CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 18 décembre 2024

.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 } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { 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 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } Published on 6 January 2025   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 8215/17 Feliks HAYRAPETYAN against Armenia and 2 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 18 December 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES In the early morning of 17 July 2016 an armed group stormed a police compound in Yerevan, taking police officers hostage and putting forward political demands to the Government. From 17 until 30 July 2016 protest rallies gripped the city, apparently in support of the armed group. According to a media article submitted by the first applicant, on 17 July 2016 at about 11 a.m., he was arrested at Freedom Square where, according to him, people gathered to receive information about the seizure of the police compound. The applicant claims that, together with other arrested protesters, he was transferred to a military unit of the police forces and placed in police custody for around fourteen hours. On 18 July 2016 the second and third applicants were arrested during another protest held at Khorenatsi street, not far from the police compound in question, and were allegedly taken to Erebuni and Kentron police stations. Their arrest is confirmed by a video footage of the incident. The applicants allege that they were held in police custody for twenty and six hours respectively. All three applicants allege that there were no records of their arrest. The first and the third applicants further claim that they were not informed of the reasons for their arrest. The applicants complain under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention that their arrest lacked reasonable suspicion and was unrecorded. The first and third applicants also complain under the same Article that they were not informed of the reasons for their arrest. The applicants further complain under Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention that their arrest at the site of the demonstrations breached their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1. Were the applicants deprived of their liberty in breach of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, was their deprivation of liberty on the respective dates based on a reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence (see Selahattin Demirtaş v. Turkey (no. 2) [GC], no. 14305/17, §§   313-14, 22 December 2020)? Was their deprivation of liberty lawful within the meaning of Article 5 § 1 (see Mushegh Saghatelyan v. Armenia , no. 23086/08, §§ 164-65, 20 September 2018)?   The Government are invited to submit all the relevant records drawn up in respect of the applicants’ police custody, if any.   2. Were the first and the third applicants informed promptly, in a language which they understood, of the reasons for their arrest, as required by Article   5 § 2 of the Convention (see Khlaifia and Others v. Italy [GC], no.   16483/12, §§ 115-16, 15 December 2016)?   3. Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to freedom of peaceful assembly, contrary to Article 11 of the Convention taken alone or read in the light of Article 10 of the Convention (see Kudrevičius and Others v.   Lithuania [GC], no. 37553/05, §§ 86, 108 and 142-60 , ECHR 2015, and Navalnyy v. Russia [GC], nos. 29580/12 and 4 others, §§ 103 and 128, 15   November 2018)?       APPENDIX No. Application no. Case name Introduction date Applicant’s name Year of birth/Registration date Place of residence Nationality Representative’s name Location 1. 8215/17 Hayrapetyan v. Armenia 17/01/2017 Feliks HAYRAPETYAN 1939 Died in 2020 Yerevan Armenian Heir Arusyak HAYRAPETYAN Born in 1975 Anna MARALYAN Strasbourg 2. 9787/17 Harutyunyan v. Armenia 18/01/2017 Anush HARUTYUNYAN 1987 Yerevan Armenian Araks MELKONYAN Yerevan 3. 9788/17 Sargsyan v. Armenia 18/01/2017 Maksim SARGSYAN 1987 Yerevan Armenian Araks MELKONYAN Yerevan