CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 19 septembre 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 6 October 2025   THIRD SECTION Application no. 46267/19 Agil HUMMATOV against Azerbaijan lodged on 24 August 2019 communicated on 19 September 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns administrative conviction of the applicant for “failure to comply with a lawful order of a police officer” under Article 535.1 of the Code of Administrative Offences. On an unspecified date in March 2019 the applicant published a video on a social network in which he criticised the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan and complained about difficult living conditions. On 14 March 2019 he was taken to a police station, where an administrative-offence report was drawn up, and the applicant was charged with the above-mentioned offence. By a judgment of 15 March 2019, the Khazar District Court, referring to the police report and statements of police officers, convicted the applicant as charged and sentenced him to one month’s administrative detention. The court stated that the applicant failed to comply with the lawful order of police officers and used offensive language against them when they invited him to the police station. By a final decision of 4 April 2019, the Baku Court of Appeal upheld the lower court’s judgment. Relying on Articles 6, 10 and 18 of the Convention, the applicant complains of the alleged unfairness of the domestic proceedings and of a violation of his right to freedom of expression. He also complains that his arrest and following conviction did not pursue legitimate purposes.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charge against him, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, were the principle of equality of arms and the applicant’s right to a reasoned decision respected (see Huseynli and Others v.   Azerbaijan , nos. 67360/11 and 2 others, §§ 110-123, 11 February 2016)? Was the applicant afforded legal assistance during the pre-trial stage and during the proceedings before the first-instance court, within the meaning of Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention (see Huseynli and Others , cited above, §§   125-34, and Huseyn and Others v. Azerbaijan , nos. 35485/05 and 3 others, §§ 171-73, 26 July 2011)?   2.     Has there been an interference with the applicant’s freedom of expression, within the meaning of Article 10 § 1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article   10   §   2 (see , mutatis mutandis , Ibrahimov and Mammadov v.   Azerbaijan , nos.   63571/16 and 5 others, §§ 170-74, 13 February 2020)?   3.     Were the restrictions imposed by the State in the applicant’s case, purportedly pursuant to Articles 6 and 10 of the Convention, applied for a purpose other than those envisaged by those provisions, contrary to Article   18 of the Convention (see Ukraine v. Russia (re Crimea ) [GC], nos. 20958/14 and 38334/18, §§ 1337-38, 25 June 2024)?   The parties are requested to submit copies of all documents relating to the administrative proceedings, which have not yet been submitted (the applicant’s statement (izahat) to the police, the administrative-offence report, and so on).