CEDH · PRESS;GENERAL;ENG — 22 juin 1999

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sEA5CB6F2 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#000080 } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s94935B0F { width:389.85pt; display:inline-block } .s5F1C7C86 { width:6.15pt; display:inline-block } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sF6D41D5D { width:368.55pt; display:inline-block } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s23A41E03 { width:36pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s1EDF3BA6 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s204692D3 { width:13.02pt; display:inline-block } .sA904E5F0 { width:7.65pt; display:inline-block } .sE9B312F6 { width:5.29pt; display:inline-block } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS         346     22.6.1999 Press release issued by the Registrar   HEARING IN THE CASE OF RIERA BLUME AND OTHERS v. SPAIN   Tuesday, 22 June 1999 at 9 a.m.   The applicants     The case concerns an application (application no.   37680/97)brought by six Spanish nationals, Elena Riera Blume, Concepción Riera Blume, Maria Luz Casado Perez, Daria Amelia Casado Perez, Maria Teresa Sales Aige and Javier Bruna Reverter, all of whom live in Valencia in Spain.   Summary of the facts     On 20 June 1984 the homes of the applicants, who were suspected of belonging to a sect, were searched as part of a criminal investigation. The applicants were taken to Barcelona Court of First Instance where the judge gave a verbal order releasing them into the care of their families and suggesting that they should be admitted to a psychiatric clinic. This order was later confirmed in writing.     The applicants were then taken from the court to the headquarters of the Catalan police on the orders of the Director-General of the force. On 21 June 1984 Catalan police officers transferred them to a hotel where they were handed over to their families. They were each put in a separate room with boarded-up windows. The rooms were under permanent guard and the applicants were not allowed to leave them for the first three days of their stay. They were made to undergo “deprogramming” by a psychologist and a psychiatrist. On 29   and 30 June 1984 they were cautioned and questioned by the Deputy Director-General of the Catalan police in the presence of a lawyer not chosen by them. On 30 June 1984 they were allowed to leave the hotel.     Immediately upon their release, they filed a criminal complaint against the Director-General and Deputy Director-General of the Catalan police and another member of the police department , alleging various offences including unlawful detention . A prosecution ensued and the Barcelona Audiencia Provincial acquitted the defendants on the ground that, because their motives had been philanthropic, legitimate and well-intentioned, there had been no unlawful detention. The applicants lodged an appeal on points of law, as did State Counsel; both were dismissed. The applicants then lodged an application for the protection of fundamental rights (an amparo appeal) with the Constitutional Court. This was, likewise, unsuccessful.   Complaints     The applicants complain that they were unlawfully detained contrary to Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights and that their right to freedom of thought under Article 9 of the Convention was infringed.   Procedure     The application was lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 25   August 1997. Under Article 5 § 2 of Protocol No. 11 to the Convention, it was transferred to the Court with effect from 1 November 1998, the date on which the Protocol entered into force. The Court declared it partly admissible on 9 March 1999.   Composition of the Court     The case will be heard by a Section of the Court composed as follows:   Matti Pellonpää (Finnish), President , Georg Ress (German), Antonio Pastor Ridruejo (Spanish), Lucius Caflisch [1] (Swiss), Jerzy Makarczyk (Polish), Ireneu Cabral Barreto (Portuguese), Nina Vajić (Croatian), Judges Volodymyr Butkevych (Ukrainian), John Hedigan (Irish), Snejana Botoucharova (Bulgarian), substitute Judges , and also Vincent Berger , Section Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Government: Javier Borrego Borrego, Agent;   Applicants: Javier Bruna Reverter , Counsel .     Elena and Concepción Riera Blume will also be attending the hearing.     After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private. Judgment will be delivered at a later date.   ***   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Contact:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: (0)3 88 41 24 92) or           Emma Hellyer   (telephone: (0)3 90 21 42 15) Fax: (0)3 88 41 27 91     The European Court of Human Rights was set up in 1959 in Strasbourg to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. On 1 November 1998 a permanent Court was established, replacing the original two-tier system of a part-time Court and Commission. [1] The judge elected in respect of Liechtenstein.