They submit in this connection that it has not been substantiated that this expropriation has been imposed in the public interest and that there is no fair balance between the act of interference and the

In particular, he claimed that there had been witness tampering, that the courts had not properly evaluated the evidence before them and that they had failed to give sufficiently reasoned judgments.

The inspectors indicated their readiness to cooperate, although they reserved the right to conduct their investigations as they thought right.

_ahin and his companions wanted to flee but could not as there was nowhere they could flee to. When the soldiers saw them, they started to beat them, hitting them with their rifle butts.   74.

Then they forced Mr Aslan Abubakarov into one of the URAL lorries and drove off in the direction of the FSB.

the value of their property and the amount of damage they had sustained.

When no cars stopped, the girls had decided to walk to their uncle's house but then the soldiers arrived and told the two girls to stop.

One of the witnesses stated that the boy was lying on his back. When the two men noticed the people were coming out of their houses, they immediately put him into their car and drove away.

verdict of completed robbery and had afforded them the possibility of exercising their defence rights on this issue.

    Under this heading, the Government also noted that after lodging their application while the applicants were in detention it had taken them a number of months to inform the Court of their

They submit that their expulsion from this country after having lived there for more than eight years would constitute inhuman and degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention

This is disputed by the applicants. In their view, the proceedings started already on 11 April 1994 when they instituted proceedings for the issuing of a building permit. 29.

  They are confined to a very small area in the immediate vicinity of their particular villages.

The applicants claim that they were not given a copy of this presentation.

The Court found that the applicants’ delays in bringing their applications to the Court were justified as they were able to demonstrate that they had lodged their abduction complaints without undue delay

During the night between 20 and 21 February unknown men broke into her hotel room. They assaulted her, searched the room and then disappeared.

    On 23 May 2008 at about 4.30 p.m., the SIZO administration sent a telegram to the applicants informing them that their son had died and that they could collect his body from the Lviv morgue

They committed to substantiate their request along with the reasons for their appeal.

In their letter to the Commission they described the events referred to in the psychologists’ report, together with other information given to them by the applicants.