Detention during Her Majesty's pleasure     English law imposes a mandatory sentence for the offence of murder:   in respect of offenders under the age of 18, detention during Her Majesty's

  He submitted in particular that at the trial the public had been unlawfully excluded during the part of the proceedings relating to the question whether he should be present during the questioning

  3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - in prison vans from 06/06/2018 to 19/11/2019,   Art.

Finally, the fact that the applicants were confronted during the criminal investigation with the statements they had made during the asylum proceedings had no bearing on the fairness of the criminal proceedings

The headmasters considered these accessories to be in breach of a French law passed in 2004 prohibiting the wearing of all conspicuous signs of religious faith during lessons.

The headmasters considered these accessories to be in breach of a French law passed in 2004 prohibiting the wearing of all conspicuous signs of religious faith during lessons.

The headmasters considered these accessories to be in breach of a French law passed in 2004 prohibiting the wearing of all conspicuous signs of religious faith during lessons.

The headmasters considered these accessories to be in breach of a French law passed in 2004 prohibiting the wearing of all conspicuous signs of religious faith during lessons.

The headmasters considered these accessories to be in breach of a French law passed in 2004 prohibiting the wearing of all conspicuous signs of religious faith during lessons.

Russia [GC] - 32541/08 and 43441/08 Judgment 17.7.2014 [GC] Article 3 Degrading treatment Use of metal cage to hold defendants during criminal trial: violation Facts – Both applicants were charged with

The article, entitled “Political-narcotics scandal”, included the following passages referring to statements made by T. during the press conference:   “On September 28 [T.], during a press conference

The headmasters considered these accessories to be in breach of a French law passed in 2004 prohibiting the wearing of all conspicuous signs of religious faith during lessons.

justify his dismissal: no violation [This case was referred to the Grand Chamber on 6 June 2016] Facts – The applicant was dismissed by his employer, a private company, for using the company’s Internet during

Ukraine - 8927/11 Judgment 12.7.2016 [Section V] Article 7 Article 7-1 Heavier penalty Refusal to apply more lenient sentence existing during short interval in legislation between abolition of death penalty

By that time, the prosecution had already brought criminal proceedings into the public disorder generated by the demonstrators during the incident.

Allegedly, he had to sleep, being seated in a chair to which he remained handcuffed during the night.

During the force-feeding he was handcuffed with his hands behind his back.

During the events which followed, the applicant’s husband, Naif Oğur, was shot dead.

He raised his complaints of torture during his trial (see below). B.