e) of the Convention?

The applicants’ complaints under various Articles of the Convention (see appended table) were communicated to the Ukrainian Government, which submitted observations on the admissibility and merits.

The applicants rely on Article 3 and Article 13 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 10 of the Convention 7.     The applicants principally complained of various restrictions imposed on their right to freedom of expression.

    GRIEFS        Le requérant invoque chacun des griefs sous l'angle de l'article 6 par. 1 de la Convention.

    He further brought numerous complaints under various other Articles of the Convention. THE LAW a.     Complaints under Article 3 of the Convention 36.

    Has the applicant been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article   3 of the Convention?   2.

the Convention?

The applicant complains that the Gostynin Centre did not offer a proper therapeutic environment as required by Article 5 § 1 (e) of 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.

(Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention).

In that regard, the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth applicants rely on Article 3 of the Convention and the seventh applicant relies on Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention.

Convention.

The applications raise issues under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention and Articles 13 and 35 § 1 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.

The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the excessive length of the criminal proceedings against him.

COMPLAINTS The applicant complains under Article 10 of the Convention that his conviction under section 7(2) of Law no. 3713 constituted a violation of his right to freedom of expression.

the Convention.

    The applicants complain under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the civil proceedings instituted by them in connection with the expropriation and demolition of their properties were not

The conviction was based on the results of a search of the applicant’s home and a number of crime detection examinations as well as on the statements of various relevant witnesses.