CEDH · PRESS;FORTHCOMINGJUDGMENTS;ENG — 5 avril 2007

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   212 5.4.2007   Press release issued by the Registrar   FORTHCOMING CHAMBER JUDGMENTS   10 and 12 April 2007   The European Court of Human Rights will be notifying in writing four Chamber judgments on Tuesday 10 April 2007 and 45 on Thursday 12 April 2007.   Press releases and texts of the judgments will be available at 11 a.m. (local time) on the Court’s Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).     Tuesday 10 April 2007   Barta v. Hungary (application no. 26137/04) The applicant, Sophie Barta, is a British national who was born in 1965 and lives in London. At the relevant time, Ms Barta and her mother ran a shelter for dogs and cats in Bőny (Hungary).   Ms Barta alleges that she was ill-treated by the police following an investigation apparently opened by the police into allegations that the animals in her shelter had created a nuisance in the neighbourhood. She further complains that the investigation into her complaint of ill-treatment was ineffective.   She relies on Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights.   Panarisi v. Italy (no. 46794/99) The applicant, Salvatore Panarisi, is an Italian national who was born in 1954 and lives in Realmonte (Italy).   He relies on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) and Article 6 (right to a fair hearing).   Emin Yıldız v. Turkey (no. 32907/03) The applicant, Emin Yıldız, is a Turkish national who was born in 1955 and lives in Antalya (Turkey).   He relies on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time).     Repetitive case   Öner Kaya v. Turkey (no. 9007/03) The applicant, Öner Kaya, is a Turkish national who was born in 1965 and lives in Izmir (Turkey).   He relies on Article 6 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time).     Thursday 12 Avril 2007   Bulinwar OOD and Hrusanov v. Bulgaria (no. 66455/01) The applicants are Georgi Hrusanov, a Bulgarian national who was born in 1959 and lives in Sofia, and Bulinwar OOD, a limited liability company which is managed by Mr Hrusanov.   They rely, in particular, on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing).   Ganchev v. Bulgaria (no. 57855/00) The applicant, Velko Stoyanov Ganchev, is a Bulgarian national who was born in 1940 and lives in Velingrad (Bulgaria).   He relies on Article 5 § 3 (right to liberty and security) and Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial within a reasonable time).   Ivanova v. Bulgaria (no. 52435/99) The applicant, Kalinka Todorova Ivanova, is a Bulgarian national who was born in 1950 and lives in Ruse (Bulgaria).   Relying on Articles 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion) and 14 (prohibition of discrimination), Ms Ivanova alleges that she was dismissed from her job on account of her religious beliefs.   Ivan Vasilev v. Bulgaria (no. 48130/99) The applicant, Ivan Tsekov Vasilev, is a Bulgarian national who was born in 1979 and was living in Vidin (Bulgaria) on 14 April 1998.   Mr Vasilev complains about being ill-treated by two police officers and the ensuing criminal proceedings, which resulted in their acquittal. He relies, in particular, on Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).   Terziev v. Bulgaria (no. 62594/00) Vasil Angelov v. Bulgaria (no. 61662/00) The applicants, Hristo Grozev Terziev and Vasil Hristov Angelov, were Bulgarian nationals who were born in 1936 and 1932 respectively; they died in 2005 and 2003.   They rely on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time).   Yambolov v. Bulgaria (no. 68177/01) The applicant, Galin Grozdev Yambolov, is a Bulgarian national who was born in 1975. He is currently detained in Bulgaria.   He relies on Article 5 § 3 (right to liberty and security).   Zeleni Balkani v. Bulgaria (no. 63778/00) The applicant, Zeleni Balkani, is a Bulgarian non-profit environmental protection organisation founded in 2000 and based in Plovdiv (Bulgaria).   He relies on Articles 11 (freedom of assembly and association) and 13 (right to an effective remedy).   Pello v. Estonia (no. 11423/03) The applicant, Ain Pello, is an Estonian national who was born in 1981 and lives in Estonia.   He relies on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) and § 3 (d) (right to obtain attendance and examination of witnesses).   Laaksonen v. Finland (no. 70216/01) The applicant, Pekka Laaksonen, is a Finnish national who was born in 1949 and lives in Riihimäki (Finland).   He relies on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) and § 3 (a) right to be informed promptly of the accusation against him) and (b) (right to adequate time and facilities for preparation of defence).   Dzwonkowsi v. Poland (no. 46702/99) The applicant, Dariusz Dzwonkowski, is a Polish national who was born in 1973 and lives in Marki (Poland).   He complains that he was ill-treated by the police during his arrest in June 1997 and that no adequate and effective investigation into his allegations was carried out by the authorities.   He relies on Articles 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) and 13 (right to an effective remedy).   Kozimor v. Poland (no. 10816/02) The applicant, Piotr Kozimor, is a Polish national who was born in 1971 and lives in Przemyśl (Poland). Following his death in August 2005, his sister continued the proceedings before the Court.   Relying on Article 5 §§ 3 and 4 (right to liberty and security) he complains about the length of his detention and the lack of equality of arms in the proceedings to prolong that detention. He further complains about censorship of his correspondence in breach of Article 8 (right to respect for correspondence).   Kwiatkowski v. Poland (no. 20200/02) The applicant, Krsysztof Kwiatkowski, is a Polish national who was born in 1967 and lives in Gdynia (Poland).   Relying on Article 5 § 3 (right to liberty and security), he complains about the excessive length of his detention on remand.   Święcicki v. Poland (no. 25490/03) The applicant, Ronald Święcicki, is a Polish national who was born in 1971 and is currently detained in Świdnica prison (Poland).     He relies on Article 5 § 3 (right to liberty and security).   Atıcı v. Turkey (No. 2) (no. 31540/02) The applicant, Hüseyin Atıcı, is a Turkish national who was born in 1970 and lives in Kocaeli (Turkey).   Relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial within a reasonable time), he complains about the length of criminal proceedings against him on account of his membership of an illegal organisation.   Bedir and Others v. Turkey (no. 52644/99) The applicants, Şehmus Bedir, Mehmet Bedir, Ahmet Bedir and Zekiye Bedir, are Turkish nationals who were born in 1955, 1924, 1945 and 1938 respectively and are members of the same family. They currently live in Diyarbakır (Turkey).   They rely on Articles 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), 8 (right to respect for private and family life), 13 (right to an effective remedy) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property).   Demirel and Ateş v. Turkey (nos. 10037/03 and 14813/03) The applciants, Hünkar Demirel and Hidir Ateş, are Turkish nationals who were born in 1979 and 1951 respectively and live in Brüchköbel and Rüsselsheim (Germany).   They rely on Article 10 (freedom of expression), Article 6 (right to a fair hearing) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property).   Güven and Others v. Turkey (no. 68694/01) The applicants, Ahmet Güven, Ramazan Akdağ, Kadri Sönmez, Metin Göktepe, Neslihan Göktepe, İzzettin Koç, Kadri Issı, Mehmet Kışanak, Rıdvan Karatay, Ali Kemal Yıldız, Yaşar Avcı and Emsihan Karatay, are Turkish nationals who were all detained in Buca Prison, İzmir, at the time of the events.   The applicants alleged that they were ill-treated by the prison authorities and gendarmes in Buca Prison on 20 July 1995 and complained that they were not informed by the national authorities about the outcome of the investigation into their allegations. Mr Güven further complained about his continued detention despite his medical condition.   They rely on Articles 2 (right to life), 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) and 13 (right to an effective remedy) and Article 34 (right of individual petition).   Hacı Özen v. Turkey (no. 46286/99) The applicant, Hacı Özen, is a Turkish national who was born in 1943 and lives in Şırnak (Turkey).   Mr Özen complains that he was ill-treated by gendarmes , was detained for 13 days before being brought before a judge and that the criminal proceedings against him were unfair.   He relies on Articles 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), 13 (right to an effective remedy), 5 § 3 (right to be brought promptly before a judge), 6 §§ 1 (right to a fair trial) and 3 (c) (right to legal assistance of own choosing).   Tangün and Others v. Turkey (no. 38128/02) The applicants, Tekin Tangün, Metin Yavuz, Ali Ercan   Gökoğlu, Egemen Seyfettin Kuşçu, Hatice   Ruken   Kılıç, Naciye Barbaros, Duygu Eygi, Yeter   Gönül, İsmail Özmen, Murat Bargu, Feridun   Yücel   Batu and İbrahim Akın, are Turkish nationals. On 1 June 2006 the Court decided to strike the case out of the list in so far as it concerned İbrahim Akın.   They rely on Article 5 § 3 (right to liberty and security).   Uslu v. Turkey (no. 33168/03) The applicant, Abdülkadir Uslu, is a Turkish national who was born in 1968 and lives in Istanbul. He was arrested and placed in police custody in September 1998 on suspicion of having committed armed robbery as part of a gang.   Relying on Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy), the applicant complains that he was subjected to ill-treatment during his time in police custody and alleges that the proceedings brought against the police officers concerned were not conducted in a thorough manner.   Repetitive cases   Hajduković v. Croatia (no. 38303/02) Petrović v. Croatia (no. 38292/02) Radivoj Novaković v. Croatia (no. 43446/02) Terzin-Laub v. Croatia (no. 43362/02) The six applicants are all Croatian nationals.   They rely on Article 6 § 1 (right of access to a court) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).   Ovciarov v. Moldova (no. 31228/02) The applicant, Nicolai Ovciarov, is a Russian national who was born in 1933 and lives in Chişinău.   Relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property), Mr Ovciarov complains about the quashing of a final judgment in his favour.   Dremlyugin v. Russia (no. 75136/01) Gaydukov v. Russia (no. 75038/01) Glushakova v. Russia (no. 38719/03) Grechko v. Russia (no. 75037/01) Grigoryev and Kakaurova v. Russia (no. 13820/04) Kletsova v. Russia (no. 24842/04) Korolev v. Russia (no. 25550/05) Mizyuk v. Russia (no. 9253/06) Neofita v. Russia (no. 3311/06) Oleg Zolotukhin v. Russia (no. 75032/01) Saplenkov v. Russia (no. 8190/02) Sevostyanov v. Russia (no. 76736/01) Shabalin v. Russia (no. 75027/01) Shishlov v. Russia (no. 75035/01) Usanov v. Russia (no. 75030/01) The 16 applicants are all Russian nationals.   Relying, in particular, on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) the applicants complain that judgments given in their favour were either not enforced in good time or not enforced at all.   Mevlüt Kaya v. Turkey (no. 1383/02) The applicant, Mevlüt Kaya, is a Turkish national who was born in 1951 and lives in İzmir.   He relies on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial), § 2 (presumption of innocence) and § 3 (c) (right to legal assistance of own choosing).   Turğay v. Turkey (no. 21085/02) The applicant, Abdulkadir Turğay, is a Turkish national who was born in 1959 and lives in Adana (Turkey).   He relies on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) and § 3 (b) (right to adequate time and facilities for preparation of defence).   Length-of-proceedings cases   In the following cases, the applicants, relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time), complain, in particular, about the excessive length of (non-criminal) proceedings.   Šoštarić v. Croatia (no. 39659/04) Serdar Çakmak v. Turkey (no. 29600/02)   ***   Press contacts Emma Hellyer (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 15) Stéphanie Klein (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 88 41 21 54) Beverley Jacobs (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 54 21) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.