CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 20 mars 2023

.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 } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Published on 11 April 2023   FIRST SECTION Applications nos. 21807/18 and 38997/22 Eldaniz HAJIYEV against Azerbaijan and Salman ABDULLAYEV against Azerbaijan lodged on 27 April 2018 and 21 July 2022 respectively communicated on 20 March 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES The applicants are followers of the Nursist teachings of Islam. The applications concern the applicants’ arrest and subsequent administrative conviction by the domestic courts for participation in religious meetings on private premises without prior authorisation from the relevant authorities. The applicants were found guilty of violating the legislative rules on organising and holding religious meetings under Article 515.0.2 of the Code of Administrative Offences and fined 1,500 Azerbaijani manats (approximately 850 euros at the material time). Relying mainly on Articles 5, 6 and 9 of the Convention, the applicants allege that their arrest and administrative conviction amounted to a breach of their rights protected by the Convention as they did not commit any administrative offence but were instead punished for their religious beliefs. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Were the applicants deprived of their liberty in breach of Article 5 §   1 of the Convention on 4 March 2017 and 3 September 2021 respectively? In particular, did the deprivation of liberty fall within sub-paragraphs (a)-(e) of this provision? Was a detention record ( İnzibati tutma haqqında protokol ) compiled? If so, the Government are requested to submit copies of each applicant’s detention record, as well as any other documents relating to their detention.   2.     Did the applicants have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against them, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, did the domestic courts provide adequate and relevant reasons for their decisions?   3.     Was the applicant in application no. 38997/22 afforded adequate time and facilities to prepare his defence, as required by Article 6 § 3 (b) of the Convention? In particular, was he provided with a copy of the administrative ‑ offence report of 3 September 2021? If so, the Government are requested to submit relevant documents showing that a copy of the report was served on the applicant.   4.     Was the applicant in application no. 21807/18 afforded an opportunity to defend himself through legal assistance of his own choosing, or provided with proper free legal assistance in the interests of justice, as required by Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention, during his arrest and the subsequent hearing before the first-instance court?   5.     Has there been an interference with the right to respect for home of the applicant in application no. 38997/22, within the meaning of Article 8 §   1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article 8 § 2 of the Convention?   6.     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 List of applications No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Represented by 1. 21807/18 Hajiyev v.   Azerbaijan 27/04/2018 Eldaniz Balamat oglu HAJIYEV 1974, Baku Ruslan MUSTAFAZADE   Asabali MUSTAFAYEV 2. 38997/22 Abdullayev v.   Azerbaijan 21/07/2022 Salman Vagif oglu ABDULLAYEV 1969, Baku Ruslan MUSTAFAZADE   Asabali MUSTAFAYEV