He was also certain that they had “good relationship” with the head of the VOVD and that was the reason why the officers of the VOVD accompanied them to Kurchaloy and afterwards allowed them to question

On 26 September 2002 the national authorities notified the applicants that their asylum claims had been rejected and that they had fifteen days to object to this decision.

They had learned that the military had taken with them four of the men leaving in the house, including the first applicant.

They were never ill-treated during this time. In the morning their identity documents were returned and they were told to leave.

    They were informed that they were being released, their luggage was returned to them and they were each given an envelope containing their personal possessions, with the exception of their

The policemen had therefore cut the door lock and had broken into the premises. They then instructed all individuals found there to lie on the floor and refrain from touching the computer equipment.

They then proceeded along the Svoboda Street towards the cemetery.

These plaintiffs claimed that their houses were stable and did not represent danger for the life or limb of their inhabitants, and that they had applied to have the houses legalised and declared “tolerable

In their statements the applicants denied having had any connections with the PKK, and submitted that they had been forced to sign their police custody statements without having been allowed to read them

As a reaction to their petition, in January 2002 they were suspended from the university for a period of two terms starting from the spring, except for one of them, who, having shown remorse, was suspended

Their car in the garage and the cowshed with two calves inside were burned. On the same day M. buried the bodies on a patch of land by the house, having wrapped them into pieces of cloth.

to the banks of the river Drava, where they killed them with shots from firearms and threw their bodies into the river Drava.

The fires were so far advanced that there was nothing the applicant could do. Since a few of the houses had not caught fire, the applicant and the other villagers thought they could shelter in them.

      The parties were then invited to submit any additional observations on the merits of the case which they wished to make.

    The applicants maintained in reply that they had not been notified of the decision to deport them prior to their expulsion.

    Mr and Mrs Aubrac then set out those of the applicants’ allegations which they considered defamatory and their reasons for so considering them: “A.

Subsequently, they were moved to the yard of the F-9 Unit. Once order was restored, the detainees met with the prison director and were then transferred back to their units.

It was argued on their behalf that since they had already completed the punitive element of their sentence, and were now detained on the basis of the risk that they continued to represent to the safety

They obeyed the police and followed them to the police bus. 10.