CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 26 août 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .sB217F558 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:3pt } .sCF71F55 { width:100%; border-collapse:collapse } .s2DED5BCF { width:4.56%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s29C8AD35 { width:12.58%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s701C4260 { width:19.8%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s72C2249F { width:10.48%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sE56F604 { width:29.84%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sBA9AD033 { width:22.74%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s31226D61 { width:4.56%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sCA3CA3A3 { width:12.58%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF14C678C { width:19.8%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s95E771B1 { width:10.48%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s314474FA { width:29.84%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6A004302 { width:22.74%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Communicated on 26 August 2020 Published on 14 September 2020   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 81009/17 Vasif Agabala oglu GULIYEV against Azerbaijan and 9 other applications (see list appended) SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES The applicants were followers of the late Turkish Muslim theologian Said Nursi. The application concerns their allegedly unlawful arrest and detention, the alleged unlawful interference with their freedom of religion and the alleged unfairness of the administrative proceedings against them concerning fines for violating the legislative rules on organising and holding religious meetings. The applicants complain that they were unlawfully arrested and detained by the police for approximately twelve hours. They further complain that they were not provided with adequate time for the preparation of their defence and did not have recourse to legal assistance of their own choosing both before and during the trial. They also complain that the domestic courts unreasonably restricted their entitlement to a public hearing and their decisions lacked adequate reasoning. The applicants furthermore complain that their administrative conviction amounted to an unlawful interference of the domestic authorities with their right to freedom of religion.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Were the applicants deprived of their liberty in breach of Article 5 §   1 of the Convention? Were detention records ( İnzibati tutma haqqında protocol ) compiled? If they were, the Government are requested to submit copies, as well as any other documents relating to the applicants’ detention. 2.     Did the applicants have a fair trial in the criminal proceedings against them, as required under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? 3.     Were they afforded an opportunity to defend themselves through legal assistance of their own choosing, as required by Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention? In particular, was their right to be defended by a lawyer of own choice restricted during questioning at the police station and the proceedings in the first-instance court? 4.     Did the exclusion of the public in the present case pursue one of the legitimate aims enumerated in the second sentence of Article 6 § 1 and was it “strictly necessary” within the meaning of this provision? 5.     Has there been an interference with the applicants’ freedom of religion within the meaning of Article 9 § 1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article 9 § 2 of the Convention?     APPENDIX Nos. Applications nos. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by 1. 81005/17 Rzamov v. Azerbaijan 04/11/2017 Sarvat Rajab oglu RZAMOV 1987 Guba Azerbaijani Ruslan Asabali oglu MUSTAFAZADE 2. 81009/17 Guliyev v. Azerbaijan 06/11/2017 Vasif Agabala oglu GULIYEV 1974 Jalilabad Azerbaijani Ruslan Asabali oglu MUSTAFAZADE 3. 81024/17 Gasimov v. Azerbaijan 16/11/2017 Azad Rustam oglu GASIMOV 1978 Guba Azerbaijani Ruslan Asabali oglu MUSTAFAZADE 4. 81043/17 Khanlayev v.   Azerbaijan 16/11/2017 Fakhraddin Nasraddin oglu KHANLAYEV 1967 Baku Azerbaijani Ruslan Asabali oglu MUSTAFAZADE 5. 81049/17 Elmar Aliyev v.   Azerbaijan 06/11/2017 Elmar Akbar oglu ALIYEV 1969 Guba Azerbaijani Ruslan Asabali oglu MUSTAFAZADE 6. 81051/17 Shikhmammadov v.   Azerbaijan 04/11/2017 Khaspulad Balahmad oglu SHIKHMAMMADOV 1963 Guba Azerbaijani Ruslan Asabali oglu MUSTAFAZADE 7. 81083/17 Seyfalov v. Azerbaijan 07/11/2017 Sakhavat Agali oglu SEYFALOV 1983 Guba Azerbaijani Ruslan Asabali oglu MUSTAFAZADE 8. 81084/17 Amrahov v. Azerbaijan 06/11/2017 Natig Kamil oglu AMRAHOV 1966 Guba Azerbaijani Ruslan Asabali oglu MUSTAFAZADE 9. 81088/17 Badirkhanov v.   Azerbaijan 16/11/2017 Akram Nazim oglu BADIRKHANOV 1960 Guba Azerbaijani Ruslan Asabali oglu MUSTAFAZADE 10. 81095/17 Gulaliyev v.   Azerbaijan 04/11/2017 Lutfaddin Valeh oglu GULALIYEV 1959 Guba Azerbaijani Ruslan Asabali oglu MUSTAFAZADE