CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 14 avril 2026

.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 } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s38CFE95D { width:148.54%; border-collapse:collapse } .s3F96C4FA { width:6.5%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 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 } .sDE572609 { width:13%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s67298BFC { width:20.76%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s92A8BAA2 { width:12.98%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s4C3D862B { width:23.38%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s887365A9 { width:6.5%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s7920D2D { width:13%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s935A7C95 { width:20.76%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s9D7793A6 { width:12.98%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s7B9D7EE3 { width:23.38%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Published on 4 May 2026   THIRD SECTION Applications nos. 18158/21 and 20684/21 Rauf ORUJOV and Others against Azerbaijan and Emil ALIYEV against Azerbaijan lodged on 29 March 2021 and 9 April 2021 respectively communicated on 14 April 2026 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications concern alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings against the applicants. At the material time the applicants in application no. 18158/21 were officers of the army and the applicant in application no. 20684/21 was a soldier discharged from military service in 2011. In 2017 criminal cases were instituted against the applicants. They were charged with, among other offences, violation of combat duty procedures, treason and acts of sexual violence under Articles 150, 274 and 338 of the Criminal Code. On various dates the applicants were convicted as charged and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment. The relevant appellate courts and the Supreme Court upheld the convictions. Relying on Article 6 of the Convention, the applicants complain, in particular, that the domestic courts’ decisions were not adequately reasoned, that their convictions were based on self-incriminating statements they had provided under torture and ill-treatment during the interrogations and that the criminal proceedings against them were in breach of various fair-trial guarantees.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     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: (i) was the applicants’ right to a reasoned decision respected? (ii) were the principles of equality of arms and adversarial proceedings respected? (iii) were the applicants afforded an adequate opportunity to contest the evidence against them, and to adduce evidence in support of their line of defence and to have such evidence assessed by the court?   2.     Was the applicants’ right to legal assistance during the investigation stage of the proceedings respected? Were they able to defend themselves through legal assistance of their own choosing, as required by Article 6 § 3   (c) of the Convention?   3.     Were applicants able to examine witnesses against them, as well to obtain the attendance of witnesses on their behalf, as required by Article   6 §   3   (d) of the Convention?   The parties are requested to submit any factual updates concerning the criminal cases against the applicants, as well as copies of all the documents, such as forensic reports, procedural decisions, witness statements, photographs, video recordings or any other document relating to the criminal proceedings. APPENDIX No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by 1. 18158/21 Orujov and Others v. Azerbaijan 29/03/2021 Rauf Rashid oglu ORUJOV 1984 Sumgayit Azerbaijani Emin Gadir oglu ADILZADE 1993 Beylagan Azerbaijani Mushfig Seymur oglu AHMADLI 1990 Barda Azerbaijani Faig Alibay oglu AHMADOV 1990 Salyan Azerbaijani Nasif Mehman oglu ALIYEV 1993 Baku Azerbaijani Majid Kamal oglu GASIMOV 1987 Gazakh Azerbaijani   Turan Marif oglu IBRAHIMLI 1998 Ismayilli Azerbaijani Mirpasha Zahid oglu MEHDIYEV 1995 Agjabadi Azerbaijani Atabay Mugabil oglu RAHIMOV 1994 Lerik Azerbaijani Yalchin IMANOV Sumgayit   Fariz NAMAZLI Sumgayit 2. 20684/21 Aliyev v. Azerbaijan 09/04/2021 Emil Abdulnasirovich ALIYEV 1991 Baku Azerbaijani Yalchin IMANOV Sumgayit