He was questioned about his homosexual partners, who they were, where they worked, how the applicant met them and about the nature of his relationship with them including the type of sex they had.

with the ‘Emasesa’ overalls appear [in the press pictures], well, these are the ones who carried out the torture[;] then they finished tying us up and left the place and right away some fire fighters

They alleged that there had been a violation of Article   6 § 1 of the Convention.

Both applicants claimed that they would be able to identify the police officers who had tortured them and they also provided the name of one police officer.

    In their observations, the Government argued that the applicants had lodged their application with the Court more than six months after the date on which they should have become aware of

It concluded that even though the ordinary courts had referred to some specific facts, which allegedly justified the applicants’ detention, they had failed to explain them in their decisions.

The applicants had agreed to this plan, which provided them with a parcel of 23,219 square metres near their farm, and did not contest the transfer decision.

The local authority accepts that they could foresee damage to the plaintiffs if they carried out their statutory duties negligently and that the relationship between the authority and the plaintiffs is

The policemen “immediately wanted to handcuff them and pulled their arms backwards”. The applicants state that they “resisted this treatment”.

Finally, invoking Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention, the applicants complained that national legislation prevented them from having access to their lawyers during the first four days of their police

They settled together with their husband/father in the village of Karinskoye, in the Odintsovski district of Moscow city. 13.

On 12 August 1998 the applicants informed the former Commission about their resettlement in Canada and they withdrew their request under Rule   36. They maintained their other complaints.

At the time of their escape, they were wanted by the Turkish authorities. They refer in this respect to the warrant of arrest of 27 February 1990 and the newspaper announcement of 27 August 1990.

It was then that the applicant had first seen the word “police” printed in large letters on the clothing of the first of these persons, and understood that they were officers of the law; however, she still

In the course of the asylum proceedings, they were required to state the truth about their reasons for seeking asylum, including their careers in KhAD/WAD.

    The applicants contested these arguments and asserted that an excessive individual burden had been placed on them, in that they had not received the market value for their expropriated property

They submitted that their political activities and opposition to the Iranian regime meant that their lives would be at risk if they returned to Iran.

They are currently in Sweden. They are represented before the Court by Ms   A. Enochsson, a lawyer practising in Stockholm. The respondent Government are represented by their Agent, Mr   C.

    In support of these complaints, they argued that since their proceedings were at the pre-trial stage and since at that stage the proceedings were essentially under the control of the PPS,