Apart from his gastrointestinal disorders, A.

The disclosure failure did not render his conviction unsafe. 28 .

case to decide on his restitution claim. 8.

The application was lodged on his behalf by his common-law wife, Ms Teresa Rohde, who submitted a duly signed written authorisation from the applicant. A.

Further representations were made on his behalf but on 19 May 1995, the Secretary of State informed the applicants that he maintained his decision of refusal of entry.

  The applicant alleges that his defence lawyers failed to defend him properly at his trial at first instance in that they failed to call any expert witnesses on his behalf or properly to cross-examine

The applicant submits that the expropriation constitutes a disproportionate burden for him because it is not absolutely necessary for the purposes of the pedestrian walkway and because he himself and his

family and his own social rehabilitation...

Counsel for the applicant submitted that he was justified in so doing, given that disclosing the identity of his source would render it impossible for the applicant to work as a journalist in the future

    The applicant's flight from Somalia was arranged by his mother and his uncle. 17.

Moreover, the applicant had mentioned a certain aspect of his alleged abuse (namely that his abusers had shaved him around his anus).

There had been no complaints about his work or his conduct at work and his supervisor, who was of Asian origin, had nominated him for the award of “first-class employee”. 8.

    In 1992 the applicant began to write his autobiography. By 1996 his work amounted to 400 closely typed pages.

In the report it is also stated that the applicant was questioned on the reasons for his arrest and the forged passport which had been found in his possession.

Thenceforth he was assisted by that lawyer and later by a lawyer of his choice appointed to him by his brother. 10 .

Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. 2.

In particular, his submissions lacked any elements which might excuse his activities as an informant.

therefore his appeal had been submitted in time.

mental condition and his ability to be educated.

They argued that neither at the appellate nor at the cassation stage had the applicant alleged, even in substance, any infringement of his right to a fair hearing as presented in his subsequent complaint