In the present case, this part of the applicants’ complaint was not supported by any elements linked to their individual case.

In this connection, they indicated that the applicants were members of the terrorist organisation PKK and that they had previously spoken Turkish with their relatives on the telephone, but later on had

The gendarmerie replied that they had been unable to find the perpetrators despite their searches. 20.

They registered there as internally displaced persons (IDPs) and were issued with IDP certificates that indicated Kyiv as the place of their actual residence.

As they questioned them, one of the men opened fire killing one of the police officers and injuring another. Mehmet Şah İkincisoy allegedly then escaped.

The squad officers verbally and physically assaulted them on their way from the car to the punishment ward where the newly arrived detainees were held.

They said that the village was to be evacuated at once and there was no possibility of their return. The applicants took whatever they were able to carry with them and left the village.

They further asked the Court to advise them whether or not there were any other authorities still outstanding.

They remained in the cafeteria, until about 17.00 hours, when they were taken to the main station and eref akmak took their statements. He then released them and told them to leave the station.

It found, however, that the Government had in the specific facts of the case fulfilled their obligation under this provision.

and that there was nothing to suggest that they had influenced the judges of that court who had ruled in the applicants’ case.

The applicant company then challenged this refusal and sued V., requesting access to the funds.

They also informed the inhabitants that their houses would be set on fire. The applicants left their villages, taking their animals and as many belongings as they could carry.

While there are official sites in the area, he complains that these are not fit for human habitation as they are located on rubbish sites or on old sewage beds.

In this regard, they relied on Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention. 13.

original application form and in the statements which they made to the domestic authorities, namely that the police officers had raided their flats, had arrested them using force and had taken them to

They, however, wished to maintain their complaints despite the revocation, given the years of litigation at a financial cost to them, costs which they wished to have compensated.

They also claimed that there was no evidence to rebut the presumption that they were innocent of Mr Bultó’s murder, as the physical violence to which they had been subjected rendered their confessions

In their application to the European Court the applicants complained of discrimination in that they had been required to pay fees (of EUR 800 and EUR 2,600 respectively) to pursue their secondary education