The Court has previously accepted that close relatives of applicants who have died can maintain applications that include complaints concerning various aspects of Article   6 of the Convention (see

  10490/16) against Hungary lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on 27 January 2016 by a Hungarian

They relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

In these circumstances it considers that Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention

The applicants complained under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention about the length of proceedings. The applications were communicated to the Government.

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE   11 OF THE CONVENTION 12.

Il invoque l’article 6 de la Convention. 2.

L’article 6 § 1 de la Convention est inapplicable en la matière.

Three extended orders issued between 29 July 2010 and 29 March 2011 concerned the applicant.

In addition to various provisions of the domestic law, he relied on Articles 6 and 10 of the Convention, arguing that his right to a reasoned judgment and his right to receive information had been breached

to the Convention?

They refer to the domestic law provisions, and two of them further refer to Article   6 of the Convention.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.

    Remaining complaints Some applicants also raised other complaints under various articles of the Convention.

  15387/08 and 13561/12, the applicants also raised other complaints under various articles of the Convention.

    Under Articles 6 and 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention the applicant was dissatisfied with his criminal conviction because of the courts’ use of his self-incriminating statements obtained under

These complaints – which fall under Article 18 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Article 11 – are raised with reference to Article 6 § 2, Articles 11, 14 and/or 18 of the Convention.

    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION AND OF ARTICLE 1 OF PROTOCOL No. 1 The Court reiterates that the right to a tribunal protected by Article   6 would be illusory if

1, 8 and 14 of the Convention and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.

    Has the applicant got at his disposal effective domestic remedies for his above complaints under Articles 3 and 6 of the Convention, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?