The applicants considered that their conviction for copyright infringement was not “necessary” in so far as they had been invited to the fashion shows in question, in their capacity as photographers, to

        The applicants also allege that they were arrested without a warrant and without an interpreter to inform them of their rights or tell them the reasons for the arrest

They added that if the fact of referring to Abdullah Öcalan in this way was an offence, then they accepted being judged and convicted for doing so.

The applicants and their families then moved to Diyarbakır and Istanbul where they currently live.

    He then turned to consider what had been disclosed about the anonymous witnesses, summarising the disclosures about the statements they had made and their backgrounds (see paragraphs 8-16

At first, they tried to stop Ms Cemre Ay and Ms Demet Yılan, who were both minors at the time, by dragging them by their hair. The officers allegedly swore at them and beat them.

They denied that they had previously tried to escape the social authorities and emphasised that, even if the authorities believed that there was such a risk, this should not prevent them from being granted

The applicants and their families then moved to Diyarbakır where they currently live.

Lastly, in each of these cases the applicants complained under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) of an infringement of their right to the peaceful enjoyment of their possessions.

The defendants say that this was because their new solicitors were giving them different legal advice.

At the point we’re at now, they can’t leave this issue unresolved.

  I: Do you remember the last time we met? Then you told me about the camp in Bujanovac. NL: I was there when they sent me back from Sweden to Germany.

Then there arrived servicemen from the Leninskiy VOVD, but they were also shot at from a machine gun.

The security forces had not destroyed the applicants’ village or forced them to leave their homes.

Consequently, they applied in these cases. The Court then, applying the general principles set out in its judgments of Al-Khawaja and Tahery   v. the United Kingdom [GC] and Schatschaschwili v.

Consequently, they applied in these cases. The Court then, applying the general principles set out in its judgments of Al-Khawaja and Tahery   v. the United Kingdom [GC] and Schatschaschwili v.

They pay for nothing. But what do they do – they beat up Bulgarians, rob them, ill-treat them, rape women, kill, there have been several murders already.

The applicants deny this interpretation of their intention at the time.

The President granted the applicants’ request for their identity not to be disclosed to the public (Rule 47 § 3). They were represented before the Court by Mr B.