CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 30 mars 2021

.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 } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify }   Published on 19 April 2021   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 1308/12 Tariel Adishirin oglu SHIRINLI against Azerbaijan lodged on 27 October 2011 communicated on 30 March 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the administrative arrest and detention of the applicant, as well as his subsequent conviction in “administrative” proceedings brought against him in relation to a minor charge of hooliganism. The domestic courts imposed an administrative sanction on the applicant in the form of a “reprimand”. He complains under Article 5 of the Convention that his arrest and subsequent detention was in excess of the time permitted by domestic law, without just cause, and in breach of his right to liberty. He also complains under Article 6 of the Convention that the administrative proceedings against him fell short of the guarantees of a fair hearing. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Were the applicant’s arrest and detention in compliance with Article   5   § 1 of the Convention? In particular, were the applicant’s “administrative” arrest and detention in compliance with domestic procedural rules?   2.     Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the charges against him, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? Was the applicant’s right to a reasoned judgment respected? Was the applicant afforded an opportunity to defend himself through legal assistance of his own choosing, as required by Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention?   3.     The Government are requested to submit copies of the entire case file from the domestic proceedings.