Communicated on 4 September 2018
FIFTH SECTION
Application no. 34015/17
Sardar Akif oglu BABAYEV against Azerbaijan
and 2 other applications
(see list appended)
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASEs
The applications principally concern the applicants’ pre-trial detention. The applicants lodged complaints against the court decisions ordering and extending their remand in custody with the domestic courts. The domestic courts dismissed the applicants’ complaints concerning the alleged lack of justification for their pre-trial detention.
QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES
1. Were the applicants deprived of their liberty in breach of Article 5 of the Convention? In particular, within which paragraph of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention did the deprivation of liberty of the applicant in application no. 57948/17 fall? Did the domestic courts give sufficient and relevant reasons for the applicants’ detention for the purposes of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention?
2. Was the procedure by which the applicant in application no. 34015/17 sought to challenge the lawfulness of his pre-trial detention in conformity with Article 5 § 4 of the Convention?
3. Was the applicant in application no. 34015/17 subjected to treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention on account of his confinement in a metal cage in the courtroom?
4. Was the presumption of innocence, guaranteed by Article 6 § 2 of the Convention, respected in application no. 34015/17?
5. Has there been an interference with the applicant’s right to freedom of religion, within the meaning of Article 9 § 1 of the Convention in application no. 34015/17? If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article 9 § 2 of the Convention?
6. Has the applicant in application no. 34015/17 been subjected to a difference in treatment in enjoyment of his rights under Article 9 of the Convention, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention? If so, did that difference in treatment pursue a legitimate aim, and did it have a reasonable justification?
7. Has there been an interference with the applicant’s freedom of expression, in particular, his right to impart information and ideas, within the meaning of Article 10 § 1 of the Convention in application no. 34015/17? If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article 10 § 2 of the Convention?
8. Has there been an interference with the applicant’s freedom of assembly, within the meaning of Article 11 § 1 of the Convention in application no. 34015/17? If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article 11 § 2 of the Convention?
APPENDIX
No.
Application no.
Lodged on
Applicant
Date of birth
Place of residence
Represented by
34015/17
02/05/2017
Sardar Akif oglu BABAYEV
12/03/1974
Masalli
Javad JAVADOV
37714/17
18/05/2017
Samir Samandar oglu ALIYEV
20/05/1981
Baku
Zamina ALIYEVA
57948/17
04/08/2017
Mustafa Yashar JEYHAN
10/06/1974
KONYA
Agil LAYIJOV
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy