They noted, in particular, that the disputed housing had been their only home for more than ten years and that their eviction would render them homeless.

Before the Migration Board ( Migrationsverket ) they claimed, inter alia, the following. They originated from South Ossetia and feared persecution due to the internal armed conflict there.

They complained, in the presence of the public prosecutor, of beatings by the police. With the authorisation of the investigating judge, the applicants’ counsel took photographs of their injuries.

Then a single shot had been heard 6 to 7 seconds after the gunfire had stopped. Since the observers were not allowed to leave the observation post during their shift, they had stayed where they were.

  There was no doubt that the question of the applicants’ living conditions fell within the scope of their right to respect for family and private life, as well as their homes.

There is no indication that the relevant facts of this part of the present application gave rise to a de facto interference with their right to respect for their family life.

[When] the prosecution acted as judge in their own cause on the issue of public interest immunity in this case they committed a significant number of errors which affected the fairness of the proceedings

    On the same day the applicants were brought before a judge, who remanded them in custody. They were then placed in Adana prison.

By this time the returnees have also been spoken to individually by representatives of the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) who take their contact details and then hand them a travel grant

The applicants, represented by lawyers of their choosing, challenged the evidence against them, adduced evidence in their defence and sought their acquitt al. 25.

In the following months, they submitted documents as to the question of who was to represent them before the Supreme Court. 37.

He was not aware that any of them had gone there on their own initiative.

They then contacted their Member of Parliament, Mr. C., and later the National Council for Civil Liberties. The applicant has applied for discharge two or three times and Mr.

He added: “If there is serious disagreement, the best interests procedure can be involved at short notice and the court will resolve it on the basis of the facts as they are then.

Then, he claimed, they had broken the cameras in the first office, ordered the employees found there, including the second applicant, to lie on the ground and hit them with electroshock batons, as well

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

The applicant had also taken their passports so that they would not be able to leave. They had had to give the applicant one half of the money they earned from their customers. 9.

Their deaths could equally not be attributed to the conditions in which they had been held for three days, during which none of them had died notwithstanding prolonged food and water deprivation coupled

First, they submitted, among other things, that there was no legal interest in determining these applications given that the Court had already decided on the question of the disappearances of all missing