CEDH · PRESS;FORTHCOMINGHEARINGS;ENG — 26 mars 2009

.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 } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   257 25.3.2009   Press release issued by the Registrar   HEARINGS IN APRIL   The European Court of Human Rights will be holding the following two hearings in April 2009 :   Wednesday 1 April 2009: 9. 15 a.m.   Grand Chamber   Oršuš and Others v. Croatia (application no. 15766/03)   The applicants are 15 Croatian nationals of Roma origin. They were born between 1988 and 1994 and all live in Orehovica, Podturen and Trnovec in northern Croatia. The case concerns the applicants’ complaint that they were segregated at primary school because they were Roma.   The applicants attended primary school in the villages of Macinec and Podutren at different times between the years 1996 and 2000. They participated in both Roma-only and mixed classes before leaving school at the age of 15.   In April 2002 the applicants brought proceedings against their primary schools. They claimed that the Roma-only curriculum in their schools had 30   % less content than the official national curriculum. They alleged that that situation was racially discriminating and violated their right to education as well as their right to freedom from inhuman and degrading treatment. They also submitted a psychological study of Roma children who attended Roma-only classes in their region which reported that segregated education produced emotional and psychological harm in Roma children, both in terms of self-esteem and development of their identity.   In September 2002 Čakovec Municipal Court dismissed the applicants’ complaint. It found that the reason why most Roma pupils were placed in separate classes was that they needed extra tuition in Croatian. Furthermore, the curriculum at Podturen and Macinec Elementary schools was the same as that used in parallel classes in those schools. Consequently, the applicants had failed to substantiate their allegations concerning racial discrimination. The applicants’ complaint was also subsequently dismissed on appeal.   The applicants’ constitutional complaint, lodged in November 2003, was dismissed on similar grounds in February 2007.   The applicants allege that their segregation into Roma-only classes at school deprived them of their right to education in a multicultural environment and made them endure severe educational, psychological and emotional harm, and in particular feelings of alienation and lack of self-esteem. They also complain about the excessive length of the proceedings they brought before the domestic courts concerning those complaints. They rely, in particular, on Article   3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), Article   6 §   1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time), Article   2 of Protocol No.   1 (right to education) and Article   14 (prohibition of discrimination).   In a judgment of 17   July 2008, the Court held, unanimously, that there had been no violation of Article   2 of Protocol No.   1 taken alone or in conjunction with Article   14 of the Convention concerning the applicants’ complaint that they were placed in Roma-only classes at primary school; and, a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of the proceedings brought by the applicants in particular before the Constitutional Court.   On 1 December 2008, the case was referred to the Grand Chamber at the applicants’ request.     Thursday 16 April 2009: 9 a.m.   Chamber hearing on the merits and the admissibility   Georgia v. Russia (No. 1) (no. 13255/07)   On 26 March 2007 the Georgian authorities lodged with the Court’s Registry an application against the Russian Federation under Article 33 (Inter-State cases) of the European Convention on Human Rights.   The application concerns events which have allegedly followed the arrest in Tbilisi (Georgia) on 27 September 2006 of four Russian service personnel on suspicion of espionage. On 4 October 2006 the four servicemen were released by executive act of clemency. Eleven Georgian nationals were arrested on the same charges.   The applicant Government maintain that the reaction of the Russian authorities to this incident amounted to an administrative practice of the official authorities giving rise to specific and continuing breaches of the Convention and its Protocols under the following provisions: Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment), Article 5 (right to liberty), Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life), Article 13 (right to an effective remedy), Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination), Article 18 (limitation on the use of restrictions on rights) of the Convention; Articles 1 (protection of property) and 2 (right to education) of Protocol No. 1; Article 4 (prohibition of collective expulsion of aliens) of Protocol No. 4 and Article 1 (procedural safeguards relating to expulsion of aliens) of Protocol No. 7.   These breaches are said to derive from alleged harassment of the Georgian immigrant population in the Russian Federation, in particular through widespread arrests and detention generating a generalised threat to security of the person and multiple interferences with the right to liberty on arbitrary grounds. The Georgian Government also complain of the conditions in which “at least 2,380 Georgians” had been detained. They assert that the collective expulsion of Georgians from the Russian Federation involved a systematic and arbitrary interference with these persons’ legitimate right to remain in Russia – a right duly evidenced by regular documents – as well as with the requirements of due process and statutory appeal process. In addition closing the land, air and maritime border between the Russian Federation and Georgia, thereby interrupting all postal communication, allegedly frustrated access to remedies for the persons affected.     ***   Decisions, judgments and further information about the Court can be found on its Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ) [1] .   Press contacts Stefano Piedimonte (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 04) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30) Paramy Chanthalangsy (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 28 30) Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 70) Céline Menu-Lange (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 58 77)   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. [1] These summaries by the Registry do not bind the Court.