with reference to a complaint under ORG , which was in the relevant aspects comparable to a complaint under LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) , ORG held that the use of such a complaint was not required prior to a claim before ORG that the length of the judicial proceedings in question was excessive ( judgment ( nález ) of DATE ) .", "In cases nos . III . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL and ORG dealt with repeated complaints under LAW of continuing delays in judicial proceedings following and despite previous judgments of ORG finding a violation of the ORG right to a hearing within a reasonable time and ordering the courts in question to proceed with the respective cases without delay .", "Case no . III . ÚS PERSON ( decision of CARDINAL DATE ) was declared admissible without a specific examination of whether a complaint had been lodged under LAW .", "Case no . I. ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL ( decision of DATE ) was declared inadmissible on account of the complainant ’s failure duly to use that remedy , his previous requests for the proceedings to be accelerated not having been taken into account .", "In cases nos . I. ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL and II . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL ORG dealt with complaints by CARDINAL individuals about the length of the proceedings in their joint action for damages . The complainants were represented by the same lawyer and had both lodged complaints under LAW ( DATE and DATE respectively ) prior to introducing their constitutional complaints ( CARDINAL DATE and DATE respectively ) .", "Case no . I. ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL ( decision of DATE ) was declared inadmissible because it had been lodged too soon after the reply of the president of the respective court ( DATE ) .", "Case no . II . ÚS CARDINAL/CARDINAL ( decision of DATE ) was declared admissible ." ]

[ "13", "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "On DATE , in the presence of others , the applicant shot PERSON who eventually died in a hospital .", "On DATE the police started criminal investigations into the event .", "On DATE the applicant was accused of inflicting bodily injuries ; on DATE he gave an undertaking not to abscond .", "On DATE the police also instituted criminal proceedings against the applicant on suspicion of unlawful possession of arms .", "On DATE the police changed the legal qualification of the applicant ’s actions and accused him of murder .", "On DATE the police accused the applicant of murder and unlawful possession of arms .", "On DATE the police submitted the criminal case to ORG for trial .", "NORP On DATE the court convicted the applicant of premeditated murder committed in the state of extreme emotional disturbance and sentenced him to DATE and CARDINAL months’ imprisonment .", "On DATE ORG upheld that judgment , which thus became final .", "On DATE the prosecutor lodged a protest against the decisions in the case . On DATE the Presidium of ORG rejected the protest .", "On DATE the Deputy Prosecutor General lodged a new protest .", "On DATE ORG found that the lower court had not duly established the motive of the crime , quashed the decisions in the case and remitted it to the prosecutors for additional investigations .", "On DATE the investigations were completed and on DATE the case was submitted to ORG for trial .", "On DATE the court convicted the applicant of premeditated murder and sentenced him to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment .", "On DATE ORG changed that judgment . On DATE ORG found that the court of appeal had not duly established the motive of the crime and remitted the case to that court for fresh consideration .", "On DATE ORG , in the applicant ’s absence , upheld the judgment of DATE with some minor modifications .", "On DATE ORG quashed the decision of DATE as it had been taken in the applicant ’s absence and remitted the case to ORG for fresh consideration .", "On DATE ORG changed the judgment of DATE and sentenced the applicant to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment for murder committed in the state of extreme disturbance . By the same judgment the court amnestied the applicant .", "On DATE ORG found that ORG had not duly established the motive of the crime , quashed this decision and remitted the case for fresh consideration on appeal .", "On DATE ORG sentenced the applicant to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment and changed the judgment of DATE .", "On DATE ORG found that the severity of the applicant ’s sentence did not correspond to the gravity of the crime , quashed the decision of DATE and remitted the case for fresh consideration to ORG .", "On DATE ORG upheld the judgement of CARDINAL DATE with minor modifications .", "On DATE ORG rejected the appeal in cassation lodged by the applicant ’s lawyer .", "In the course of the proceedings CARDINAL forensic examinations were ordered . CARDINAL times the applicant was placed in detention after conviction . Subsequently , he was released twice following the annulment of the convictions and twice on specific conditions . There were CARDINAL witnesses and a number of experts heard by the courts . The applicant and his lawyer lodged CARDINAL procedural requests and CARDINAL appeals against the ORG judgments and decisions ." ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , a NORP national , was born in DATE . He is represented by Mr PERSON , a lawyer practising in GPE .", "By letter of DATE , the applicant 's representative informed the ORG that the applicant had died on CARDINAL DATE and that his mother , the applicant 's sole heir , wished to pursue her son 's application .", "On DATE , the applicant was arrested and detained on remand on suspicion of having committed robbery . By summons of DATE , the applicant was charged with various counts of robbery and extortion and ordered to appear on DATE before ORG ( Arrondissementsrechtbank ) of GPE .", "In its judgment of DATE , following adversarial proceedings , ORG of GPE acquitted the applicant of the charges against him for lack of sufficient evidence and ordered his immediate release . The applicant was released on DATE . The public prosecutor filed an appeal with ORG ( Gerechtshof ) of GPE .", "In its judgment of DATE , following proceedings in absentia as the applicant had failed to appear , ORG of GPE quashed the judgment of DATE , convicted the applicant of CARDINAL count of robbery and CARDINAL counts of extortion and sentenced him to DATE imprisonment with deduction of the time spent in pre - trial detention . The applicant filed an appeal in cassation with ORG ( PERSON Raad ) .", "On DATE , ORG , holding that ORG had unjustly not allowed the applicant 's lawyer to conduct the applicant 's defence in the latter 's absence before ORG , quashed the judgment of DATE and referred the case back to ORG .", "By judgment of DATE , following proceedings in absentia , ORG of The Hague acquitted the applicant for lack of sufficient evidence .", "On DATE , the applicant filed a request with ORG , under LAW ) , for compensation in an amount of ORG . CARDINAL for the time he had spent in pre - trial detention as well as a request , under for Article CARDINALa of LAW , for reimbursement by the ORG of his legal costs in an amount of ORG . CARDINAL in connection with the proceedings on his request under LAW .", "In its decision of CARDINAL DATE , ORG of The Hague rejected the applicant 's request for compensation for the time he had spent in pre - trial detention , holding :", "< Translation >", "“ LAW opens the possibility for compensation of damages suffered as a consequence of having been detained in pre - trial custody where a case ends without the imposition of a punishment ... Compensation shall be awarded if and to the extent the court , taking all circumstances into account , is of the opinion that there are reasons in equity to do so .", "The court considers on this point that , in the applicant 's case , there were witnesses having made incriminating statements as to the applicant 's involvement in the punishable facts as charged , which fully justified the applicant 's detention during that phase < of the proceedings>.", "Moreover , sufficient lawful evidence was available , yet doubts as regards the applicant 's role have led to the acquittal . It has therefore not been established that the applicant has not committed the fact , so that , all circumstances having been taken into account , there are no reasons in equity for any compensation . ”", "On DATE , in a separate decision , ORG also rejected the applicant 's request under LAW CARDINALa of LAW . It held that , given its decision on the applicant 's request LAW , there were no reasons in equity for the costs claimed .", "No appeal lies against the decisions of DATE ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "DATE , the applicant ran a company which operated CARDINAL chemist shops . Following financial problems , the company went into liquidation in DATE . On CARDINAL DATE , a bankruptcy petition was presented against the applicant and on DATE , a bankruptcy order was made .", "On DATE , the applicant was publicly examined by the official receiver . Under section CARDINAL of LAW DATE , the applicant was obliged to answer the questions put to him by the official receiver and if he failed to comply without reasonable excuse , he would have been guilty of contempt of court and liable to punishment by a fine or imprisonment .", "On DATE and DATE , a building society advanced MONEY ( GBP ) and GBP CARDINAL respectively to the applicant . On DATE , the applicant 's wife collected part of the advance , GBP CARDINAL , and took it to GPE in a bin liner .", "The applicant was subsequently charged with CARDINAL offences of obtaining property by deception contrary to section CARDINAL ) of the Theft Act DATE on the grounds that he had misled the building society into advancing money by false representations regarding his income , his debts and the bankruptcy proceedings against him . He was also charged with CARDINAL offences of removing property required to be delivered to the official receiver and failing to account for the loss of property while bankrupt contrary to section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) and ( CARDINAL ) of LAW DATE .", "At the applicant 's trial in DATE , the prosecution introduced as evidence the transcript of the examination of the applicant by the official receiver in the bankruptcy proceedings . The applicant submitted that the transcript was inadmissible under LAW of LAW DATE which provides that a statement or admission made by a person answering questions in proceedings for the administration of any property or for an account of any property or dealings with property is not admissible in evidence against that person . However , the trial judge ruled the evidence admissible under section CARDINAL of LAW DATE which provided that statements made in pursuance of a requirement imposed by the Act could be used in evidence against the maker of the statement . The full transcript was placed before the jury and in his summing up , the judge stated that the transcript “ could be very important ” .", "On DATE , the applicant was convicted of the CARDINAL offences charged and was sentenced to DATE imprisonment . The applicant appealed against conviction and on CARDINAL DATE , ORG dismissed his appeal deciding , inter alia , that the transcript of the bankruptcy examination was admissible under section CARDINAL of LAW DATE which abrogated the privilege against self - incrimination . Leave to appeal was refused by ORG and by ORG .", "On DATE , ORG decided to remove the applicant 's licence to practise as a pharmacist on the grounds of unfitness due to his involvement in the deception connected with his bankruptcy proceedings and a previous reprimand relating to the cleanliness of his LOC .", "On DATE , ORG ( “ CCRC ” ) referred the applicant 's case back to ORG due to changes in the domestic law on obtaining mortgage advances by false statements . On DATE , the ORG added the ground that , following the decision of ORG in PERSON v. the GPE ( judgment of DATE , Reports of Judgments and Decisions CARDINAL-VI ) and the introduction of LAW DATE , the admission of answers given under compulsion during the bankruptcy examination may have been in breach of LAW and rendered the applicant 's conviction unsafe .", "On DATE , ORG overturned the applicant 's conviction on the grounds that the answers given by the applicant in his examination by the official receiver had been wrongly admitted at trial and in breach of LAW . The court found that LAW DATE could apply retrospectively . It certified a point of law to ORG as to whether LAW DATE could apply retrospectively in appeals arising from a reference by the ORG .", "The ORG appealed to ORG against the decision of ORG . On DATE , ORG allowed the appeal , holding that they were bound to follow the earlier decision of the ORG in R v. PERSON [ DATE ] CARDINAL WLR CARDINAL , which had decided that LAW DATE could not apply retrospectively to allow a defendant whose trial took place before the LAW came into force to rely on a breach of the LAW in a later appeal .", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW DATE ( “ the CARDINAL Act ” ) provided as follows :", "“ The bankrupt shall give the official receiver such inventory of his estate and such other information , and shall attend on the official receiver at such times , as the official receiver may for any of the purposes of this LAW require ; ... ”", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) went on to stipulate that :", "“ If a bankrupt without reasonable excuse fails to comply with any obligation imposed by this section , he is guilty of a contempt of court and liable to be punished accordingly ( in addition to any other punishment to which he may be subject ) . ”", "The ORG would deal with such a contempt of court and the sentence could be a fine or imprisonment for a maximum of DATE ( section CARDINAL of LAW DATE ) .", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of the DATE Act provided that the official receiver could apply to the court for the public examination of the bankrupt . Cases such as ORG ( DATE ) CARDINAL Ch . CARDINAL and NORP v. PERSON ( DATE ) CARDINAL WLRCARDINAL established that the bankrupt was not entitled to refuse to answer questions during the public examination on the grounds of self - incrimination .", "At the relevant time , section CARDINAL of the DATE Act provided that :", "“ In any proceedings ( whether or not under LAW ) –", "( a ) a statement of affairs prepared for the purposes of any provision of this LAW which is derived from LAW DATE and", "( b ) any other statement made in pursuance of a requirement imposed by or under any such provision or by or under rules made under LAW ,", "may be used in evidence against any person making or concurring in making the statement . ”", "In contrast , section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of the Theft Act DATE stipulated that a statement or admission made by a person answering questions in proceedings for the administration of any property was not admissible in evidence in criminal proceedings relating to an offence under LAW .", "NORP In NORP v. PERSON ( DATE ) CARDINAL Cr . App . PERSON ( the decision on the first appeal of this applicant ) , ORG held that the Insolvency Rules DATE ( S.I. DATE No . DATE ) made it clear that the privilege against self - incrimination was abrogated in any public examination of the bankrupt and that , thereafter , section CARDINAL of the CARDINAL Act rendered the evidence admissible in a criminal trial notwithstanding CARDINAL of LAW .", "Following the decision of this ORG in ORG v. GPE ( cited above ) and the planned introduction of LAW DATE , section CARDINAL and Schedule CARDINAL of ORG and LAW DATE amended section CARDINAL of LAW , inserting section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) ) :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) NORP However , in criminal proceedings in which any such person is charged with an offence to which this subsection applies–", "( a ) no evidence relating to the statement may be adduced , and", "( b ) no question relating to it may be asked ,", "by or on behalf of the prosecution , unless evidence relating to it is adduced , or a question relating to it is asked , in the proceedings by or on behalf of that person . ”", "This provision was not in force at the time of the applicant 's trial ." ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "On DATE the applicant was arrested by ORG ( Centralne Biuro Śledcze ) on suspicion of having committed fraud .", "On CARDINAL DATE ORG ( Sąd Rejonowy ) remanded the applicant in custody in view of the reasonable suspicion that he had committed the offences in question . It further considered that there was a risk that he would induce the co - accused to give false testimony or obstruct the proper conduct of the proceedings by destroying the documentary evidence relevant to the investigation ; at the time of his arrest the applicant was found to be destroying documents which might be important for the further conduct of the proceedings . The court also stressed the likelihood that a heavy penalty would be imposed on him .", "On DATE the applicant appealed unsuccessfully against the detention order . In his further applications for release and appeals he maintained that , given his poor health , detention was putting a severe strain on him .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a motion with ORG ( Prokurator PERSON ) for the case to be referred to another prosecutor because the prosecutor dealing with his case was not in his view impartial . In his motion the applicant alleged that he had been denied access to his lawyer in breach of his right to defence . On DATE the motion was dismissed by ORG .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an application with ORG ( Prokurator Apelacyjny ) for the detention to be either lifted or replaced by another preventive measure . On DATE the application was dismissed .", "On DATE ORG extended the applicant ’s detention until DATE . It repeated the grounds originally given for his detention .", "On DATE ORG ( PERSON ) , on appeal by the applicant , upheld the decision of DATE . It repeated the grounds previously given for the applicant ’s detention and referred to the likelihood of a severe sentence of imprisonment being imposed on him .", "Subsequently , further decisions extending the applicant ’s detention were taken by ORG . The relevant decisions were taken on the following dates : DATE ( extending his detention until DATE ) , DATE ( extending his detention until DATE ) , DATE ( extending his detention until DATE ) and DATE ( extending his detention until CARDINAL DATE ) .", "On DATE ORG extended the applicant ’s detention until DATE . The court again relied on the reasonable suspicion that the applicant had committed the offence in question and on the severity of the expected penalty . It also mentioned that the continued detention was justified by reasons referred to in LAW , without however specifying them .", "NORP ORG further extended the applicant ’s detention on the following dates : DATE ( extending his detention until DATE ) , DATE ( extending his detention until DATE ) and DATE ( extending his detention until CARDINAL DATE ) .", "In the meantime , on DATE , the applicant had appealed against the decision of CARDINAL DATE extending his pre - trial detention . No ruling was given on the appeal . On DATE ORG gave a decision stating that a ruling on that appeal would be purposeless , as the impugned decision had expired on DATE .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an application with ORG for his detention to be lifted and replaced by bail . The applicant referred to his health problems . On DATE , ORG dismissed the application , emphasising that the documents submitted in support of the applicant ’s request did not constitute sufficient evidence of the alleged negative effect of detention on his health . On DATE ORG dismissed an appeal by the applicant against the decision of DATE . On DATE the applicant was subjected to a medical examination at his own request . The results of the medical examination did not reveal grounds for release .", "On DATE the applicant was served with a bill of indictment .", "On DATE the GPE ORG lifted the applicant ’s detention and released him on bail . The court prohibited the applicant from leaving the country and confiscated his passport .", "On DATE the applicant asked for the prohibition on leaving the country to be lifted . On DATE ORG dismissed his application .", "NORP The applicant appealed . On DATE ORG dismissed the appeal .", "The applicant ’s further numerous requests for the prohibition on leaving the country to be lifted were unsuccessful . On DATE ORG again refused the applicant ’s request . The applicant ’s lawyer appealed .", "On DATE ORG granted the appeal and lifted the preventive measure in question . The court found that the applicant had not obstructed the proceedings , had not tried to escape and had been always at the disposal of the domestic authorities .", "The case is pending before the first - instance court .", "On DATE the applicant lodged , under the Law of DATE ( LOC o skardze na naruszenie prawa strony do rozpoznania sprawy w postępowaniu sądowym bez nieuzasadnionej zwłoki ) ( “ the CARDINAL Act ” ) , a complaint concerning the length of the examination of his appeal against the decision of DATE prolonging his pre - trial detention . He stressed that he had appealed on DATE . He claimed compensation in the amount of MONEY ( ORG ) ( approx . LAW ) . ORG refused to entertain the appeal on DATE .", "On DATE ORG declined to consider the complaint . It referred to the fact that the complaint concerned proceedings prior to the entry into force of the CARDINAL Act and that LAW produced legal effects as from the date of its entry into force .", "The relevant domestic law and practice concerning the imposition of pre - trial detention ( aresztowanie tymczasowe ) , the grounds for its prolongation , release from detention and rules governing other , so - called “ preventive measures ” ( środki zapobiegawcze ) is set out in the ORG ’s judgments in the cases of ORG v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , § § DATE , DATE and PERSON v. GPE , no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , § § DATE , CARDINAL DATE .", "The relevant statistical data , recent amendments to LAW designed to streamline criminal proceedings and references to relevant ORG materials including the DATE ORG can be found in the ORG ’s judgment in the case of ORG ( see ORG v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , § § CARDINAL and CARDINAL , DATE ) ." ]

[ "5" ]

[ "5-3" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in GPE .", "On DATE criminal proceedings were initiated against the applicant , a traffic police officer at the time , and his partner on suspicion of theft and abuse of office . In DATE the applicant was served with the bill of indictment . An undertaking not to leave his place of residence was imposed on him .", "On DATE the applicant was arrested and placed in detention facility no . CARDINAL in GPE .", "DATE ORG of Perm found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced him to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment . The court relied on numerous witness testimonies and forensic evidence . The applicant appealed . In his grounds of appeal he complained that the trial court had incorrectly assessed the facts and applied the law , and that it had not thoroughly examined the evidence , thus failing to take into account certain important issues . The judgment became final on DATE when ORG upheld it on appeal .", "From DATE to CARDINAL DATE the applicant was held in facility no . CARDINAL in GPE . In particular , from DATE to CARDINAL DATE he was kept in cell no . CARDINAL and from DATE he stayed in cell no . CARDINAL . On DATE he was transferred to cell no . CARDINAL from which , on DATE , he was taken to cell no . CARDINAL , having remained there until DATE .", "Relying on a certificate prepared by the director of the detention facility on DATE , the Government submitted that cell no . CARDINAL measured QUANTITY and accommodated , in general , CARDINAL inmates . Cell no . CARDINAL measured QUANTITY and on average housed CARDINAL inmates . The average number of detainees staying in cell no . CARDINAL of QUANTITY was CARDINAL , and CARDINAL inmates were usually kept in cell no . CARDINAL which measured QUANTITY . The Government stressed that at all times the applicant had an individual sleeping place and bedding .", "Citing the information provided by the director of the facility , the ORG further argued that the sanitary conditions in the cells were satisfactory . In particular , the ORG submitted that the cells received natural light and ventilation through a window measuring QUANTITY . The cells also had artificial ventilation . Each cell was equipped with a lavatory pan , a sink and a tap with running water . The lavatory pan was separated from the living area of the cell by a partition measuring QUANTITY in height . Inmates were allowed to take a shower once DATE for TIME . The cells were regularly disinfected . The cells were equipped with lamps which functioned DATE and TIME . The Government , relying on the information provided by the director of the facility , further stated that the applicant was given food “ in accordance with the established norms ” .", "NORP The applicant disputed the ORG ’s submission , arguing that the CARDINAL cells had been smaller and had accommodated a far greater number of inmates than the Government had described . Relying on written statements by PERSON who had also been detained in cell no . CARDINAL in DATE , the applicant submitted that that cell had measured QUANTITY , had CARDINAL sleeping places and housed CARDINAL inmates . Given the lack of beds , inmates had slept in shifts . They were not provided with bedding . He had had to stay in overcrowded conditions for DATE , save for an TIME - long outdoor walk in the recreation yard .", "The applicant further submitted that the sanitary conditions had been appalling . The cells were infested with insects but the management had not provided any insecticide . The walls in the cells were covered with fresh paint . Given the absence of natural or artificial ventilation , the strong smell of paint lingered in the cells . The applicant stressed that the windows were covered with metal blinds blocking access to natural light and air . It was extremely hot during DATE with the metal blinds turning into heated “ radiators ” under the direct sunlight . Inmates were allowed to smoke in the cells , which was an additional aggravated circumstance for the applicant , a non - smoker . The lavatory pan was placed on a concrete block elevated QUANTITY above the floor and situated QUANTITY from the dining area . The toilet was not separated from the living area and emitted an unpleasant odour in the cell . At no time did inmates have complete privacy . Anything they happened to be doing – using the toilet , sleeping – was in view of the guard or fellow inmates . No toiletries were provided . The food was of very poor quality and in scarce supply .", "Relying on inmate PERSON ’s written statement , the applicant concluded by noting that complaints to the administration of the detention facility had been to no avail .", "The relevant provisions of domestic and international law on conditions of detention are set out , for instance , in the ORG ’s judgment in the case of PERSON v. GPE ( no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , § § DATE , CARDINAL and DATE , DATE ) ." ]

[ "3" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in PERSON in GPE .", "On an unspecified date in DATE the applicant made an agreement for sale with the company C. The applicant , who had already paid to C , afterwards withdrew from the agreement since he had not received the agreed goods .", "On DATE the applicant instituted civil proceedings against C in the ORG ( ORG sodišče v Ormožu ) seeking reimbursement of the payment .", "On DATE the applicant made a request that a date be set for a hearing . On DATE the only judge working at the court at that time informed the applicant that the court lacked capacities and that the applicant ’s case had not yet been allocated to any judge . The applicant made further CARDINAL requests for a hearing on DATE , CARDINAL DATE and CARDINAL DATE .", "On DATE and CARDINAL DATE the court held hearings and on DATE issued a decision declaring lack of jurisdiction and transferred the case to ORG ( Okrožno sodišče na Ptuju ) .", "DATE and DATE the applicant lodged CARDINAL preliminary written submissions and/or adduced evidence .", "On DATE , he made a request that a hearing of a witness living in GPE and himself be carried out by an NORP court DATE ORG ( PERSON ) . On DATE and DATE he urged ORG to send a request to the NORP court .", "On DATE the applicant filed a request for supervision with the president of ORG because of the delays in the proceedings .", "On DATE the request was forwarded to the NORP authorities by ORG ( Ministrstvo za pravosodje ) . On DATE the Ministry forwarded the minutes of the hearing it had received from GPE to ORG and on DATE the applicant was requested to provide a translation of TIME DATE . On DATE the applicant submitted the translation , stating that he had received it from the court ’s translator only on CARDINAL DATE .", "Of the CARDINAL hearings held before FAC DATE and DATE , none was adjourned at the request of the applicant .", "At the last hearing the court decided to deliver a written judgment . The judgment , upholding the applicant ’s claim , was served on the applicant on DATE .", "On DATE the judgment became final ." ]

[ "13", "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , Mr PERSON , is a NORP national , who was born in DATE and lives in GPE ( GPE ) . He is represented before the ORG by Mrs M.A. Farrugia and PERSON , CARDINAL lawyers practising respectively in GPE and in GPE ( GPE ) . The respondent Government were represented by their Agent , Mr PERSON , Attorney General .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "The applicant owned a farm and an adjacent portion of land in GPE , close to a road called FAC . According to the original Government development schemes , a small part of this land should have been expropriated in order to widen the road with QUANTITY .", "In DATE the NORP authorities entered into the property of the applicant , demolished parts of it and took QUANTITY of it .", "By LAW of DATE ( no . CARDINAL ) , issued in terms of ORG LAW of LAW ) , it was declared that the property taken from the applicant was required for a public purpose .", "LAW was published in ORG of CARDINAL DATE , as required by LAW . At the relevant time , this publication did not transfer the ownership of the land to the Government . In particular , it was provided that the Commissioner of Lands should serve a copy of LAW on the owner of the land , together with a “ notice to treat ” informing him or her about the amount that the Commissioner was willing to pay . The owner subsequently had DATE to state the amount which he claimed as compensation .", "If the owner and the Commissioner agreed on the amount of the compensation due , either party could request ORG to make an order carrying the agreement into effect . In case of disagreement between the owner and the Commissioner , the latter should file an application with ORG requesting it to determine the amount of compensation due . In either case , a public deed of transfer had to be signed by the ORG and the owner .", "In the present case , until DATE the Commissioner of Lands did not serve on the applicant LAW and the notice to treat . Therefore , the procedure to compensate the applicant and to transfer the legal ownership of the land was not initiated .", "In DATE LAW of the Laws of GPE was amended . Under the new LAW , ownership of the property is transferred upon publication of LAW in the Government Gazette . According to the new rules , LAW should state the amount that the Government will pay as compensation , to be deposited in an interest - bearing bank account . If the owner of the land does not consider this amount adequate , he may institute proceedings before ORG .", "According to a transitory provision of law , when , as in the applicant ’s case , LAW had been issued before the entry into force of the DATE amendments , the President should issue a fresh declaration wherein he shall state the amount of compensation which the Commissioner of Lands is willing to pay . According to the information provided for by the applicant on DATE , on that date no such fresh Presidential Declaration had been served on him . As a consequence , the applicant is still the legal owner of the land .", "The applicant alleged that in the meantime one of his neighbours , Mr PERSON , had been planning to develop his property into a petrol station and had been preparing the necessary infrastructures to do so . According to the applicant , PERSON was known as being very well connected with the then current administration . The applicant ’s allegations were disputed by the Government on the ground that they were unsubstantiated .", "The original Government development schemes were not followed , and FAC , PERSON was widened and re - aligned differently . According to the applicant , the result of these changes was that motor vehicles were driven into the planned petrol station and evasive action should be taken if a vehicle did not want to enter into it . If a vehicle had continued straight , it would have collided into the wall of PERSON property . Since DATE ORG had requested the road department to re - locate the wall in issue , which was eventually demolished and moved backward .", "The applicant produced a plan which was annexed to LAW . According to the applicant , this document showed that the land was expropriated in such a way to make the main road lead directly into the property of PERSON , thus creating an unnatural series of S bends . The re - alignment and widening of the road directed the traffic into CARDINAL deviations , one to the left into the applicant ’s property , then to the right to meet the roundabout alignment and finally to the left again to continue on the main road .", "The Government disputed these allegations . They argued that the description given by the applicant was “ charged with poetic licence and substantially misleading ” . Relying on CARDINAL photographs and on an aerial view of the area in question , they challenged the view that the taking of part of the applicant ’s land was done also in order to facilitate access to the petrol station .", "The allegedly planned petrol station was never opened .", "On DATE the applicant instituted proceedings before ORG ( FAC ) in its constitutional jurisdiction against the NORP Secretary for ORG and against the Commissioner of Lands . He claimed that he had been deprived of his property illegally and without compensation and alleged a violation of ORG CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the LAW of GPE as well as of LAW No . CARDINAL . The applicant submitted that LAW of DATE was null and void and requested to be reinstated in his possession and to be granted a financial compensation for the loss suffered .", "In a judgment of CARDINAL DATE ORG dismissed the applicant ’s claims . It held that as the acts complained of took place before DATE ( date of the incorporation of the Convention into the NORP legal system ) , it had no power to decide on the alleged breach of the applicant ’s rights under LAW No . CARDINAL . As far as the LAW of GPE was concerned , there was no doubt that the applicant could have invoked the alleged breach of LAW ( right to the protection of home ) in front of the ordinary courts , asking them to impede the authorities from demolishing his farm .", "The same could not be said with regard to LAW ( protection of property ) ; however , it was apparent that the expropriation was done for a “ public purpose ” . This did not exclude the possibility that the expropriation might have involved the interest of third parties , provided that the use made by the said parties was connected with or ancillary to the public interest or utility . In the present case , in DATE the architect of ORG had expressed the view that the realignment of the road was inevitable and in DATE ORG had written to ORG to confirm that the expropriation had to be done . The latter was part of a project involving the entire road linking ORG and the town of GPE .", "It was true that according to the original plan , the applicant ’s property was going to be only slightly affected . However , the project was changed and the road went much deeper into the applicant ’s land , leading to a petrol station , owned by PERSON ORG could accept that the expropriation was done also in the interests of third parties , but this did not exclude the existence of a public purpose , as there was no doubt that a petrol station was of utility to the public .", "The applicant appealed to ORG .", "In a judgment of CARDINAL DATE , ORG declared that the taking of the applicant ’s property before the issuing of LAW of DATE constituted a violation of the plaintiff ’s right of property ( guaranteed by LAW ) and granted him a compensation amounting to CARDINAL NORP Liras ( Lm – approximately QUANTITY ( EUR ) ) . ORG confirmed the judgment of ORG as to the remainder and decided that the legal expenses should be borne CARDINAL by the applicant and CARDINAL by the respondents .", "ORG first observed that LAW was only the commencement of the expropriation procedure , which entailed an interference with the right guaranteed by LAW No . CARDINAL lasting until the individual was unable to enjoy his possessions or until there was effective transfer of property . Thus , notwithstanding the fact that LAW was issued before DATE , the matter felt within the competence ratione temporis of ORG .", "As to the lawfulness of the expropriation , it was to be noted that the authorities had entered the applicant ’s property and demolished his farm already in DATE . This action was illegal as it was taken prior to the issuing of LAW and without prior notification . Moreover , the applicant did not have at his disposal any adequate means of redress , as any judicial action he might have commenced would have been nullified by the issuing of LAW .", "As far as the applicant was complaining that the expropriation was not done for a public purpose , but to serve the interests of PERSON , the Constitutional Court observed that only a deprivation of property effected for no reason other than to confer a private benefit on a private party could not be “ in the public interest ” . As ORG had pointed out in the case of PERSON and Others v. GPE ( judgment of DATE , Series A no . CARDINAL ) , the compulsory transfer of property from CARDINAL individual to another might , depending upon the circumstances , constitute a legitimate aim for promoting public interest . ORG therefore did not see any reason to depart from ORG finding that , after the issuing of LAW , the expropriation pursued a legitimate aim .", "The acquisition of land for public purposes is regulated by LAW of LAW . As amended in DATE , the relevant provisions of this LAW read as follows .", "Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL", "\" ( a ) With respect to land subject to a declaration by the President before the coming into force of this article ... article CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of the Ordinance as amended by this article shall apply ... Provided that the interests as aforesaid shall be calculated on the value of the land on the date of the President ’s Declaration or where no such Declaration was issued prior to the coming into force of this article on the date of taking over by Government of the land in question .", "( b ) ( i ) The President may in relation to any land subject of a LAW issued before the coming into force of this article issue a fresh Declaration wherein shall be stated the amount of compensation which the competent authority is willing to pay for the land to which the LAW refers . ... Provided that when such fresh LAW is issued the compensation shall be determined on the basis of the value of such land on the date of the service of any notice to treat in respect of such land , and where no such notice to treat has been so served , on the date of the issue of the fresh LAW by the President . ... ”", "LAW", "“ ( CARDINAL ) Simple interest at the rate of CARDINAL per centum per annum shall accrue on a DATE basis in favour of any person having a right to compensation in respect of any land acquired by the absolute purchase thereof under this Ordinance , from DATE up to the date when the compensation is paid or deposited in accordance with article CARDINAL . The interest due shall accrue on the amount of compensation as established in accordance with this GPE . ”", "LAW , CARDINAL , DATE , DATE , DATE and CARDINAL", "“ ( CARDINAL ) If the competent authority and the owner agree as to the amount of compensation for any land , ORG , on the application of any one of the parties , shall make an order carrying the agreement into effect ...", "( CARDINAL ) Where the land is to be acquired by the absolute purchase thereof ... , the President ’s Declaration ... , shall state the amount of compensation which the competent authority is willing to pay for the land to which the declaration refers . ...", "( CARDINAL ) Within DATE from the publication of LAW as is referred to in subarticle ( CARDINAL ) in the ORG the Government shall deposit in an interest bearing bank account ( which will guarantee a minimum of interest per annum as the Minister responsible for lands may by regulation under this subarticle prescribe ) a sum equal to the amount of compensation offered in LOC . Such sum shall be freely withdrawn together with any interests accrued thereon by the person or persons entitled to such compensation upon evidence to the entitlement thereto , in a manner satisfactory to the competent authority .", "...", "( CARDINAL ) Where the person entitled to compensation does not accept that the amount deposited is adequate , such person may apply to ORG for the determination of the compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance . Such application shall , on pain of nullity , state the compensation that in the opinion of the applicant is due .", "( CARDINAL ) Such application shall be filed in ORG The Board shall determine such compensation and shall give all necessary orders and directives in accordance with this Ordinance .", "( CARDINAL ) Where the compensation payable in respect of land acquired by the absolute purchase thereof is determined , whether by agreement or by decision of ORG , any sum due as compensation over and above any sum deposited in accordance with this article together with interests thereon in accordance with article CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) , shall be paid to the person entitled thereto by the competent authority not DATE from the date on which such compensation was determined as aforesaid . ”", "Article CARDINAL § CARDINAL", "“ ( CARDINAL ) Without prejudice to any special provision contained in this LAW , in assessing compensation the ORG shall act in accordance with the following rules :", "( a ) no allowance shall be made on account of the acquisition being compulsory ;", "( b ) the value of the land shall , subject as hereinafter provided , be taken to be the amount which the land if sold in the open market by a willing seller might be expected to realize ... ”" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , ORG , is a NORP national who was born in DATE and currently lives in GPE , GPE . The respondent Government were represented by their Agent , Mr PERSON .", "The applicant signed a sales contract with PERSON on behalf of the open joint stock company , ORG . According to the contract , the company transferred title to its LOC to Mr PERSON On DATE PERSON .", "On DATE the company instituted civil proceedings against Mr PERSON ’s successors seeking to have the contract declared null and void .", "By a ruling of CARDINAL DATE the judge of ORG ordered that the claim and the relevant documents from the case file be transferred to LOC ( “ the Prosecutor ” ) in order to establish whether criminal proceedings should be instituted against the applicant . On DATE ORG upheld the ruling of the first - instance court .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a cassation appeal with ORG in accordance with the procedure prescribed by LAW DATE on the Introduction of Changes to the Code of Civil Procedure . On DATE a panel of CARDINAL judges of ORG of GPE refused to transfer the applicant ’s appeal to a chamber of ORG of GPE for consideration on its merits .", "The applicant alleges that he received the final decision of ORG on DATE .", "Following the above events , on DATE the Prosecutor instituted criminal proceedings against the applicant on charges of fraud , abuse of power and embezzlement of collective property .", "On CARDINAL , DATE and DATE the applicant failed to appear before the investigator .", "On DATE a pre - trial investigation was suspended in order to establish the applicant ’s whereabouts . On DATE it was resumed .", "On DATE the ORG ’s Assistant issued an arrest warrant against the applicant .", "On DATE the applicant was arrested . He was released on CARDINAL November DATE having given a written undertaking not to abscond .", "On DATE the case was transferred to ORG .", "On DATE the case was transferred to ORG .", "On DATE the applicant challenged the judge sitting in his case . On DATE the case was transferred to ORG .", "On DATE ORG remitted the case to the Prosecutor for an additional pre - trial investigation on the ground that it had not been completed .", "On DATE the applicant failed to appear before the investigator .", "On DATE the pre - trial investigation was suspended in order to establish the applicant ’s whereabouts .", "On DATE the proceedings were resumed . The applicant challenged the investigator .", "On DATE the applicant failed to appear before the investigator . The proceedings were suspended .", "On DATE ORG rejected an appeal by the applicant against the Prosecutor ’s resolution of DATE . On DATE the ORG of Appeal quashed that ruling and terminated the proceedings in that respect since the first - instance court had no jurisdiction to consider the applicant ’s complaint . On DATE ORG upheld the ruling of ORG .", "DATE the applicant acquainted himself with his case file .", "On DATE the Prosecutor issued an indictment . On DATE the case was transferred to ORG .", "On DATE the case was transferred to ORG .", "On DATE ORG remitted the case to ORG for an additional pre - trial investigation on the ground that it had not been completed and there had been some procedural omissions .", "On DATE the applicant went to GPE , where he currently resides .", "On DATE the Prosecutor put the applicant on the list of wanted persons .", "Following the above events , the criminal proceedings against the applicant were suspended .", "In the period prior to CARDINAL DATE the proceedings in the applicant ’s case were resumed in order to perform certain investigative actions and then , on several further occasions they were suspended again . The applicant , on his own or with the assistance of his counsel , challenged the suspension of the criminal proceedings , the resolution of DATE and the regular inactivity of the domestic authorities throughout the investigations of his criminal case . Some of his complaints and appeals were successful . In particular , on DATE , the investigator of ORG ordered that the head of the local police office seize the original of the notary ’s documents concerning the sale of the company ’s LOC . On DATE the Velykomykhaylivsky Court , following the applicant ’s complaint , found that the above action had not been performed . The court ordered it to be performed . By the same ruling the court ordered that the value of the company ’s premises also be established .", "On DATE ORG quashed the ruling of DATE of the investigator of ORG , under which the criminal proceedings had been again suspended , and ordered that the pre - trial investigation be resumed .", "On DATE ORG ordered the applicant ’s pre - trial detention . On DATE the ORG of Appeal quashed that ruling .", "The pre - trial investigation is still pending .", "On DATE the applicant challenged his arrest of DATE and his pre - trial detention . On DATE the applicant challenged the resolution of DATE before the same court .", "On DATE the FAC of GPE quashed the resolution of DATE and found the applicant ’s arrest and pre - trial detention to be unlawful . On DATE the NORP ORG , following an appeal by the Prosecutor , quashed the ruling of DATE and terminated the proceedings in that respect on the ground that ORG had no competence to consider the applicant ’s complaints . On DATE ORG rejected a request by the applicant for leave to appeal in cassation ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant in the first case , Mr PERSON , is a NORP national , who was born in DATE and lives in PERSON .", "The applicants in the second case , Mr PERSON and PERSON Gherşcovici , are NORP nationals , who were born in DATE and DATE respectively and live in GPE and PERSON .", "All CARDINAL applicants were represented before the ORG by PERSON , a lawyer practising in GPE .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "On DATE Ms Gherşcovici ’s husband , PERSON , was found dead in his house .", "On DATE Mr PERSON was arrested on unrelated charges . While he was in administrative detention , he was questioned about the circumstances of the death of PERSON On DATE he made a written statement about the commission of the murder , in which he provided details of the circumstances of the murder and the identities of the persons whom he alleged were involved . A lawyer was appointed to represent him and Mr ORG subsequently confessed to having planned the death of PERSON He later stated that PERSON had committed the murder of PERSON", "On DATE PERSON was arrested on charges of instigating , aiding and abetting the murder of PERSON", "On DATE an arrest warrant was issued in respect of Mr PERSON .", "According to PERSON , in DATE he was living with his uncle and aunt in GPE , GPE . On DATE he was arrested by the NORP police in the presence of his uncle and aunt . He alleged that the police officers did not inform him of the reasons for his arrest or provide him with any documents attesting to its lawfulness . Despite the fact that he complied with the request of the police officers , they forcibly twisted his arms behind his back , beat him on the back and handcuffed him . He was searched without a report being drawn up and his mobile phone was seized .", "Mr PERSON alleged that he was then taken to GPE police station where he was handed into the custody of the NORP police . The NORP police put the applicant in a car with NORP registration plates and crossed the NORP - Moldovan border at the ORG customs post . He had to sit handcuffed in the back of the car . He was not provided with any extradition request nor did the police officers present him with any document or show his identity papers to the border guards when crossing the border .", "According to ORG , PERSON was arrested on DATE in GPE , GPE . On DATE he was brought to PERSON and placed in the remand centre of ORG .", "A lawyer was appointed to represent Mr PERSON and on DATE Mr PERSON confessed that he had murdered PERSON He subsequently claimed that police officers had exerted psychological pressure on him and tortured him to make him confess .", "Meanwhile , on DATE Mr PERSON lodged a complaint with the prosecutor alleging that he had been ill - treated in order to make him confess and that on DATE he had not been provided with a lawyer of his choice . His complaint was dismissed .", "On DATE the prosecutor registered a complaint by Mr PERSON regarding his alleged ill - treatment by police officers while in detention . On DATE a prosecutor informed him that his allegations of ill - treatment had not been upheld and that it had been decided not to institute criminal proceedings . Mr PERSON challenged the decision , attaching statements from his cellmates . On DATE the ORG informed Mr PERSON that there were no new circumstances which could influence the lawfulness of the decision of DATE .", "On DATE Mr PERSON lodged a complaint about the ban on receiving visits from his family and other persons .", "Meanwhile , on DATE , Mr PERSON ’s lawyer requested ORG to provide him with information concerning the circumstances of PERSON arrest and extradition . On DATE the ORG informed him that there was no information to indicate that Mr PERSON had been arrested on the territory of GPE .", "On DATE Mr PERSON asked ORG to conduct an investigation into his alleged unlawful arrest by the NORP police and his abduction by the NORP police on DATE . He named his uncle and aunt as witnesses to the events of that date . By letter of CARDINAL DATE ORG informed PERSON that no violation of the law by the NORP police had been established . On DATE ORG explained that on DATE Mr PERSON had been arrested by the NORP police and denied that Mr PERSON had been brought to GPE police station .", "On DATE Mr PERSON complained in writing to ORG of GPE disagreeing with the replies received from the NORP law - enforcement authorities . He requested the institution of criminal proceedings . His request received no response .", "In a statement made before a notary public on DATE , PERSON PERSON ’s uncle and aunt stated that on DATE their nephew had been arrested in the town of GPE by GPE and NORP police officers .", "On an unspecified date the trial proceedings commenced at ORG . In its judgment of DATE ORG found all CARDINAL applicants guilty of PERSON ’s murder .", "The applicants and the prosecutor appealed the judgment .", "The appeals were heard before ORG . On DATE the court dismissed the appeals lodged by the prosecutor and by Mr GPE and PERSON . However , it upheld the appeal lodged by PERSON and acquitted her .", "Mr GPE , PERSON and the prosecutor appealed the judgment .", "On DATE ORG upheld all CARDINAL appeals and ordered that the case against the applicants be retried by ORG .", "All CARDINAL applicants were subsequently retried before ORG . On DATE ORG found them guilty of the murder of PERSON", "The applicants appealed the judgment .", "On DATE ORG upheld the ORG appeals and ordered that the case be retried a second time by ORG . It found that ORG had not complied with the instructions of ORG when retrying the case .", "All CARDINAL applicants were retried a second time before ORG . On DATE the court found Mr PERSON and PERSON guilty of the murder of PERSON and acquitted PERSON .", "Mr GPE , PERSON and the prosecutor appealed the judgment .", "On DATE ORG acquitted PERSON and PERSON PERSON on the ground of lack of elements constituting an offence in their actions and upheld the judgment of ORG of DATE as regards PERSON .", "On DATE the Deputy Prosecutor General lodged a request for annulment of the judgment of DATE .", "On DATE the plenary of ORG upheld the Deputy Prosecutor General ’s request for annulment and ordered that the case be retried by ORG .", "The applicants were retried a third time , this time before ORG . On DATE ORG delivered its judgment in the retrial and acquitted the applicants . The decision was final .", "NORP In particular , the court found that Mr PERSON had signed the written statement of DATE at a time when he had not been arrested for the crime and had not been assisted by a lawyer , which was incompatible with the law . Further , he had not been advised of his right to remain silent . As regards PERSON , the court held that he had been arrested in GPE by the NORP police on DATE , that the authorities had failed to comply with the extradition procedure set out in the relevant mutual legal assistance treaty and that PERSON had been illegally brought into GPE . It also found that lawyers appointed to assist him did not have licences at the relevant time and that his right to a fair trial had therefore been breached . As to the allegations of ill - treatment , the court emphasised the obligation on the authorities promptly to take all reasonable steps at their disposal to investigate allegations of ill - treatment and secure relevant evidence . The court concluded that the investigation conducted by the prosecutor did not meet the requirements of the Convention . Evidence obtained as a result of the ill - treatment was therefore inadmissible .", "On DATE the applicants lodged a civil action at ORG claiming damages the violation of their right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time pursuant to LAW . CARDINAL of DATE ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) .", "On DATE ORG rejected the applicants’ claim . It considered that the criminal proceedings against the applicants were particularly complex , highlighting the seriousness of the charge ; the number of accused in the case ; the prejudicial character of the offence ; and the importance of the process .", "On DATE the applicants lodged an appeal . On DATE ORG upheld the appeal . It considered that the proceedings had begun on DATE and had terminated on DATE , when the final judgment acquitting the applicants had been handed down . It found the length of the proceedings to be excessive and attributable to the acts of the authorities . Taking into account the complexity of the case and this ORG ’s case - law under LAW , including the ORG ’s award of MONEY ( ORG ) for proceedings which lasted DATE in PERSON v. GPE , no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , DATE , it awarded each of the applicants CARDINAL NORP lei ( approximately EUR CARDINAL ) in damages .", "On DATE the applicants lodged a civil action at the ORG claiming damages for violations of their Convention rights pursuant to LAW no . CARDINAL of DATE ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . They claimed non - pecuniary damage in respect of , inter alia , unlawful detention ; unlawful arrest ; unlawful subjection to criminal responsibility ; unlawful conviction ; unlawful search and seizure of property ; and unlawful secret investigative measures .", "On DATE the applicants were asked by the judge rapporteur , pursuant to Rule CARDINAL § CARDINAL ( a ) of ORG , to confirm whether their claim under PERSON no . CARDINAL of CARDINAL DATE sought compensation in respect of all the complaints lodged before this ORG ; and if not , for which alleged violations of the LAW compensation was sought . In their response , the applicants did not provide the details sought . However , they confirmed that nothwithstanding ORG judgment of DATE in respect of their claim under PERSON no . DATE ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) , it was open to them to seek compensation for moral damages suffered as a consequence of the excessive length of the proceedings in the context of their pending civil claim . They also confirmed that the claim remained pending before ORG .", "Law No . DATE of CARDINAL DATE provides for compensation for damage caused by the illegal acts of the criminal investigation organs , prosecution and courts to be paid to persons acquitted in criminal proceedings . The relevant provisions of the PERSON were set out in this ORG ’s judgment in ORG v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , § DATE , DATE .", "PERSON no . DATE , which created a new remedy to address complaints of unreasonable length of proceedings , entered into force on DATE . Further details of the PERSON are set out in this ORG ’s decision in PERSON v. GPE ( dec . ) , no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , DATE .", "The Prosecution Service Act of DATE provides a mechanism to challenge acts of authorities involved in conducting searches , inquiries and pre - trial investigations . Section CARDINAL provides that ORG is entrusted with a number of functions , including supervision of the observance of laws by organs conducting operative search activities , inquiries and pre - trial investigations .", "Section CARDINAL of the law provides that the public prosecutor is responsible for examining applications and complaints about violations of rights of individuals and legal entities , except for those complaints which are within the competence of the court . It further stipulates that a decision taken by the public prosecutor can be appealed to a higher public prosecutor or a court .", "Article CARDINAL of the Code of Criminal Procedure in GPE , in force until DATE , allowed criminal proceedings to be instituted on the basis of , inter alia , applications or communications from individuals . Pursuant to Article CARDINAL , upon receipt of an application the prosecutor could agree or refuse to institute criminal proceedings , if necessary after a preliminary inquiry into the facts . Article CARDINAL allowed an appeal against the prosecutor ’s decision to a higher prosecutor . Refusal of that prosecutor to annul the decision could be appealed to the court under the procedure set out in Article CARDINAL of the Code .", "Article CARDINAL of LAW of DATE ( “ DATE ORG ” ) , in force until DATE , set out the right to complain to a court about decisions , acts and omissions of public authorities . LAW DATE ( “ DATE ORG ” ) , which entered into force on DATE , provides that decisions , actions or inaction on the part of public authorities can be challenged in administrative courts . Article CARDINAL of LAW sets out the right to payment of nonpecuniary damage for unlawful decisions , acts or omissions . Nonpecuniary damage is to be paid irrespective of guilt in cases concerning illegal imprisonment ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant is a NORP national , born in DATE and resident in GPE . He is represented before the Court by Mr PERSON , a lawyer practising in GPE .", "On DATE , N was charged before ORG ( käräjäoikeus , tingsrätt ) with aggravated narcotics offences concerning QUANTITY of cannabis ( case R CARDINAL ) . He had stated to the police that he had committed several narcotics offences in DATE and incriminated several other people during the police investigations . The case was adjourned until CARDINAL DATE , as the police investigations had not been finished .", "N 's case was heard on CARDINAL and DATE . N confessed to ORG that he had dealt in QUANTITY of cannabis . The case was adjourned until DATE as the police investigations continued .", "On DATE , N was charged with an additional aggravated narcotics offence which he confessed to . The case ( R CARDINAL ) was again adjourned until DATE .", "At the hearing on DATE , N repeated all his statements to the police and stated that he would stand by them . N 's case was joined with another case ( R CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) .", "At some point during the proceedings against N , the applicant had been detained on remand on suspicion of aggravated narcotics offences , apparently on the basis of the information revealed to the police by N. On DATE the applicant was charged with CARDINAL aggravated narcotics offences before ORG . ( The file is incomplete as regards the beginning of the proceedings against the applicant . )", "On DATE , there was also a hearing in the case R CARDINAL/CARDINAL against N and CARDINAL other accused , concerning several aggravated narcotics offences . Several charges were brought against N and the co - accused . The case was adjourned until DATE .", "At the hearing on DATE before ORG the applicant 's case , which had so far been heard separately from ORG case , was joined to the latter . N stated that he would not repeat all his statements made in the police investigations . The applicant 's legal counsel said that he intended to put some questions to N later .", "The next hearing took place on DATE . When asked by the applicant 's legal counsel , N stated that he had not dealt in drugs with the applicant .", "On DATE , there was a further hearing in the case , which was again adjourned until DATE . ( The complete minutes of that hearing have not been filed . )", "In a hearing on DATE , yet another case was joined to the applicant 's case . There were now a total of CARDINAL accused , including the applicant and ORG stated that at this stage he did not want to repeat everything he had said about some of the accused .", "On DATE , there was another hearing in the case before ORG . The public prosecutor submitted several police investigation reports to the court . The applicant 's legal counsel stated that it was his impression that according to N the applicant had not dealt in any drugs . When asked by the counsel , N referred to what he had said before . The case was adjourned until DATE .", "On DATE the case was heard again . The public prosecutor submitted new police investigation reports to the court . N refused to comment on any of his statements and stated that he would remain silent . He also stated that he would not answer questions put to him as he “ wanted to reserve an opportunity for all the innocent co - accused to tell the truth ” . The case was adjourned until DATE .", "The applicant 's case was heard again on DATE and it was adjourned until DATE .", "At the hearing on DATE , co - accused H confessed that he had been CARDINAL of the CARDINAL main financiers of the drug trafficking . The other was allegedly N. The applicant 's legal counsel stressed that N had not stated anything that would incriminate the applicant in the case . ORG convicted N of CARDINAL aggravated narcotic offences and some other offences and sentenced him to DATE and DATE imprisonment . H was convicted of CARDINAL aggravated narcotics offences and some other offences and sentenced to DATE imprisonment . Another co - accused was also convicted of narcotics offences and sentenced to a term of imprisonment . The rest of the case was adjourned until DATE .", "On DATE the case was heard again . The public prosecutor submitted to ORG a report , dated on DATE , concerning telecommunications between the accused . The applicant 's counsel gave his closing speech and commented on the report on telecommunications , without requesting a further adjournment on the basis of the report . ORG convicted the applicant of CARDINAL aggravated narcotics offences , committed in complicity with N and another co - accused , and convicted him to DATE imprisonment . The conviction was mainly based on ORG statements supported by some co - accused 's and witnesses ' statements and by circumstantial evidence . The applicant was detained on remand .", "The applicant appealed to ORG ( hovioikeus , hovrätt ) , requesting an oral hearing before ORG . He stated , inter alia , that N had repeated several times during the proceedings before ORG that the applicant had not dealt in narcotics with ORG , ORG statements in the police investigations in so far as concerned the applicant had been very vague and had had no reference to any factual situation . The applicant also argued against the value of the report on telecommunications as evidence , as the report had appeared to be incomplete . The applicant named several persons that he wished to be heard before ORG : e.g. a co - accused S and new witnesses J and V as regards the value of the report on telecommunications as evidence , and the co - accused H as regards his confession . On DATE ORG upheld ORG judgment without holding an oral hearing .", "On DATE ORG ( korkein oikeus , högsta domstolen ) refused the applicant leave to appeal ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in the village of LOC in the GPE region .", "In DATE the local authorities undertook to connect the village to a gas pipeline . Starting from DATE the applicant was entrusted with directing the works . According to him , at that point the public funding was interrupted and the construction was continued at the expense of certain villagers . After the GPE completion in DATE the village council and some of the villagers publicly accused the applicant of embezzling public funds , which , as they claimed , had been allocated to him for the construction works in question .", "On DATE the applicant instituted proceedings against the village council , as well as against Mr S. and PERSON , seeking compensation for damages in respect of the aforementioned embezzlement accusations considered by him to be defamatory .", "On DATE ORG ( “ the Ivanivka Court ” ) allowed the applicant ’s claim in part .", "On DATE the NORP ORG of Appeal ( “ the NORP Regional Court ” ) quashed the aforementioned judgment and remitted the case back to ORG for fresh consideration .", "On DATE the case was transferred to ORG ( “ the Kominternivskyy Court ” ) .", "The examination of the case was adjourned several times for the followings reasons : the applicant ’s absence or at his lawyer ’s request ( for DATE in total ) ; the adversary party ’s absence ( for DATE ) ; and the judge ’s leave ( for DATE ) .", "On DATE ORG rejected the applicant ’s claim , as well as the counterclaim of PERSON which she had lodged in the meantime , as unsubstantiated .", "On DATE the applicant appealed .", "On DATE the ORG dismissed that appeal following a hearing , in which the applicant had participated . It was noted in the ruling that it could be appealed in cassation within DATE after its pronouncement .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a cassation appeal , together with a request for renewal of the time - limit . He contended , in particular , that the ruling in question had been served on him with a delay and that he had required additional time for preparing his appeal in cassation given his advanced age and poor health .", "On DATE ORG , following a hearing with the applicant ’s participation , refused to renew the time - limit for his appeal in cassation , having found that the reasons advanced by him were not sufficiently serious for that .", "On DATE the applicant challenged that ruling on appeal .", "On DATE the president of the ORG admitted , in his reply to the applicant ’s complaint about the length of the proceedings , that there had indeed been some delays in dealing with his case by the first - instance court and that the judge in charge had been reprimanded in that regard .", "On DATE the ORG found against the applicant , having upheld the decision of the first - instance court .", "On DATE the applicant appealed in cassation . He submitted , inter alia , that the adversary party had obtained , without his knowledge , a medical certificate regarding his health which had wrongly been adduced to the case file .", "On DATE ORG transferred the applicant ’s appeal in cassation to ORG ( “ the ORG ” ) , in compliance with the legislative amendments .", "On DATE ORG held that the lower courts had correctly rejected the applicant ’s request for the renewal of the procedural time - limits .", "According to the applicant , the aforementioned ruling was served on him on DATE , following his enquiry with ORG about the case progress of DATE .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a separate compensation claim with ORG against a certain PERSON alleging that she had disseminated defamatory information about him , including in the framework of the above proceedings .", "On DATE the applicant challenged the judge dealing with his case .", "On DATE his motion was granted , and the case was assigned to another judge .", "On DATE ORG stayed the proceedings at the applicant ’s request , pending the receipt of the case file materials in respect of the first set of the defamation proceedings ( see above ) , which the applicant considered to be of relevance for this case .", "On DATE the case was transferred to another judge following an increase of the court ’s staff .", "In DATE the court resumed the examination of the case . It adjourned its hearing in DATE for DATE because of the defendant ’s failure to attend .", "On DATE ORG found against the applicant .", "On DATE and DATE ORG and ORG , respectively , upheld that judgment ." ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "In DATE , at DATE , the applicant became a member of ORG , joining the ORG regiment of ORG . In DATE the applicant was posted to ORG ( “ the HCMR ” ) where he was taught to ride a horse . The applicant alleges that during riding lessons he became the target of bullying by other soldiers , including a lance - corporal . According to the applicant , towards DATE the lance - corporal hit him on the side of the head with his fist , causing him to fall and strike his head on the ground . On DATE , DATE after the attack , the applicant reported sick and told the medical officer that the injury to his face had been caused by falling off a horse . On DATE the applicant , who alleges to have feared a further physical attack , went absent without leave . On DATE he wrote to the commanding officer ( “ CO ” ) of the regiment ( a lieutenant - colonel ) , stating , inter alia , that “ [ his ] inability to express sufficient enthusiasm during training sometimes resulted in physical abuse by certain NCOs [ non - commissioned officers ] ” , and asking to terminate his service . He received no reply to this letter .", "The applicant was arrested by the civilian police on DATE and taken to the ORG 's barracks at LOC , GPE . DATE he was charged with being absent without leave contrary to section CARDINAL(a ) of the Army Act DATE . On DATE he was remanded in close arrest by ORG , acting as subordinate ORG . On the “ DATE Delay Report ” dated DATE , the reason for the detention is stated : “ Likely to absent himself ... – has already offered bribe to ORG on guard to release him . ” On DATE he appeared before the ORG and was remanded by him in close arrest for an abstract of evidence . He was subsequently released by the ORG into open arrest on DATE . The ORG remanded him for trial by district court martial on DATE .", "In a statement dated DATE to ORG , the applicant stated that the attack by the lance - corporal had occurred in DATE prior to his going absent without leave , while in a statement dated DATE he stated that the attack occurred sometime in DATE . The police found that the lance - corporal had left the army and took statements from other soldiers who had been on the same riding course as the applicant . They found that there was no evidence to support his complaint . The applicant subsequently signed a statement saying , inter alia : “ I have come to the conclusion that I just want to get out of the army and get on with my life ... Even though this assault happened , I do not want ORG ... to take any further action concerning the incident . ”", "Following the applicant 's remand for trial , the ORG appointed Captain A. as “ defending officer ” . PERSON was an army officer with no legal training , serving as a troop commander with the HCMR . The applicant applied to ORG ( “ ORG ” ) for legal aid to enable him to be represented by a solicitor . On the application form he stated that his DATE income after deduction of tax , rent and national insurance was MONEY ( GBP ) , and that he had no savings or other property of value . The form was countersigned by his ORG . By a letter dated DATE , ORG replied that a charge of absence without leave did not normally warrant legal representation but that either the ORG or the applicant should write setting out his reasons if he considered that , exceptionally , legal aid should be granted . The applicant 's solicitor wrote to ORG on DATE pointing out that the applicant faced a custodial sentence and needed to be represented . ORG offered the applicant legal aid subject to a down - payment of GBP CARDINAL in a letter dated DATE . The Government maintain that he could have paid in CARDINAL DATE instalments of GBP CARDINAL each , but this is disputed by the applicant . On DATE the applicant 's solicitor wrote asking ORG to reconsider the down - payment condition , but on DATE , before ORG had replied , the applicant refused the offer of legal aid and was not , therefore , represented by a solicitor at the court martial .", "Also on CARDINAL DATE , the applicant signed a document , addressed “ to whom it may concern ” , in which he made the following statement :", "“ This is to certify that I , CARDINAL ORG of ORG no longer wish to be represented at my pending ORG other than by my Defending Officer , Captain [ A. ] .", "I have made this decision of my own free will . I understand that all previous correspondence with regard to my application for legal representation will now be ignored . ”", "The applicant 's court martial took place at FAC on DATE . The court was composed as follows : a president , ORG FAC of ORG and ORG , who was a permanent president of courts martial ( appointed to his post in DATE and due to remain until his retirement in DATE ) ; Captain PERSON of ORG , GPE ; Captain PERSON of ORG , GPE , GPE and ORG ( Volunteers ) , Reading ; and a legally qualified civilian judge advocate ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . All CARDINAL military officers were outside the command area in which the applicant was serving . The president worked from home when not attending court - martial hearings .", "Captain PERSON represented the applicant , who pleaded guilty to the charge of being absent without leave between DATE and CARDINAL DATE . The applicant 's letter of CARDINAL DATE to his ORG was handed to the court , but no other mention was made of the bullying allegedly suffered by him . The applicant was sentenced to dismissal from the army and DATE detention .", "After the hearing , PERSON erroneously advised the applicant that if he appealed against the sentence he risked the commencement date for his sentence being put back to the date of dismissal of the appeal . On DATE the applicant instructed a solicitor to represent him . On DATE the solicitor lodged a petition with ORG in its role as the “ reviewing authority ” ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) , relying on the facts that the applicant had had no legal representation before the court martial and that his allegations of assault were not presented to the court , either by way of a defence of duress ( which applies when a person charged with a criminal offence can show that , at the relevant time , he reasonably believed that he would be killed or seriously injured if he did not commit the offence ) or in mitigation of sentence . The petition asserted that it was unlikely that the defending officer understood that the applicant might have had a defence on the basis of duress and that the defending officer had indicated that he had been “ ordered ” not to allude to the allegations at the court martial without indicating who had so ordered him . It also mentioned instructions which the defending officer had given about what the applicant ought to do in the event that the court martial should , of its own volition , ask the applicant about the allegations which had been made . It also indicated that the defending officer had advised the applicant that , “ if he appealed , his sentence might well be increased ” . On DATE the petition was introduced , the solicitor wrote to PERSON asking for his comments on it and reminding him that he was subject to the rules of client privilege and should not disclose details of his dealings with the applicant to any third party . Despite this , PERSON provided a statement to ORG , in which he said , inter alia :", "“ As [ the applicant 's ] Troop Leader I was asked to represent him at Court Martial , this was the first Court Martial I have attended in any capacity . Although I have had experience in civil cases at both NORP ' and ORG . ...", "[ The applicant ] had indicated to me that he had gone absent from the ORG for CARDINAL reason . As expressed in his letter of CARDINAL DATE . He was showing reservations about his enthusiasm , commitment and devotion to duty . ...", "[ T]he petition states that I assumed the petitioner had no choice but to plead guilty , as he had been Absent Without Leave . I was unaware that he could have entered a plea of not guilty to the charge on the basis of duress . [ The applicant ] and I did not discuss the allegations of bullying in any great detail . This was because these allegations had been withdrawn by him under interview by ORG .", "[ The applicant ] indicated to me that he wanted to drop all the references to the violence by the ORG during his training . This was in order that the trial date would be set significantly earlier and that the trial would be substantially shorter . This led me to advise [ the applicant ] to plead guilty as charged , as I had felt that this gave him his best opportunity to be discharged from the ORG at the earliest date which was , after all , his overall aim . ...", "I discussed with the Adjutant my role as the Defending Officer . We talked about the procedural steps of the court martial and my conduct leading up to the trial . It was confirmed to me that a guilty plea would produce an earlier trial date than that of not guilty .", "I advised [ the applicant ] that references to his allegations of bullying could prolong and complicate his court martial . The mention of bullying would be introduced as part of his letter to his commanding officer dated DATE , which he agreed could be put forward for the court as mitigation . [ The applicant ] agreed that he did not wish to answer questions about his previous allegations , which he had dropped .", "I therefore advised him to refer such questions to me and I would state to the court that this was an avenue down which he did not wish to proceed . ... ”", "The petition was refused by the reviewing authority on DATE , in the following terms :", "“ ORG has considered the petition submitted by your above - named client , and has denied it for the following reasons .", "The down payment for ORG was carefully calculated , and was well in line with the amount the petitioner would have had to pay under the civil system . The certificate signed by him shows clearly that he had decided not to proceed with his application for legal representation . We can not accept that [ the applicant ] was in any way forced to accept this decision . He also appears to have been content to accept Captain [ A. ] as his defending officer .", "The complaints about the petitioner being bullied were investigated by the ORG and the allegations could not be substantiated . Indeed it came to light during this investigation that the petitioner had told [ another soldier ] that he planned to go absent because he was merely tired of the training and TIME being worked . In view of the ORG report , ORG must accept that the allegation that the petitioner was subjected to violence by a Non - Commissioned Officer can not be substantiated , and can not be regarded as a mitigating factor .", "In considering your complaint that , had the petitioner been advised by a qualified solicitor , he would have been able to plead not guilty on the basis of duress , we had to rely on the advice given by the Judge Advocate General . He stated that a person is subject to duress when words or conduct from another person cause him to fear that he will be killed or seriously injured , if he does not commit the offence . Clearly , the petitioner could never have reasonably believed that he had cause to fear that he would be killed or seriously injured .", "ORG notes that the petitioner had dropped his allegations of being subjected to violence by the time he appeared in ORG . All Captain [ A. ] intended to do was to inform the ORG that the petitioner did not wish to proceed with these allegations . In fact the ORG was made aware of them because the letter from ( sic ) the Commanding Officer was read out to them .", "We accept that Captain [ A. ] was mistaken in referring the petitioner to the booklet ' Appeals and Petitions after conviction by ORG , which was out of date after DATE . In addition the wrong paragraph was used in his advice to the petitioner . However as we have now received a petition , in spite of this mistaken advice , we believe that no harm has been done . ... ”", "On DATE the applicant lodged an application for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence to ORG . Leave to appeal was refused by the single judge on DATE , on the grounds that the defence of duress had not been open to the applicant , that he had been properly advised to plead guilty , and that the sentence was not manifestly excessive .", "LAW ( “ the LAW ” ) came into effect on DATE , amending LAW DATE ( “ the DATE LAW ) .", "NORP Under LAW , the initial decision whether or not to bring a prosecution is taken by the higher authority , who is a senior officer who must decide whether any case referred to him by the accused 's commanding officer should be dealt with summarily , referred to the prosecuting authority , or dropped . Once the higher authority has taken this decision , he has no further involvement in the case .", "Where the accused is a member of the army , the role of prosecutor is performed by ORG ( “ the prosecuting authority ” ) . Following the higher authority 's decision to refer a case to it , the prosecuting authority has absolute discretion , applying similar criteria as those applied in civilian cases by ORG , to decide whether or not to prosecute , what type of court martial would be appropriate and precisely what charges should be brought . In addition , it conducts the prosecution ( DATE Act , Schedule I , Part II ) . The prosecution is brought on behalf of the Attorney - General . The current prosecuting authority is ORG . In his role as prosecuting authority , ORG is answerable to the Attorney - General , while in his coexisting role as the army 's senior lawyer he is answerable to ORG ( the army 's principal personnel and training officer , responsible , inter alia , for army disciplinary policy and a member of ORG ) . In pursuit of his latter role , ORG provides some military legal advice to the army chain of command . He does not advise the disciplinary chain of command of the army , this role being reserved to ORG .", "ORG is also the responsibility of ORG .", "ORG ( now ORG ) , independent of both the higher authority and the prosecuting authority , is responsible for making the arrangements for courts martial , including arranging venue and timing , ensuring that a judge advocate and any court officials required will be available , securing the attendance of witnesses and selecting members of the court . Its officers are appointed by ORG . Before commencement of the court - martial hearing , the power to dissolve it is vested in the responsible court - administration officer . Until DATE the person in charge of ORG was a retired officer . ORG was then created in its place , the head of which is now a serving brigadier .", "At the relevant time , a district court martial ( “ DCM ” ) was required to consist of a permanent president of courts martial , not CARDINAL serving military officers of DATE military experience and a judge advocate ( section CARDINAL of LAW as amended by LAW ) . The court - administration officer , commanding officers of the accused , members of the higher authority , investigating officers and all other officers involved in inquiring into the charges concerned were all barred from selection to the court martial ( section CARDINALC(CARDINAL ) of LAW as amended by LAW ) . ORG Rules DATE further provide that an officer serving under the command of : ( i ) the higher authority referring the case ; ( ii ) the prosecuting authority ; or ( iii ) the court - administration officer are ineligible for selection . ORG provide that a court martial is , so far as practicable , to be composed of officers from different units .", "NORP The post of permanent president of courts martial ( “ the permanent president ” ) was first created in DATE . Permanent presidents were routinely appointed thereafter to sit on DCMs whenever CARDINAL was available until suspension of the post in DATE , around the time of a ruling by Assistant Judge Advocate PERSON on DATE in ORG ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) that the appointment of permanent presidents meant that courts martial did not have the necessary impartiality and independence for the purposes of LAW . Permanent presidents were selected from the ranks of serving army officers of suitable age and rank . Until DATE , permanent presidents of courts martial held the rank of major . Thereafter their rank was raised to lieutenant - colonel , which resulted in permanent presidents routinely outranking the other serving officers on a ORG , who were never above the rank of major . Legal qualifications or experience were not required . Their appointment was usually expected to be for a period in excess of DATE and was almost without exception the officer 's last posting before his retirement from the army . The Military Secretary ( a senior subordinate of ORG ) had power to terminate the appointment of a permanent president , but this has never happened in practice .", "NORP Judge advocates are appointed by the Lord Chancellor and are civilians who must have DATE experience as an advocate or DATE experience as a barrister . A judge advocate 's rulings on points of law are binding on the court and he delivers a summing - up in open court before the court martial retires to consider its verdict . Once the court martial hearing has commenced , the power to dissolve it is vested in the judge advocate . He has a vote on sentence , but not on verdict . Under LAW , the Judge Advocate General lost his previous role of providing general legal advice to the Secretary of ORG I , Part III , sections CARDINAL , DATE and DATE ) .", "Each member of a court martial has to swear the following oath :", "“ I swear by Almighty PERSON that I will well and truly try the accused before the court according to the evidence , and that I will duly administer justice according to LAW DATE without partiality , favour or affection , and I do further swear that I will not on any account at any time whatsoever disclose or discover the vote or opinion of the president or any member of this court martial , unless thereunto required in the due course of law . ”", "Decisions on verdict and sentence are reached by majority vote ( section CARDINAL of the DATE Act ) . The casting vote on sentence , if needed , rests with the president of the court martial , who also gives reasons for the sentence in open court . The members of the court are required to speak , and at the close of deliberations to vote on verdict and sentence , in ascending order of seniority .", "All guilty verdicts reached and sentences imposed by a court martial must be reviewed by the “ reviewing authority ” ( section CARDINAL of the CARDINAL Act as amended by LAW ) . Although the ultimate responsibility rests with ORG , the review is as a matter of practice generally delegated to a senior subordinate of ORG . Post - trial advice received by the reviewing authority from a judge advocate ( different from the one who officiated at the court martial ) is disclosed to the accused , who has the right to present a petition to the authority . The reviewing authority may quash any guilty verdict and associated sentence or make any finding of guilt which could have been made by the court martial , and may substitute any sentence ( not being , in the authority 's opinion , more severe than that originally passed ) which was open to the court martial ( section LAW of the DATE Act as amended by LAW ) . The reviewing authority gives a reasoned decision and its verdict and sentence are treated for all purposes as if they were reached or imposed by the court martial .", "There is a right of appeal against both conviction and sentence to ORG ( a civilian court of appeal ) ( section CARDINAL of ORG DATE ) . An appeal will be allowed where the court finds that the conviction is unsafe , but dismissed in all other cases . The court has power , inter alia , to call for the production of evidence and witnesses whether or not produced at the court martial ( section CARDINAL of ORG DATE ) .", "The role of permanent president was examined by ORG ( which has the same composition as the civilian ORG ) in NORP v. PERSON and another and in NORP v. PERSON ( [ DATE ] ORG GPE and GPE ) CARDINAL ) . The court dismissed the appellants ' complaint that the position of permanent presidents on courts martial violated LAW because permanent presidents lacked the necessary independence and impartiality . The court declined to follow the reasoning of Assistant Judge Advocate PERSON in ORG . Lord Justice Laws , delivering the judgment of the court , said :", "“ CARDINAL . Mr Mackenzie of course relies on the decision of Assistant Judge Advocate General PERSON in ORG . His judgment was given as we have said on DATE , by way of a ruling in a then current court martial upon objections raised on behalf of the defence to the ORG [ Permanent President ] sitting as a member of the court . The judge advocate 's essential reasoning appears at pp . CARDINAL of the transcript , after he had correctly directed himself as to LAW CARDINAL standards to be applied ( the numbering attached to the judge advocate general 's text is ours , not his ) :", "' CARDINAL . I am concerned as to the terms of appointment of these Permanent Presidents . It seems to me that there is no fixed time limit other than a time which may be quite short DATE , CARDINAL or DATE ; certainly DATE is probably too short to ensure full independence , DATE may be suitable – I express no comment on that .", "NORP I am concerned as to their training . This reference to their visiting the APA [ ORG ] , I suspect that is mistyping , nevertheless it is there in their current job description and I must be concerned with the perception of bias , and it does not look appropriate , in my view , for Permanent Presidents to be told they should attend a briefing from ORG .", "NORP I am concerned obviously with their potential removal . Clearly anybody exercising judicial or quasi - judicial functions should be free from arbitrary removal , and there should be some sort of guarantee that the removal would only be on the basis of some sort of misconduct within that particular office . There is no security , therefore , it would seem to me , that applies to Permanent Presidents at the present time in their role .", "I am also obviously concerned with the question of reporting , whether it be DATE – which I doubt ; it is more likely to be DATE , or perhaps on the renewal of their appointment – I can not say , but certainly there is some reporting that appears to take place , and it seems to me again that is a significant difficulty which affects the perception of independence .", "Now , I have specified those CARDINAL [ in fact , CARDINAL ] as being the main concerns that I have ... those particular concerns are sufficient in my view for me to rule that in the particular circumstances of the system as it now stands , the appointments of Permanent Presidents do not give rise to an independent and impartial tribunal . '", "The judge advocate was at pains to insist that his ruling was ' limited to this particular case ' ; but its reasoning plainly applies at least to all DCMs presided over by a ORG .", "Mr Mackenzie sought to build on the reasoning in ORG with a series of further points ... In particular , he submitted that ( a ) there were no objective regulatory provisions governing the ORG 's appointment , beyond the ordinary procedures for staff appointments ; ( b ) ' the medium rank of ORG prevents such officers from being immune from general ORG influence ' ... ; ( c ) the ORG is senior in rank to the other officers on the court martial ... , and would be likely to exert a substantial influence over them .", "It is convenient to deal with this last point first . In ORG the judge advocate stated at CARDINAL - D ( referring to junior members of a ORG ) :", "' Speaking for myself , having of course sat in on many , many sentencing matters with Permanent Presidents , I can say that I have found that the junior members ... the fact that they happen to be junior in rank , has not prevented them from being very robust in their sentencing arguments . '", "As judge advocate he would not , of course , have participated in the court 's deliberations upon conviction . It is to be noted that by paragraph CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of ORG the junior officer is required to speak first in the course of any court martial 's deliberations . The provision is plainly intended to ensure that junior members ' genuine opinions are put forward .", "Upon this point , PERSON argument does not go to the particular position of the PERSON at all , but rather to the differences in rank among the members of the court martial , whether the president is a ORG or not . As such we doubt whether it is open to him . But we are clear in any event that there is no merit in it . If the argument were right , it would presumably mean that Article CARDINAL ) required that the members of a court martial should be officers of the same rank . That can not be the law . The notion , were it accepted , that it is reasonable to fear that between joint decision - makers of different rank there is a systematic likelihood that the more junior may be unduly influenced by the perceived views of the more senior would , surely , be an unlooked for and unwelcome side - effect of the ORG 's beneficent regime . We consider it perfectly reasonable to suppose that junior officers would regard it as their duty to speak with their own voice , and that the modern culture of the ORG would promote that very point of view . We do not think it would be reasonable for the accused soldier to entertain any different perception . This point is a bad one .", "The argument as to the ORG 's medium rank and ' general ORG influence ' falls to be disposed of in like manner . But there is another point to be made . The way this argument is formulated DATE ' the medium rank of ORG prevents such officers from being immune from general ORG influence ' – amounts , looked at rigorously , to an allegation of actual bias ( whether unconscious or not ) . It is not , or not only , a matter of the appearance of the thing or of the presence or absence of objective guarantees . It is a delicate way of saying that such medium - ranking officers are relatively prone to take a prosecution line . That is quite a serious allegation , for which there is not a whisper of any supporting evidence . And in our view it is simply patronising to suggest that an officer in the rank of Lieutenant - Colonel ... will have his judgment on the concrete facts of a particular case affected by anything so amorphous as ' general ORG influence ' .", "In our judgment Mr LOC 's further submission about the absence of any specific regulatory provision goes nowhere , unless it supports an argument to the effect that the PPCMs lack sufficient tenure in office for this court to be satisfied that the Article CARDINAL requirements of independence and impartiality are met . ...", "... we should dispose of point ( CARDINAL ) in ORG . This rested in the judge advocate 's understanding that ORG PPCMs were required , as a training exercise , to visit and be briefed by ORG . In fact the judge advocate himself reported ( CARDINAL ) the assurance given to him that no such visits took place . Lt Col Stone states in terms that he has never visited the ORG . From the judge advocate 's reasoning in ORG it looks as if there must have been some rogue document or documents in circulation ; but there is obviously nothing of substance in the point . ”", "Lord Justice Laws concluded as follows on the appellants ' complaint about the position of permanent presidents ( at paragraph CARDINAL ) :", "“ ... We consider that the conditions upon which PPCMs have been appointed , and held office , have involved no violation of Article CARDINAL ) , and in particular there was no violation on the facts of these cases . We should first collect the facts which have weighed with us . ( CARDINAL ) The PPCMs effectively operated outside the ordinary chain of command . They advisedly lived their professional lives largely in isolation from their ORG colleagues . ( CARDINAL ) While Mr Havers rightly accepted that there was no ' written guarantee ' against removal , there is in fact no record of a ORG ever having been removed from that position . Removal from office , we may readily infer , would only take place in highly exceptional circumstances which have never eventuated . ( CARDINAL ) The appointment was the officer 's last posting , offering no prospect of promotion or preferment thereafter . Neither of the PPCMs in these cases entertained any such prospect , hope or expectation . ... ( CARDINAL ) The term of these PPCMs ' appointments was for DATE ... ( CARDINAL ) There have been no reports on ORG PPCMs since DATE . ... ”", "In NORP v. PERSON ( [ DATE ] ORG Reports CARDINAL ) , ORG examined , inter alia , the compatibility of a NORP general court martial with section CARDINAL(d ) of LAW , which provides :", "“ CARDINAL . Any person charged with an offence has the right", "...", "( d ) to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal . ”", "A general court martial consisted of CARDINAL voting members , who were joined by a judge advocate who was called upon to determine questions of law or mixed law and fact during the trial . The judge advocate was appointed to the general court martial by the Judge Advocate General on an ad hoc basis .", "ORG concluded that the judge advocate did not possess sufficient security of tenure to satisfy the requirement of “ independence ” under section CARDINAL(d ) of the Charter . PERSON , delivering the leading judgment of the court , commented as follows :", "“ ... the judge advocate was appointed solely on a case by case basis . As a result , there was no objective guarantee that his or her career as a military judge would not be affected by decisions tending in favour of the accused rather than the prosecution . A reasonable person might well have entertained an apprehension that a legal officer 's occupation as a military judge would be affected by his or her performance in earlier cases ... [ or ] that the person chosen as judge advocate had been selected because he or she had satisfied the interests of the executive , or at least has not seriously disappointed the executive 's expectations , in previous proceedings . ...", "Military judges who act periodically as judge advocates must therefore have a tenure that is beyond the interference of the executive for a fixed period of time . ”", "He went on to note that amendments to NORP court - martial procedures , which had come into force subsequent to the proceedings at issue in the case , had corrected deficiencies in the judge advocate 's security of tenure , providing for appointment for a period of DATE ." ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1", "6-3" ]

[ "6-3-c" ]

[ "The applicants , Mr PERSON , PERSON , PERSON Fedorova and Mr PERSON , are NORP nationals who were born in DATE , DATE , DATE and DATE respectively and live in GPE , GPE .", "The respondent Government were represented by PERSON , Representative of GPE at ORG .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "On DATE CARDINAL of the applicants , PERSON , was called up by the military authorities to take part in the emergency operations at the site of the GPE nuclear plant disaster . The applicant was engaged in the operations until DATE and , as a result , suffered from extensive exposure to radioactive emissions . In DATE , after an expert opinion established a causal link between the applicant ’s disability and his involvement in the GPE events , Mr PERSON was put on a waiting list for additional housing . As he was not offered any , in DATE he brought court proceedings against ORG , ORG and ORG .", "On DATE ORG partly found in the applicant ’s favour and ordered ORG to grant the applicant additional housing in a form of a separate room . Both parties appealed against the judgment ( the applicant requested to be provided with a separate flat instead of a room ) .", "On DATE ORG upheld the judgment and on DATE it became enforceable .", "On DATE ORG instituted enforcement proceedings .", "On DATE Mr PERSON ’s representative in the domestic proceedings , PERSON , applied to ORG in order to withdraw the writ of execution .", "On DATE the writ of execution was returned to the applicant ’s representative and the enforcement proceedings were terminated due to the applicant ’s withdrawal of the writ .", "Subsequently , the applicant applied to the court requesting it to amend the way of the execution of the judgment of ORG of DATE .", "On DATE ORG changed the way of execution of the judgment of DATE and ordered the defendant to pay the applicant CARDINAL CARDINAL , MONEY ( RUB ) for the purchase of additional housing in a form of a separate room with a living surface of CARDINAL m² .", "On DATE the applicant sent the new writ of execution to ORG .", "On DATE the applicant ’s wife , on his behalf , concluded a sale - purchase agreement of a separate room with a living surface of CARDINAL m² .", "On DATE the agreement was registered by ORG in accordance with the official procedure and the applicant received an ownership certificate for the room .", "On DATE the sum awarded to the applicant for the purchase of the housing was transferred to the seller ’s account ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The first applicant is a lawyer and retired major - general of the NORP army . The seventh applicant is a retired major - general of the NORP army . The other applicants are retired officers of the NORP police force .", "NORP In DATE the Minister of ORG and the Minister of ORG authorised the granting , from DATE , of an award for meritorious service ( επίδoμα ευδόκιμης παραμovής ) to colonels and their superior officers . The award was fixed at PERCENT of the main salary . That ministerial decision was subsequently confirmed by the NORP parliament ( PERSON no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) .", "The applicants accordingly lodged claims for an increase in their pensions in accordance with the provisions of PERSON no . DATE . They lodged their applications on DATE , CARDINAL DATE , CARDINAL DATE , CARDINAL DATE , CARDINAL DATE , CARDINAL DATE and CARDINAL DATE respectively .", "Their claims were rejected by ORG ( PERSON τoυ PERSON ) on DATE , CARDINAL DATE , DATE , CARDINAL DATE , CARDINAL DATE , CARDINAL DATE and DATE respectively , on the ground that the applicants had retired before DATE , the date on which Law no . DATE came into force .", "The applicants appealed to ORG ( PERSON ) , which dismissed their appeals as ill - founded ( decisions ORG . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , DATE , DATE , CARDINAL/CARDINAL , DATE , CARDINAL/CARDINAL and CARDINAL respectively ) . In particular , ORG considered that the award in question could not be considered to be part of the main salary . Accordingly , it could not be taken into account for the purpose of calculating the pensions of officers having retired before the entry into force of the statute providing for the award .", "NORP On DATE , DATE , CARDINAL DATE , CARDINAL DATE , CARDINAL DATE , CARDINAL DATE and DATE respectively , the applicants appealed on points of law to ORG , sitting as a full court , which was the court having jurisdiction to examine their appeal .", "On DATE the NORP parliament adopted PERSON no . CARDINAL , which excluded the award in question from the calculation of pensions paid to officers having retired before DATE , declared any relevant claim statute - barred and any relevant judicial proceedings pending in any court to be null and void . That PERSON was confirmed by PERSON no . CARDINAL of DATE .", "On DATE ORG , sitting as a full court , upheld a claim lodged by another police officer who had also retired before DATE , and ordered that his pension should be increased ( judgment no . DATE ) . That judgment marked a reversal of the case - law of ORG . It was followed by CARDINAL other judgments along the same lines .", "In judgments dated DATE ( applicants nos . CARDINAL , CARDINAL and DATE ) , CARDINAL DATE ( applicant no . CARDINAL ) , DATE ( applicant no . CARDINAL ) and CARDINAL DATE ( applicants ORG . CARDINAL and DATE ) , ORG , sitting as a full court , dismissed the applicants ' appeals on the ground that they were ill - founded . ORG pointed out in particular that the award in question could not be considered as a general salary increase ; accordingly , it could not be granted to officers having retired before the entry into force of Law no . DATE . ORG noted , subsidiarily , that even supposing that the award in question could be considered as a general salary increase and the proceedings not declared null and void under to Law no . CARDINAL , the applicants ' claims were manifestly ill - founded because the provisions of the above - mentioned statute applied retrospectively ." ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The late PERSON heirs PERSON and PERSON are NORP nationals born in DATE and DATE and resident in GPE . The estate of PERSON also acts as an applicant .", "The applicants are the owners of the real property ORG ( registered as number ORG ; “ the ORG mansion ” ) in the village of the same name , currently part of the city of Tammisaari ( PERSON ) .", "The applicants claim ownership in the form of a right of permanent usufruct ( in NORP vakaa hallinta - oikeus ; in NORP ständig besittningsrätt ) in respect of the property PERSON ( registered as number CARDINAL ) in the village of the same name , also within the city limits of Tammisaari . The property comprises CARDINAL hectares of water and some islands totalling QUANTITY . The islands originally belonged to the NORP Crown ( “ Crown land ” ; kruununluontoinen maa , jord av krononatur ) .", "Around DATE the then owners of the ORG mansion ( kartano , säteri ) were afforded the right to make use of the ORG - Högholm islands in return for an DATE levy ( sääntönäisvero , stadga or stadgad ränta ) . The levy was collected from DATE . That arrangement was maintained by a decision of the ORG of the then GPE on CARDINAL DATE . The decision noted the following :", "( In NORP ) “ ... så emedan dessa holmar äro påförde stadgade räntor och sedan medlet af DATE århundradet opåtaldt innehafts ... pröve VI skäligt förklara desamma skola som hitintills förbliva under sagde säteri ... emot erläggande af de förre stadgade räntorne , hvarom anteckning likväl bör i jordeboken införas ... ”", "( Translation into LANGUAGE ) “ ... since these islands are subject to payment of an annual levy and have been made use of in an undisturbed manner since the middle of the last century ... we find it reasonable that they should remain , as heretofore , attached to the said mansion ... in return for payment of the DATE levy , which should be entered into the land register ... ”", "When land taxation was abolished in DATE the duty to pay a levy was replaced by a liability to pay ORG wealth tax ( varallisuusvero , förmögenhetsskatt ) . Up to DATE the levy had amounted to the equivalent of MONEY ( ORG ) at DATE ’s value .", "The PERSON - Högholm property was formed through a supplementary land - parcelling procedure in DATE . At the same time it was registered as ordinary real property instead of ORG land , the ORG being indicated as its owner . According to the record of the land parcelling the owner description was incomplete , but the property was leased to the ORG mansion . During the land - parcelling proceedings the owners of the ORG mansion submitted that they did not question the ORG ’s ownership . However , they claimed that they had a right of disposal ( dispositionsrätt in NORP ) .", "The owners of the ORG mansion made use of the ORG - Högholm islands and the surrounding waters in an undisturbed manner until DATE , when ORG granted fishing rights to a third party without PERSON consent .", "In DATE PERSON initiated proceedings with a view to having his ownership of the PERSON - Högholm property confirmed . In a judgment of CARDINAL DATE ORG ( kihlakunnanoikeus , häradsrätten ) found it established that the claimant and the previous owners of the ORG mansion had been enjoying a right of permanent usufruct in respect of the property , that right having developed into ownership .", "ORG judgment was quashed by ORG ( hovioikeus , hovrätten ) on CARDINAL DATE . The appellate court found that the ORG had originally let the islands to the then owners of the ORG mansion . This lease had been maintained in DATE . The ORG had thus never given up its ownership , but had simply tacitly consented to the ORG mansion ’s use of the property , initially subject to payment of a rent or levy and later subject to payment of wealth tax .", "On DATE ORG ( korkein oikeus , högsta domstolen ) refused leave to appeal .", "The registration ( lainhuuto , lagfart ) of the ORG as the lawful owner of the property in DATE was challenged by PERSON in a new civil suit seeking to obtain confirmation of his right of permanent usufruct in respect of the PERSON - Högholm property and DATE should that right be deemed to have developed into ownership DATE confirmation of his ownership . PERSON died on DATE and his estate continued the lawsuit .", "In a judgment of DATE ORG confirmed the applicants’ right of permanent usufruct and revoked the ORG ’s title to the property .", "ORG judgment was quashed by ORG on DATE on grounds similar to those relied on in its earlier judgment . It found , inter alia , that :", "( a ) the ownership issue had been finally settled in the first set of proceedings ;", "( b ) the first reference to the islands of ORG and PERSON had appeared in a judgment book ( tuomiokirja , dombok ) of GPE in DATE , and a DATE payment had been made in respect of the islands ;", "( c ) it could be deduced from the written material submitted to ORG that the islands had been leased to the owner of the ORG mansion in DATE ;", "( d ) in DATE the owner of the ORG mansion had attempted to transform the islands from ORG land into tax land ( see “ Relevant domestic law and practice ” below ) , but the official list of land thus transformed – drawn up in DATE had not included the islands ;", "( e ) in DATE the ORG had decided that the islands were to remain under the control of the ORG mansion in return for the prescribed payments , rather than the lease being put up for tender for DATE , as had been suggested in the light of the practice with regard to certain other plots of ORG land ;", "( f ) the owners of the ORG mansion had enjoyed undisturbed possession of the islands until DATE , when the ORG had granted a fishing licence to a third party in respect of the waters surrounding the islands ; and", "( g ) a right of permanent usufruct in respect of ORG land continued to be recognised under NORP law , on condition that there was a clear legal basis for the right .", "ORG concluded that originally the ORG had leased the islands to the ORG mansion , and that the ORG had upheld that lease in its decision of CARDINAL DATE . The payment of rent ( in NORP vuokranmaksu ) had later ceased and the mansion had paid tax in respect of the property , just as in respect of any other real property belonging to it . The ORG ’s decision had not established any right of permanent usufruct in favour of the ORG mansion , and the applicants had not presented any evidence of any other acquisition upon which such a right could be founded .", "On DATE ORG refused leave to appeal .", "Meanwhile , following PERSON death in DATE , PERSON and PERSON had declared that the PERSON - Högholm property formed part of the overall estate of the deceased for the purposes of the inventory of his possessions ( perukirja , bouppteckning ) . Inheritance tax was levied inter alia in respect of the PERSON - Högholm property .", "In a letter of CARDINAL DATE ORG requested the applicants to vacate the ORG property . The applicants have apparently not yet complied with the request and no enforcement proceedings have been initiated to date . At the hearing before the ORG on DATE the ORG argued that the letter in question amounted to the termination of the lease . The nature of the letter was disputed by the applicants .", "Meanwhile , in DATE ORG ( Nyland ) had certified that the owners of the ORG mansion had covered all the reforestation and other costs relating to the ORG - Högholm islands and had also collected the full yield from the forestry activities carried out on the islands .", "At the time of lodging their application with the ORG the applicants were allegedly still obliged to pay wealth tax on the PERSON - Högholm property . In DATE the Government informed the ORG that the taxation authorities would correct the relevant property register ( maatilarekisteri , jordbruksregistret ) with effect from DATE . The ORG would then be indicated as the rightful owner of the PERSON - Högholm property .", "According to the Government , there were no regulations in force in DATE governing the transfer of ownership of ORG land , nor was there any consistency in the contracts concerning such transfers . The scope of each contract and the rights contained therein had therefore to be determined in the light of the particular circumstances of each case . As a rule , it was not possible to transfer the ownership of ORG land before it had been transformed into privately owned land ( perinnöksiosto , skatteköp ) . It was nevertheless possible to establish various rights relating to the enjoyment of the property and benefiting private individuals , municipalities or the ORG . For example , the ORG could transfer a so - called permanent and exclusive right of possession in respect of the land , subject to a payment . Such a right required the land to be used for a specific purpose , and the ORG was entitled to regain possession of it either on payment of compensation or without having to redeem it . Over time the ORG ’s title to the land could change into an ordinary one , whereas it was not , for example , possible to change the amount of the payment ( stadga ) collected from the holder of a right attaching to the property .", "Provisions on the procedure for transferring ORG land to private individuals were later included in specific Acts of ORG , such as Act no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL ( eräiden kruununluontoisten tilojen ja tilanosien järjestelystä annettu laki , lag om reglering av vissa lägenheter och lägenhetsdelar av krononatur ) . These Acts did not , however , govern all ORG land or all cases where a right of usufruct had been attached to it .", "In the DATE LAW ( maakaari , jordabalken ORG ) the special characteristics of ORG land are only dealt with in the provisions concerning property registration , the aim being to ensure that the registered data correspond as far as possible to the existing situation . Title may now be established in respect of former ORG land . Any right of permanent usufruct , leasing right or other form of enjoyment of property may also be registered . A title of ownership may not be registered in respect of an estate which is already subject to a permanent right of possession ( see section CARDINALa of the LAW on the Implementation of the Land Code ( laki maakaaren voimaanpanosta , lagen om införande av jordabalken CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) .", "Many scholars have supported the view that the permanent right of possession may be regarded as tantamount to actual ownership . Domestic courts have not accepted this view , preferring to focus on the purpose of the original transaction , even in cases where a right of usufruct was being enjoyed over a long period and in an undisturbed manner . Reference may be made to ORG judgment no . CARDINAL .", "It was possible to lease land belonging to the ORG , either for a certain period of time or indefinitely . Rights based on such lease contracts have not been transformed into ownership by means of specific legislation to that effect . Nor has the long - term de facto enjoyment of a property been considered to constitute a basis for ownership or a right of permanent usufruct in respect of land subject to a lease contract . The fact that the owner of the land has been passive or has tacitly accepted that another person uses the land does not entail a transfer of ownership . Transfer of ownership requires a transaction .", "For taxation purposes , leased ORG land has been regarded as the tenant ’s possession whenever he or she has been enjoying the right to use the property in spite of the ORG ’s formal ownership . Thus , according to the Income and LAW ( laki tulo- ja omaisuusverosta , lagen om skatt på inkomst och förmögenhet ; Act no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , section CARDINAL ; Act no . DATE , section DATE ; and Act no . CARDINAL , section CARDINAL ) :", "“ [ CARDINAL property for which taxes shall be paid includes the assets of the person liable to pay taxes , subject to the restrictions set out below .", "The assets shall also include :", "( CARDINAL ) any right of usufruct in respect of real property , whether or not its validity has been defined in time or it remains valid during the holder ’s lifetime ; any timber - felling rights ; and any other right to make use of real property belonging to someone else . ”", "The existing LAW ( varallisuusverolaki , förmögenhetsskattelagen DATE ) contains a comparable provision ( section CARDINAL ) .", "Anyone wishing to adjust the amount of their tax assessment must make a request to that effect in accordance with LAW ( verotusmenettelylaki , lagen om beskattningsförfarande DATE ; LAW ) .", "According to the applicants , the right to perpetual usufruct did exist in DATE and was explicitly established , given that transfer of ownership per se was prohibited in respect of ORG land . A right of usufruct was granted permanently until DATE , when the ORG Collegium ( in NORP ) decided to let ORG land for a fixed period of DATE following a tendering procedure in the form of an auction . As the right claimed by the applicants in respect of the PERSON - Högholm property had been established well before , LAW was irrelevant to this case . The nature of the payment collected from the then owners of the ORG mansion ( in NORP stadga or stadgad ränta ) was DATE , which is evidenced by the fact that it was entered in the column of land tax in the land register , and replaced by wealth tax in DATE .", "The nature of ORG land is described in the relevant preparatory work on the DATE LAW Government PERSON ) . Real property was historically divided into ORG land , exempted land and tax land ( in NORP krono- , frälse- och skattejord ) . Land tax was levied only on ORG land and tax land . The distinction between ORG land and tax land was abolished by the DATE LAW which entered into force on DATE . As is evidenced by section DATE of LAW ( CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) and its drafting history , the concept of perpetual usufruct nevertheless remained recognised and may also be registered .", "NORP The preparatory work on LAW made clear that in examining historical rights to ORG land it must be established whether the ORG ’s intention when preparing the relevant contract was to transfer ownership per se or to grant a right of usufruct in respect of the land . If evidence of a transfer of ownership can not be provided , a right of perpetual usufruct is registered as a special right . For land registration purposes such a right is treated as a leasing right , and its holder may put it up as collateral ( section DATE , subsection CARDINAL , of LAW ) . A right of perpetual usufruct is nevertheless more extensive than a leasing right in that it entitles its holder to use and possess the land at his or her sole discretion and prevents the landowner from having his or her ownership registered or putting the land up as collateral ( section CARDINALa , subsection CARDINAL , of LAW ) .", "According to section CARDINAL ) of GPE ( maanvuokralaki , jordlegolagen CARDINAL/CARDINAL ) , which is applicable only to agreements made after DATE , a termination of lease must , if the addressee does not give his acknowledgment in writing , be effected in the presence of witnesses or in another demonstrable manner , and must specify the date on which the lease will end ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicants , PERSON and PERSON Radionova , are NORP nationals , mother and daughter , who were born in DATE and DATE respectively . They live in GPE . They were represented before the ORG by PERSON . ORG ( “ the Government ” ) were represented by PERSON , former Representative of GPE at ORG .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "In DATE the second applicant joined the ballet dance department of a state - run choreography school in GPE .", "According to the applicants , on DATE her classical dance teacher , PERSON , allegedly hit her on her forehead , temple and chest for performing an exercise incorrectly . The next day she was taken to town hospital no . DATE and diagnosed with concussion . She received in - patient treatment .", "The hospital reported the incident to the police . The ORG district police department conducted an inquiry . In particular , it questioned the second applicant , the teacher and the second applicant 's parents . PERSON stated that she had regularly corrected the second applicant 's posture during her lessons but had never hit her . The police department considered that the acts of PERSON were to be classified as battery , which was punishable under LAW and pertained to cases of private prosecution which , LAW , had to be instigated by court on a victim 's request . Therefore , on DATE the police refused to instigate criminal proceedings .", "According to the applicants , on DATE the same teacher PERSON allegedly pushed the second applicant onto her back and insulted her in her classmates ' presence .", "On DATE the second applicant saw a psychiatrist , who diagnosed her with neurotic depression syndrome and an anxiety neurosis with suicidal intentions , which had originated in a psychologically traumatic situation . She received appropriate treatment .", "On DATE the first applicant lodged a complaint with the school administration in respect of the events of DATE and DATE requesting that an end be put to her daughter 's exposure to violence and moral pressure by the teacher .", "On DATE the first applicant complained about the incident of DATE to the GPE Zheleznodorozhniy district police department .", "On DATE the school administration informed the first applicant that the teacher would continue the class but would avoid physical contact with the second applicant .", "On DATE the GPE district police department decided not to pursue the matter .", "On DATE the first applicant complained about PERSON 's behaviour to ORG town authority .", "On DATE the ORG district prosecutor 's office examined the first applicant 's appeal and ordered the police to initiate criminal proceedings .", "In DATE the second applicant left the choreography school .", "On DATE ORG informed the first applicant that they had not detected any wrongdoing by the teacher or the school administration in respect of her daughter .", "In the course of the criminal proceedings instituted by the police investigators questioned witnesses , including PERSON and the second applicant 's other classmates , and ordered a number of forensic medical examinations .", "According to medical experts ' report no . CARDINAL of DATE , on DATE the second applicant had suffered concussion which could have been caused by a hard blunt object . The resultant damage to her health was classified as mild , because the injury had been followed by a short - term health disorder which had not exceeded DATE .", "According to experts ' report no . CARDINAL of DATE , drawn up following a thorough psychological and psychiatric examination of the second applicant by CARDINAL psychiatrists and CARDINAL psychologist , the second applicant had not and did not suffer from a chronic mental disorder . In DATE and DATE she had suffered from an anxiety neurosis which had originated in a stressful situation , from which she had fully recovered .", "According to medical experts ' report no . CARDINAL of DATE , no injuries or mental disorder as a result of the incident of DATE had been established .", "On DATE an investigator of the LOC police department ordered a comprehensive medical examination with a view to establishing the second applicant 's injuries or mental disorders , their cause and gravity , and if there was a causal link with the incident of CARDINAL DATE . According to the investigator 's records , on DATE the first applicant refused to allow her daughter to undergo the examination .", "The proceedings were terminated by the police several times on the ground that there was no evidence of PERSON 's guilt . Those decisions were quashed on the first applicant 's appeals by the ORG district prosecutor 's office and by the ORG district court on the ground that the investigation was incomplete .", "On DATE the district prosecutor wrote to the police department pointing out the defects of the investigation in the case and the investigator 's negligence . The prosecutor indicated that the police administration should take measures to eliminate the breaches of law and take disciplinary action against the investigator in charge .", "According to the applicants , as a result of the concussion the second applicant suffered from asthenoneurotic syndrome , which caused frequent headaches and nausea . In connection with that , she underwent in - patient treatment on several occasions in DATE . She was kept under observation by a neuropathologist .", "According to the investigator 's records , on DATE the first applicant again refused to allow her daughter to undergo the medical examination .", "On DATE the police terminated the proceedings in view of the absence of evidence that PERSON had committed the crime , the lack of a causal link between the damage to the second applicant 's health and the events of CARDINAL DATE and DATE and the first applicant 's refusal to allow the second applicant to undergo the medical examinations .", "On DATE ORG dismissed a complaint by the first applicant against this decision . The court found that the first applicant had failed to submit the second applicant 's medical records necessary for obtaining the additional expert 's opinion ordered by the police .", "An appeal by the first applicant was disallowed on DATE by ORG . The appeal court ruled that under LAW the time - limit for the prosecution of minor offences provided by ORG CARDINAL , CARDINAL and CARDINAL of LAW involving minor damage to the health was DATE , and that this term had expired in this case .", "On an unspecified date the first applicant brought an action against the FAC district police department for non - pecuniary damage allegedly caused by the inefficient investigation . On DATE ORG of GPE did not find that the conduct of the police in the course of the investigation had been unlawful . It stated that the damage to the second applicant 's health ( the craniocerebral injury and the depressive neurosis ) had been caused at the choreography school and not by the investigating authority . The court dismissed the claim as unsubstantiated . On an appeal by the first applicant , ORG upheld the judgment on DATE .", "In another set of proceedings brought by the applicants , on DATE ORG awarded the applicants MONEY ( RUB ) by way of compensation for nonpecuniary damage to be paid by the choreography school . It found no causal link between the second applicant 's concussion diagnosed on DATE and her subsequent illnesses and the alleged attacks by PERSON on DATE and DATE . It found that the concussion had been selfinflicted by the second applicant 's striking herself accidentally on the left temple with a purse with metal coins , as was confirmed by CARDINAL witnesses . The court stated that the damage had been caused on the school LOC and during the lessons as a result of the insufficient supervision by the teaching staff and that the school should therefore be held responsible . The judgment was executed in DATE .", "On DATE the GPE regional prosecutor 's office quashed , on the direction by ORG office , the decision to terminate the criminal proceedings of DATE on the ground that the investigation was incomplete . It was noted that the comprehensive medical examination ordered by the investigating authority had never been carried out and that an additional interview be held with the second applicant 's former classmate PERSON , who had initially confirmed that PERSON had hit the second applicant but had later retracted her statements .", "The proceedings recommenced . The applicants appealed against the prosecutor 's decision of DATE arguing that the prosecutor 's office should have acknowledged the violation of the second applicant 's rights by the flawed investigation instead of reopening the proceedings against the law . On DATE ORG examined the appeal . It noted the defects of the “ endless investigation , of which the applicants had undoubtedly got tired ” , the fact that the last decision to discontinue the proceedings had only been quashed after ORG at ORG had intervened , and at the same time stressed the need to conduct an objective investigation in order to deliver a lawful and well - founded decision in the case in the interests of the applicants and PERSON It upheld the prosecutor 's decision . The applicants appealed to ORG .", "The proceedings appear to be pending .", "On DATE the first applicant was allegedly assaulted by third persons . As a result of the incident she had a bruise on her left eye . She called the police , who kept her waiting for TIME before registering her complaint . On DATE the police refused to institute criminal proceedings . The applicant brought proceedings against the police claiming damages on account of their failure to respond properly to her complaint . By a final decision of ORG of DATE she was awarded MONEY in compensation ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicants are CARDINAL inhabitants of the coastal town of GPE ( see Appendix I ) , of whom CARDINAL claim to be the owners of real property in the area ( see PERSON ) . They are represented before the ORG by an environmental association named ORG ( GPE za očuvanje kulturne i prirodne baštine FAC ” ) , with its seat in GPE and the aim to promote preservation of the environment and of cultural and historical monuments . The respondent Government are represented by their Agent , Ms Š. Stažnik .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "Within the framework of a project to protect the Kaštel Bay of LOC , the ORG is constructing a sewer network , with an outlet near the coastal town of GPE .", "On DATE ORG ( ORG zaštite okoliša i prostornog uređenja ; “ the Ministry ” ) granted the company ORG a building permit for constructing the sewer outlet in GPE .", "On DATE the applicants filed a motion for re - opening of the above administrative proceedings ( prijedlog za obnovu postupka ) with the Ministry . They claimed not to have been afforded the opportunity to participate in those proceedings , which had violated their constitutional rights and international environmental treaties as the sewer would not be equipped with a proper biological purification system .", "On DATE the ORG requested the applicants to substantiate their complaints and submit additional documents . The applicants replied on DATE .", "On DATE the ORG dismissed the applicants’ motion , finding that they had failed to prove their locus standi or to substantiate their allegations as required by the relevant legislation .", "On DATE the applicants brought an action in ORG ( ORG ) against the ORG ’s decision . On DATE ORG quashed the ORG ’s decision . In its judgment , ORG stated that , due to the fact that they lived in the area of possible negative impact of the building works , the applicants could not have been denied locus standi in the case .", "Currently , the proceedings concerning the applicants’ request to reopen the administrative proceedings are again pending before ORG .", "On DATE the applicants lodged a constitutional complaint , seeking to have the building permit quashed . They submitted that the permit violated some of their constitutional rights , including freedom of movement , as well as the right to work and to protection of health . Moreover , in their constitutional complaint the applicants requested an interim measure in order to stop the ongoing building works .", "On DATE ORG ( Ustavni sud PERSON ) declared the applicants’ constitutional complaint inadmissible for non - exhaustion of legal remedies .", "On DATE the applicants requested ORG ( PERSON ) to issue an interim measure in order to stop the building works . On CARDINAL DATE the court scheduled an on - site inspection for CARDINAL DATE . Following the inspection , on DATE the court experts submitted an offer , charging CARDINAL NORP kunas ( HRK ) for their opinion . The applicants never advanced the amount sought ; the proceedings are still pending .", "Sometime in DATE , CARDINAL of the CARDINAL applicants lodged a civil action with ORG seeking compensation for damage resulting from the construction of the sewer outlet . The proceedings are still pending before the first - instance court .", "With a view to securing the building site , the police cordoned off the area . On DATE several applicants , while swimming , approached the visibly marked area . The police intervened , preventing the applicants from approaching the site .", "Section CARDINAL of LAW ( Zakon o obveznim odnosima , ORG nos . CARDINAL , CARDINAL , DATE , DATE and CARDINAL ) , provides for a so - called ecological action and , insofar as relevant , reads as follows :", "Everyone may request another person to remove a source of danger , which might cause substantial damage to him or to other persons or to sustain from an activity which causes disturbance or might cause damage ...", "NORP The court shall , at the request of an interested person , order appropriate measures to be undertaken , for prevention of damage or disturbance or removal of the source of danger , at the expense of the possessor of the source of such danger ...", "NORP If damage occurs while performing an activity in the general interest , for which a permit of the competent authority has been obtained , one may seek compensation for such damage as exceeds only the usual limits ... ”", "In its decisions PERSON of DATE , ORG found that the owner of agricultural land near a factory chimney had the right to compensation for damage to his products ruined due to chimney emissions .", "In its decision PERSON CARDINAL/CARDINAL - CARDINAL of DATE , ORG ruled that the owners of a house had the right to compensation for damage suffered due to the construction of a nearby road . The damage they sustained included the drop of the value of their property .", "Section CARDINAL of LAW ( Zakon o općem upravnom postupku , ORG nos . CARDINAL/CARDINAL and CARDINAL ) provides that a party to the administrative proceedings is a person , at whose request the proceedings have been instituted , or a person against whom the proceedings have been instituted , or any other person who can participate in the proceedings with a view to protecting his or her rights or interests .", "Section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW provides that in simple matters an administrative body is obliged to issue a decision within DATE following the lodging of the party ’s request . In more complex cases , an administrative body is obliged to issue a decision within DATE after the request was lodged . LAW of the same LAW enables a party whose request has not been decided within the periods established in the previous paragraph to lodge an appeal , as if his or her request had been denied .", "Section CARDINAL § CARDINAL of LAW ( Zakon o upravnim sporovima , ORG nos . CARDINAL , CARDINAL/CARDINAL and DATE ) provides that , if a second - instance authority fails to issue a decision on an appeal by the party within DATE , and within DATE following the repeated request , the party may lodge an action with ORG as if his or her request had been dismissed . The same applies to the failure of a first - instance authority to issue a decision , if no appeal against that decision is allowed .", "The relevant part of CARDINAL of LAW on LAW ( Ustavni zakon o PERSON , ORG no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , of CARDINAL DATE ; “ the LAW ” ) reads as follows :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) The Constitutional Court shall examine a constitutional complaint whether or not all legal remedies have been exhausted if the court with jurisdiction fails to decide a claim concerning the applicant ’s rights and obligations or a criminal charge against him or her within a reasonable time ...", "( CARDINAL ) If a constitutional complaint ... under paragraph CARDINAL of this section is upheld , the Constitutional Court shall set a time - limit within which the court with jurisdiction must decide the case on the merits ...", "( CARDINAL ) In a decision issued under paragraph CARDINAL of this section , the Constitutional Court shall assess appropriate compensation for the applicant for the violation of his or her constitutional rights ... The compensation shall be paid out of the ORG budget within DATE from the date a request for payment is lodged . ”" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , PERSON , is a NORP national who was born in DATE and lives in PERSON . With the leave of the President of the Section ( Rule CARDINAL of the Rules of Court ) she was represented before the Court by her son Mr PERSON . ORG ( “ the Government ” ) were represented by their Agent , Mr PERSON of ORG .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "The applicant ’s father , Mr PERSON , was the owner of a property located on the corner of ORG streets in GPE . The applicant and her son are the only heirs of Mr Meklemburg .", "By virtue of the Decree of DATE on the Ownership and Use of Land in GPE , ownership of all private land was transferred to GPE . The decree gave the former owners the opportunity to obtain a perpetual lease ( temporary ownership after DATE and currently perpetual use ) of the nationalised plot of land on request .", "On DATE GPE ( ORG ) signed before a public notary a contract with the PERSON limited liability company by virtue of which the ownership of a plot of land in the centre of GPE was transferred to the above company as the GPE ’s contribution to its seed capital ( aport do kapitalu zakładowego spółki ) . The land in question included the plot previously owned by the applicant ’s father . The Złote Tarasy company constructed a shopping centre on it .", "The LOC acknowledged in the contract that there had been “ reprivatisation claims ” made in respect of the land in question and that proceedings to ascertain whether these claims were justified were pending . The GPE further stated that it had the financial means necessary to cover these claims .", "The LOC conducted negotiations with the applicant , her sister and CARDINAL other heirs of former owners of the land in question .", "On DATE the representatives of GPE signed before a public notary a friendly settlement agreement with CARDINAL heirs of the owners of the land . They accepted the compensation proposed by the LOC and agreed to waive any rights in respect of ownership or right to perpetual use of the land in question . The compensation proposed by the GPE had been based on the value of the property according to an assessment of DATE . The applicant and her sister decided not to sign the agreement because they contested the amount of compensation . The agreement in its relevant part reads as follows :", "“ GPE agrees to pay [ to CARDINAL heirs of the former owners of the land ] compensation for pecuniary damage ( odszkodowanie ) for not granting them the right of perpetual use of the plot of land described above , to which they were entitled under LAW , and the ownership of which was transferred by the LOC as a contribution to the Złote Tarasy limited liability company ... ”", "On DATE the applicant lodged a civil claim with ORG ( PERSON ) for annulment of the contract of DATE by which the land in question had been transferred to the Złote Tarasy limited liability company . They claimed that the contract had breached their right to be granted perpetual use of the land or their pre - emptive right thereto .", "On DATE the court dismissed their action , finding that the ownership of the property had been transferred in the form of the LOC ’s contribution to the seed capital of the limited liability company . According to the court such a contribution could not be considered as a sale of the property within the meaning of section CARDINAL of ORG , thus the contract in question remained valid .", "An appeal by the applicant was dismissed on DATE by ORG ( Sąd Apelacyjny ) . The court agreed with the opinion that the form in which the GPE had transferred the ownership of the land had not been a sale within the meaning of the domestic law . However , even if it was a sale and the transfer of the ownership had been carried out in breach of section CARDINAL of the PERSON , in any event it had not rendered the contract of DATE null and void . The only consequence of a breach of these provisions was a compensatory liability on the part of the LOC .", "On DATE ORG refused to hear a cassation appeal lodged by the applicant .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a civil claim against GPE for compensation for damage caused by the decision of DATE dismissing her father ’s claim to be granted perpetual use of the land and the contract of DATE .", "On DATE ORG gave a preliminary judgment ( wyrok wstępny ) in which it allowed the claim . It considered that the issue of the applicant ’s claim to be granted perpetual use of the land should have been examined before the Municipality had transferred the ownership of the property to the company . GPE thus acted illegally , as it had known that the applicant ’s claims were pending .", "GPE lodged an appeal against the judgment .", "On DATE ORG allowed the appeal and dismissed the applicant ’s claim . The court considered that until the right to perpetual use of the land had finally been determined by the administrative authority the heirs of the former owners had no right to the property in question . Only a final administrative decision could decide whether or not they had any claim to the property . Thus the GPE could legally transfer the ownership of the land in question . Moreover , the proceedings concerning the request to be granted perpetual use of the land had been pending and as a result the applicant might still obtain perpetual use of another plot of land or compensation . The applicant was also ordered to reimburse the costs of the proceedings to GPE in the amount of MONEY ( ORG ) .", "The applicant lodged a cassation appeal against the judgment but on DATE ORG refused to hear it .", "On DATE , in accordance with the time - limit provided in section CARDINAL of the DATE Decree , the applicant ’s father lodged an application in which he sought to be granted the right of temporary ownership of the land .", "On DATE the Mayor of GPE dismissed the application .", "On DATE the applicant lodged a request for the above decision to be declared null and void .", "On DATE ORG ( PERSON ) decided to stay the proceedings . An appeal by the applicant was dismissed on DATE .", "On DATE ORG of Appeal decided to resume the proceedings .", "On DATE ORG of Appeal found the above decision null and void .", "Subsequently , the applicant intervened on many occasions with the President of GPE and complained to a local Member of ORG that the administrative authority was taking no action .", "On DATE the President of GPE dismissed the applicant ’s request for perpetual use of the land . It established that the ownership of the property in question had been transferred to the Złote Tarasy limited liability company , thus the applicant could not be granted the right of perpetual use of it .", "The applicant appealed .", "On DATE ORG upheld the impugned decision .", "On DATE ORG quashed the decision and remitted the case . It considered that the administrative authorities should have examined whether the applicant had fulfilled the legal requirements to be granted the right of perpetual use . The issue that the ownership of the land had been transferred was of a secondary nature .", "The parties appealed against the judgment and on DATE ORG upheld the decision .", "The proceedings are pending before the President of GPE .", "Under LAW ( “ the LAW ” ) of DATE an administrative authority should give a decision on the merits of a case within DATE . If those time - limits have not been complied with , the authority must , under LAW , inform the parties of that fact , explain the reasons for the delay and fix a new timelimit .", "Pursuant to LAW , if the case has not been handled within the time - limits referred to in ORG and DATE , a party to administrative proceedings can lodge an appeal to the higher authority , alleging inactivity . In cases where the allegations of inactivity are well - founded , the higher authority fixes a new term for handling the case and orders an inquiry in order to determine the reasons for the inactivity and to identify the persons responsible for the delay . If need be , the authority may order that measures be applied to prevent future such delays .", "On DATE , the Law of CARDINAL DATE on ORG ( “ the DATE LAW ) entered into force . Under section CARDINAL of the DATE ORG was competent to examine complaints against inactivity on the part of an authority .", "Section CARDINAL of the Act provided :", "“ When a complaint alleging inactivity on the part of an administrative authority is well - founded , ORG shall oblige that authority to issue a decision , or to perform a specific act , or to confirm , declare , or recognise a right or obligation provided for by law . ”", "Section CARDINAL of the CARDINAL Act set out the requirement of the exhaustion of available remedies before lodging a complaint with ORG . Accordingly , a complaint concerning alleged inactivity should be preceded by the lodging of a complaint with an administrative organ of a higher level , pursuant to the abovementioned LAW .", "Pursuant to LAW , the decision of ORG ordering an authority to put an end to its inactivity was legally binding on the authority concerned . If the authority did not comply with the decision , the court could , under section CARDINAL , impose a fine on it and might itself give a ruling on the right or obligation in question .", "LAW was repealed and replaced by LAW DATE on ORG ( “ the DATE Act ” ) which entered into force on DATE . LAW of LAW contains provisions analogous to section CARDINAL of LAW . It provides that administrative courts examine complaints of inactivity on the part of authorities obliged to issue an administrative decision or to carry out enforcement proceedings . Under section CARDINAL , if a complaint is wellfounded , an administrative court shall oblige the authority concerned to issue a decision , to perform a specific act , or to confirm , declare , or recognise a right or obligation provided for by law ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant , Mr PERSON , is a NORP national who was born in DATE and lives in PERSON . He was represented before the ORG by the LOC lawyers . ORG ( “ the Government ” ) were represented by their Agent , Mr PERSON , State Attorney - General .", "The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .", "On DATE the applicant was injured in an accident at work and broke his elbow . The applicant ’s employer had taken out insurance with the insurance company ZT .", "On DATE the applicant instituted civil proceedings against ZT in ORG ( Okrožno sodišče v PERSON ) seeking damages in the amount of CARDINAL NORP tolars ( MONEY ) for the injuries sustained .", "On DATE and CARDINAL DATE the applicant requested that a date be set for a hearing .", "On DATE the applicant lodged preliminary written submissions and adduced evidence .", "On DATE the court held a hearing and decided to appoint a medical expert .", "On DATE the court appointed a medical expert to deliver an opinion concerning the applicant ’s injuries .", "On DATE the applicant lodged preliminary written submissions and requested that a date be set for a hearing .", "On DATE the court held a hearing and decided to deliver a written judgment . The judgment , upholding the applicant ’s claim in part , was served on the applicant on DATE .", "On DATE the applicant appealed to ORG ( PERSON v PERSON ) .", "On DATE the court dismissed the applicant ’s appeal . The judgment was served on the applicant on DATE .", "On DATE the applicant lodged an appeal on points of law with ORG sodišče ) and sought a recusal of CARDINAL of the judges .", "On DATE the president of ORG dismissed the request for a recusal .", "On DATE the court allowed the appeal on points of law in part and increased the amount of the damages awarded . The judgment was served on the applicant on DATE .", "On DATE the applicant requested a correction of the judgment , seeking reimbursement of some costs . The court dismissed the request on DATE . This decision was served on the applicant on DATE ." ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lived in GPE until the time of his arrest .", "On DATE the applicant was arrested on suspicion of killing and/or causing grievous bodily injuries to several individuals . On the following day the Pushkinskiy ORG of GPE remanded him in custody .", "On DATE , DATE , DATE and DATE and DATE LOC extended the authorised period of the applicant 's detention for up to a total duration of DATE .", "On DATE , DATE and DATE GPE authorised further extensions of the applicant 's pre - trial detention until DATE . No appeal was lodged against the extension orders .", "On DATE the pre - trial investigation was completed and the applicant was granted access to the case file .", "On DATE GPE granted the prosecutor 's application for a further extension of the applicant 's detention until DATE , that is , for a total duration of DATE . ORG referred to the gravity of the charges against the applicant , the existence of a reasonable suspicion of his involvement in the commission of the alleged offences and certain “ objective circumstances ” , in particular , the fact that the defendants had not yet finished studying the case file .", "On DATE counsel for the applicant lodged an appeal against the extension order . Counsel pointed out that ORG had failed to identify any concrete facts to justify the risks of absconding , reoffending or obstructing justice . She alleged a violation of LAW . On DATE ORG of GPE rejected the appeal , finding that the gravity of the charges could be taken into account when deciding to extend the pre - trial detention .", "In the meantime , the prosecution applied for a further extension of the applicant 's detention . It was submitted that he stood accused of a serious criminal offence and had not yet finished reading the case file . The defence objected to the extension and emphasised that the applicant had a place of permanent residence , no criminal record and positive references .", "On DATE ORG granted the extension sought by the prosecution , referring to the gravity of the charges against the applicant and the medical findings that he did not have any health issues which could have required his release . The extension was granted until DATE , by reference to LAW .", "On DATE counsel for the applicant appealed against the extension order . She submitted that neither the gravity of the charges nor the fact that the applicant had not finished studying the file were relevant or sufficient grounds for extending his pre - trial detention . On DATE ORG rejected the appeal . Neither the applicant nor his counsel were present at the appeal hearing .", "On DATE ORG granted a further extension of the applicant 's detention until DATE , finding in particular as follows :", "“ The gravity and public dangerousness of the crimes imputed to Mr PERSON are such that an undertaking to appear would not be sufficient to guarantee his appearance before the investigator or in court or to ensure his law - abiding conduct . ”", "In the statement of appeal , counsel for the applicant pointed out that on DATE ORG had already granted CARDINAL extension for the purpose of studying the file and that LAW and CARDINAL of LAW did not provide for a possibility to grant repeated extensions for that same purpose . In her submission , a second extension of the detention period , such as the one authorised by ORG on DATE , was contrary both to the letter of Article CARDINAL and to its interpretation given in ORG judgments no . CARDINAL-O of DATE and no . ORG of DATE ( cited below ) , and was therefore arbitrary and incompatible with LAW .", "The applicant sought leave to appear in person before the appeal court . On DATE ORG refused him leave on the ground that the applicant had not submitted a separate statement of appeal and his presence would not therefore be indispensable . In the same hearing , ORG rejected the appeal against the extension order in a summary fashion . On the issue of the alleged unlawfulness of repeated extensions , it found as follows :", "“ The argument to the effect that the judge was not authorised to grant a second extension of the detention period for studying the criminal case file on the same grounds may not be taken into account because it is not founded on law , which was given an incorrect interpretation [ sic ] . ”", "On DATE GPE granted a further extension of the applicant 's detention until DATE , noting that the preventive measure was lawful and justified , taking into account the gravity of the charges and “ information on [ the applicant 's ] character ” . On DATE ORG refused the applicant leave to appear and rejected the appeal lodged by his counsel . It expressed the view that LAW permitted repeated extensions of the detention period when it was necessary to allow the defendant to finish studying the case file .", "On DATE and DATE ORG examined further requests by the prosecution for extensions of the applicant 's detention and granted the extensions requested . It held that the applicant could not be released on an undertaking to appear because of the gravity and “ public importance ” of the crimes imputed to him . It also expressed the view that further extensions were lawful within the meaning of LAW of the ORG since the requests for extensions had been made within the DATE time - limit mentioned in that provision .", "On DATE counsel for the applicant and the applicant himself submitted statements of appeal against the extension order of CARDINAL DATE . The applicant also sought leave to appear before the appeal court . Counsel pointed out that on DATE ORG had already granted a fourth extension in excess of the maximum eighteenmonth detention period , which was incompatible with the requirements of LAW and CARDINAL of the CCrP. By decision of DATE , ORG refused the applicant leave to appear , noting that his presence was not necessary because all the arguments were explained in sufficient detail in his counsel 's submissions . In the same hearing , ORG rejected the appeals against the extension orders , holding that counsel had “ incorrectly interpreted ” the provisions of Article CARDINAL .", "On DATE GPE extended the authorised period of the applicant 's detention until DATE for the purpose of allowing the prosecution sufficient time for complying with the legal requirement that a case be submitted for trial DATE before the expiry of the detention period . As to the grounds for continued detention , ORG noted that the grounds for preferring a custodial measure still obtained .", "On DATE the case against the applicant and other codefendants was referred for trial . On DATE ORG held a preliminary hearing , in the absence of the applicant and his counsel , and indicated that the custodial measure “ should remain unchanged ” . It did not set a time - limit for the measure or list any grounds for continuing its application .", "On CARDINAL DATE ORG issued a decision by which it extended the detention period in respect of the applicant and CARDINAL other co - defendants for DATE . It referred to the gravity of the charges against them .", "On DATE ORG examined the appeals submitted by the applicant 's counsel against the extension orders of CARDINAL and CARDINAL DATE and rejected them . Counsel and the applicant did not take part in the hearing .", "On DATE ORG extended the period of detention in respect of all defendants for DATE , noting the gravity of the charges and continuing examination of evidence .", "On DATE GPE convicted the applicant and his co - defendants of various violent crimes committed for racial motives . The applicant was sentenced to DATE imprisonment but relieved from serving the sentence owing to the expiry of the prescription period . The applicant was released from custody on DATE . He did not file an appeal , but CARDINAL of his co - defendants did . On DATE ORG upheld the judgment on appeal .", "Before DATE , while the applicant was legally a minor , he was held in a special wing of remand prison no . IZ-CARDINAL/CARDINAL of GPE , popularly known as “ GPE ” , and in remand prison no . IZ-CARDINAL/CARDINAL of PERSON in LOC . The applicant raised no complaints in respect of that period of detention .", "After DATE , when he reached legal majority , the applicant was held together with adult detainees in various cells of remand prison no . IZ-CARDINAL/CARDINAL .", "The Government produced , among other documents , CARDINAL statements of DATE from the director of remand prison no . IZ-CARDINAL/CARDINAL , according to which all the cells in which the applicant had been detained , had measured QUANTITY and accommodated CARDINAL detainees , including the applicant . They also submitted disparate sheets from a certain register concerning transfers of detainees , all of which referred to a period prior to CARDINAL DATE .", "According to the applicant , the cells measured QUANTITY and were equipped with CARDINAL - tier bunk beds . The actual number of inmates ranged from CARDINAL to CARDINAL , including the applicant himself . The mandatory ventilation did not function and the toilet was not separated from the living area . Inmates used bed sheets to create a makeshift screen around it but warders considered it to be a violation of prison regulations and tore them down .", "On DATE the applicant complained about the conditions of detention to a supervising prosecutor . On DATE the St GPE prosecutor sent a reply to his complaint , in which he acknowledged , in particular , that the personal space afforded to inmates in cell no . CARDINAL was below the legal norm of QUANTITY . m per person . On DATE the prosecutor ordered the director of the remand prison to remedy a violation of the law and discipline those responsible .", "According to the Government , on DATE , DATE and DATE the GPE prosecutor issued further warnings to the director of the remand prison , requiring him to improve the material conditions of the inmates ' detention and bring them up to the applicable standards .", "In DATE the applicant was transferred to a new cell of the same size which he shared with CARDINAL detainee until he was released on DATE .", "Pursuant to LAW , the initial pre - trial detention of an accused must not exceed DATE . It may be subsequently extended DATE .", "Further extensions to up to DATE are possible only in relation to persons accused of serious or particularly serious criminal offences , in view of the complexity of the case and if there are grounds justifying detention . An investigator 's request for extension must be approved by the regional prosecutor ( § CARDINAL ) .", "An extension of detention beyond DATE and DATE may be authorised only in exceptional circumstances in respect of persons accused of particularly serious offences , upon an investigator 's request approved by ORG or his deputy ( § CARDINAL ) .", "Extension of detention beyond DATE is prohibited and the detainee must be immediately released , unless the prosecution 's request for an extension for the purpose of studying the case has been granted by a court in accordance with LAW of the CCrP ( LAW ) .", "Upon completion of the investigation , the detainee must be given access to the case file DATE preceding the expiry of the maximum period of detention indicated in DATE and CARDINAL ( § CARDINAL ) .", "If access was granted on DATE , the detainee must be released after the expiry of the maximum period of detention ( § CARDINAL ) .", "If access was granted DATE before the expiry of the maximum period of detention but the DATE period proved to be insufficient to read the entire case file , the investigator may request the court to extend the period of detention . The request must be submitted DATE before the expiry of the detention period ( § CARDINAL ) .", "Within DATE of receipt of the request for an extension , the judge must decide whether to grant it or reject it and release the detainee . If the extension is granted , the period of detention is extended until such time as would be sufficient for the detainee and counsel to finish reading the case file and for the prosecution to submit the case to the trial court ( § CARDINAL) .", "Examining the compatibility of LAW ( now replaced by LAW CCrP ) with LAW , on DATE ORG ruled as follows :", "“ ... affording the defendant a sufficient time for studying the file must not result in ... his detention for a period of an unlimited duration . In that case such detention would amount to a sanction for using by the defendant of his procedural rights and thereby induce him to waive these rights ... ”", "On DATE ORG issued a further clarification of its position ( decision no . CARDINAL-O ) , finding as follows :", "“ CARDINAL . ... the studying of the file [ by the defendant and his counsel ] is a necessary condition for extending the term of detention [ beyond DATE ] but it may not be , taken on its own , a sufficient ground for granting such an extension ... For that reason , in each particular case the prosecutor 's application for extending the period of detention beyond DATE ( LAW , CARDINAL of the RSFSR CCrP ) must refer not to the fact that the defendant and his counsel continue to study the file ... but rather to factual information demonstrating that this preventive measure can not be revoked and the legal grounds for its continued application remain ...", "... LAW RSFSR CCrP expressly provides that , on an application by a prosecutor , the judge may extend the defendant 's detention until such time as the defendant and his counsel have finished studying the file and the prosecutor has submitted it to the [ trial ] court , but by no longer than DATE . Accordingly , the law does not provide for lodging of repeated applications for extension of the defendant 's detention , even after an additional investigation [ has been carried out ] ... In the absence of an express legal provision for repeated extensions of detention on that ground , any other interpretation of [ LAW ] would breach the prohibition on arbitrary detention within the meaning of ORG decision of DATE . ”", "By decision no . CARDINAL of DATE , ORG confirmed its position , by reference to above - cited decision no . CARDINAL-O , that in the absence of an express provision to that effect , time - limits during the pre - trial investigation may not be repeatedly extended , particularly on the same grounds , in excess of the maximum time - limit set out in the CCrP.", "In decision no . CARDINAL - O of DATE , ORG expressed the view that LAW ( CARDINAL ) of the ORG was compatible with the LAW . Even though this provision did not define the maximum period within which an extension could be granted for the purpose of studying the case file , it did not imply the possibility of excessive or unlimited detention because , in granting an extension , the court should not rely solely on a well - founded suspicion that the defendant committed the offence but mainly base its decision on specific circumstances justifying the continued detention , such as his potential to exert pressure on witnesses or an established risk of his absconding or reoffending ." ]

[ "13", "3", "5" ]

[ "5-1", "5-3", "5-4" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in FAC , GPE .", "At DATE a new concept called “ tax asset stripping cases ” ( selskabstømmersager ) came into existence in GPE . It covered a criminal activity by which the persons involved committed aggravated debtor fraud by buying up and selling numerous inactive , solvent private limited companies within a short period and , for the sake of their own profit , “ stripping ” the companies of assets , including deposits earmarked for payment of corporation tax . The persons involved were usually intricately interconnected and collaborated in their economic criminal activities , which concerned very large amounts of money . According to surveys made by the customs and tax authorities , CARDINAL companies with a total tax debt exceeding MONEY ( ORG ) were stripped in the period from DATE until DATE . Following a number of legislative amendments , the trade in inactive , solvent companies largely ceased in DATE .", "In DATE , the applicant learnt via a local newspaper that he was the subject of an investigation , as was a private limited stockbrokers company , of which he was part owner .", "NORP By letter of DATE he informed the police that he was available for an interview , if required . By letter of CARDINAL DATE the police confirmed that they were in the process of investigation and informed the applicant that they would talk to him at a later stage .", "From DATE to DATE , CARDINAL discovery orders were issued against CARDINAL banks , CARDINAL search warrants were issued and numerous interviews were held .", "On DATE the applicant was arrested and charged , inter alia , with aggravated debtor fraud . On DATE he was detained in solitary confinement , which was prolonged at regular intervals until he was released on DATE .", "On DATE , an oral hearing took place before ORG ( PERSON ORG - hereafter “ the ORG ” ) , during which the prosecution stated that the investigation was concluded and that the indictment could be expected at DATE .", "From DATE to DATE various investigative steps were taken , notably relating to CARDINAL co - accused in the case , for example searches in GPE , GPE and GPE , numerous interviews in GPE and abroad , international letters of request , a request to ORG , CARDINAL discovery orders and an order prohibiting the disclosure of the applicant ’s name . Moreover , on DATE a request for an accountant ’s report was made and material for that purpose was obtained , including statements of account , cheque vouchers and so on .", "On DATE , the indictment was submitted to ORG according to which the applicant ( and CARDINAL co - accused : A , B , N , M and R ) were charged of “ tax asset stripping ” committed jointly . The applicant was charged with CARDINAL counts out of a total of CARDINAL committed DATE and DATE . His responsibility related to an amount of DKK CARDINAL ( approximately MONEY ( ORG ) ) out of the total amount of tax evaded in the case which came to approximately ORG CARDINAL .", "DATE and DATE , CARDINAL pre - trial hearings were held and the draft of the accountant ’s reports was submitted . On the former date , the case was set down for trial on DATE .", "DATE and DATE , a total of CARDINAL hearings were held . The applicant , the CARDINAL co - accused and CARDINAL witnesses were heard , including state - registered public accountants . Statements of accounts and a considerable amount of other documentary evidence were also produced . The court records comprised CARDINAL pages . The closing speeches were held over DATE in DATE and DATE .", "By a judgment of DATE , which ran to CARDINAL pages , ORG convicted the applicant in accordance with the indictment , but on CARDINAL count he was acquitted . The co - accused were also convicted . The applicant was sentenced to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment . In addition , an amount of DKK CARDINAL was seized , and he was deprived for an indefinite period of his right to establish a private limited company or a company or an association requiring public approval , or to become a manager and/or member of a director ’s board of such companies .", "ORG dismissed the applicant ’s claim that the length of the proceedings had been at variance with LAW , stating the following :", "“ ORG finds no reason to criticise the prosecution ’s decision to join the criminal proceedings against the [ applicant and the CARDINAL coaccused ] . Accordingly , and having regard to the mutual connection between the cases and their character , ORG finds no violation of LAW , although there were longer periods of inactivity during CARDINAL part of the case , while investigation was going on in another part of the case . In this connection [ ORG ] notes that the complexity of the acts carried out by [ the applicant and the CARDINAL co - accused ] partly when buying and “ stripping ” the companies for assets , partly when writing off projects abroad , necessitated an investigation of an extraordinary scope . In ORG opinion there were no longer periods , whether before the police , the prosecution or ORG , during which no part of the case proceeded . It must be emphasised that due to the nature and scope of the charges , the cases against [ M ] and [ the co - accused B and R ] could not proceed before the cases against [ the applicant , N and A ] [ had been heard ] . [ Finally ] , in view of the character and complexity of the case , [ ORG ] considers that the total length of the proceedings did not in itself constitute a breach of the said provision of the LAW . ”", "On DATE the applicant and the CARDINAL co - accused appealed against the judgment to ORG of Eastern GPE ( PERSON - “ the High Court ” ) .", "After DATE , CARDINAL preparatory hearings were held , including CARDINAL on DATE during which the trial was scheduled with numerous fixed dates to commence on DATE . Counsel for the applicant and the co - defendants jointly replied that they only had very limited possibilities to appear during the DATE .", "Thus , although the trial commenced on DATE , most of the hearings took place in DATE and DATE . A total of CARDINAL hearings were held in the case . In DATE the appeal hearings had to be postponed because the applicant fell ill . For the same reason ORG changed the order of some of the hearings . ORG records comprised CARDINAL pages . The closing speeches were held over DATE in DATE , DATE , and DATE .", "On DATE ORG upheld ORG judgment . As regards the length of the proceedings , it stated :", "“ In the assessment of whether the proceedings have been concluded within a reasonable time , the starting point ... concerning the [ applicant ] was on DATE , when he was charged ...", "[ ORG ] upholds ORG judgment and its reasoning with regard to the question of whether LAW has been violated ...", "The appeal proceedings were scheduled and carried out without any unreasonable delay . On DATE the trial was scheduled to take place on fixed dates as from CARDINAL DATE . A number of hearing dates in DATE and DATE had to be cancelled because some counsel were occupied [ with other cases ] , for which reason the [ present ] case was delayed . To avoid any further delay caused by impossibilities to appear , the trial , which commenced on DATE , proceeded in a proper , but not completely suitable order . ”", "In the period from DATE , the applicant and the codefendants requested that the Leave to Appeal Board ( Procesbevillingsnævnet ) grant them leave to appeal to ORG ( Højesteret ) . CARDINAL of the defendants stated in their petitions that they would submit supplementary comments , which were received on DATE . In DATE the cases were sent to the prosecution , which gave its opinion on DATE . The applicant and the codefendants gave their comments in reply and at a meeting on CARDINAL DATE the Leave to ORG decided to refuse the requests . Letters of refusal were not sent out , however , as on DATE counsel for CARDINAL of the co - defendants stated that he wanted to submit supplementary comments in the light of a recent judgment in a similar case .", "Thereafter , due to an error , nothing happened in the case until DATE , when the police telephoned the Leave to Appeal Board and drew attention to the case . Subsequently , on his request , counsel for the relevant co - defendant who had wanted to submit supplementary comments did so on DATE . The applicant and the co - defendant were informed on DATE that their requests for leave to appeal to ORG had been refused ." ]

[ "6" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant who was born in GPE lives in PERSON . She runs an NORP restaurant with NORP cuisine in PERSON .", "On DATE she lodged a request with ORG ( Arbeitsmarktservice – LMS ) for the grant of an employment permit for an NORP chef from the LOC of GPE as a key worker ( GPE ) .", "On DATE the PERSON refused the request in accordance with section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of ORG ( ORG ) . It found that the chef did not fulfil the conditions to be a key worker as defined in section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) .", "The applicant appealed against the refusal to the PERSON on DATE . She maintained in substance that the authority had failed to assess properly the evidence .", "On DATE the PERSON dismissed the applicant 's appeal . It held that the submitted documents did not sufficiently prove her contention that the proposed chef fulfilled the conditions required to be a key worker or that the requested employment would secure existing jobs or create new jobs , as required by section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of ORG . His professional skills could not be seen as specific and extraordinary since any chef could with further training obtain a certificate in NORP cuisine .", "The applicant filed a complaint with ORG on DATE and requested an oral hearing . In her appeal the applicant maintained that the authorities had failed to assess the evidence properly and give appropriate reasons . Had they done so they should have concluded that the person to be employed qualified as a key worker . On DATE the PERSON submitted its comments .", "On DATE ORG dismissed the applicant 's complaint . In accordance with section CARDINAL ) of LAW ( PERSON ) it also dismissed the applicant 's request for an oral hearing as it found that it would not be likely to contribute to the clarification of the case . The decision was served on the applicant 's counsel on DATE .", "The Employment of Foreigners Act ( Ausländerbeschäftigungs - gesetz ) regulates a foreigner 's access to the NORP labour market . Section CARDINAL ( CARDINAL ) of this act , as in force at the relevant time , reads as follows :", "“ ( CARDINAL ) Key workers are foreigners who have particular training or specific know- how and professional experience which are requested on the domestic labour market and who would receive for their employment a DATE gross salary of PERCENT of the maximum contribution level under Section CARDINAL para . CARDINAL of the General Social Security Act . Moreover , CARDINAL of the following conditions must be fulfilled :", "NORP the intended employment goes beyond the interest of the employing company and is of specific relevance for the region or the sector of the labour market concerned or", "NORP the intended employment fosters the creation of new employments and ensures the protection of existing employments or", "NORP the foreigner has a crucial influence on the management of the company ( executive managerial post ) or", "the intended employment leads to a transfer of capital investment to GPE or", "the foreigner is a university or polytechnics graduate or holds a certificate proving that he has accomplished a specially recognised training . ”", "Further relevant provisions of that act can be found in the judgments in the cases of PERSON and Collegium PERSON v. GPE ( no . CARDINAL , DATE ) and ORG and PERSON v. GPE ( no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL , DATE ) .", "Section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) of LAW requires ORG to hold a hearing after its preliminary investigation of the case where the complainant has requested a hearing within the time - limit . LAW ) ( CARDINAL ) provides , however , that , notwithstanding such a request , ORG may decide not to hold a hearing if it is apparent from the written pleadings of the parties and the files relating to the previous proceedings that an oral hearing would not be likely to contribute to the clarification of the case and that the lack of a hearing would not be in breach of LAW ." ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[ "The applicant was born in DATE and lives in Gdańsk .", "On DATE the applicant was arrested and remanded in custody .", "On DATE the applicant was released from pre - trial detention .", "On DATE the prosecution lodged a bill of indictment with ORG ( FAC ) . The applicant was charged with several counts of receiving and counterfeit . The bill of indictment comprised charges against CARDINAL accused .", "In the proceedings the ORG scheduled CARDINAL hearings . CARDINAL of them were adjourned . On many occasions the court did not give any reasons for adjournment decisions .", "The proceedings are still pending before the ORG .", "On an unspecified date the applicant lodged with ORG ( PERSON ) a complaint under LAW on complaints about a breach of the right to a trial within a reasonable time ( LOC o skardze na naruszenie prawa strony do rozpoznania sprawy w postępowaniu sądowym bez nieuzasadnionej zwłoki ) ( “ the CARDINAL Act ” ) .", "On DATE the ORG confirmed that the proceedings in question had indeed been lengthy . The court stated , inter alia , that on CARDINAL occasions ORG had adjourned hearings without giving reasons for its decision . It further stated that on eight occasions the hearings had lasted TIME , which taking into account the number of co - accused and difficulties in scheduling a date convenient to all the participants , was proof of bad organisation of the proceedings on the part of ORG . Furthermore , the court held that on numerous occasions hearings had been adjourned as some of the co – accused had participated on these dates in another set of proceedings or because prison authorities had been given too short notice to organise transport of the accused from a remand centre to the courtroom . The court also pointed out that ORG did not apply any disciplinary measures against the co - accused who systematically failed to appear for hearings . Finally , ORG stated that the intervals between the hearings had been too significant ; in particular on CARDINAL occasion ORG had adjourned a hearing for DATE without submitting exceptional reasons for its decision as required by the code of criminal procedure . According to ORG , it resulted from the above that ORG had significantly contributed to the excessive length of the proceedings . The ORG did not , however , examine the period prior to the entry into force of LAW .", "NORP The court awarded the applicant MONEY ( PLN ) ( approx . MONEY ( ORG ) ) in just satisfaction .", "The relevant domestic law and practice concerning remedies for the excessive length of judicial proceedings , in particular the applicable provisions of LAW , are stated in the ORG 's decisions in the cases of ORG v. GPE no . CARDINAL/CARDINAL ( dec . ) , § § DATE , ECHR CARDINAL-V and NORP v. GPE no . CARDINAL ( dec . ) , ORG CARDINAL-VIII and the judgment in the case of GPE v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , § § DATE , ORG CARDINAL" ]

[ "6" ]

[ "6-1" ]

[]

[]

[]

[]