Communicated on 5 October 2020
Published on 26 October 2020
FIFTH SECTION
Application no. 57334/15
Shahin NOVRUZLU against Azerbaijan
and 5 other applications
(see list appended)
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The applications concern the criminal conviction of the applicants, who were civil society activists and members of NIDA civic movement, for illegal possession of weapons and mass disorder. The applicants in applications nos. 57334/15 and 22334/16 were also convicted for illegal possession of narcotic substances.
Relying on various Articles of the Convention, the applicants mainly argue that the criminal case against them was fabricated and that their conviction amounted to an unlawful interference with their rights of freedom of expression and freedom of peaceful assembly.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
COMMON QUESTIONS
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, did the domestic courts establish the existence of all the elements of the criminal offences of which the applicants were convicted and provide reasons for their decisions? Was the applicants’ conviction based on unlawfully obtained evidence? Were the applicants provided with legal assistance from the moment of their arrest? If so, were their lawyers present during the searches conducted on the applicants’ person and at their flats?
2. Has there been an interference with the applicants’ freedom of expression within the meaning of Article 10 § 1 of the Convention as a result of their criminal conviction? If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article 10 § 2?
3. Has there been an interference with the applicants’ freedom of peaceful assembly within the meaning of Article 11 § 1 of the Convention as a result of their criminal conviction? If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article 11 § 2?
CASE SPECIFIC QUESTION IN RESPECT OF APPLICATIONS 57334/15, 2059/16 and 22334/16
Were the applicants able to defend themselves through legal assistance of their own choosing, as required by Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention?
CASE SPECIFIC QUESTION IN RESPECT OF APPLICATIONS 22318/16, 22334/16 and 23171/16
Were the restrictions imposed by the State in the present cases, purportedly pursuant to Articles 6, 10 and 11 of the Convention, applied for a purpose other than those envisaged by those provisions, contrary to Article 18 of the Convention?
APPENDIX
No.
Application no.
Lodged on
Applicant
Year of Birth
Place of Residence
Represented by
1
57334/15
16/11/2015
Shahin Ibrahim oglu NOVRUZLU
1995
Baku
Nemat KARIMLI
2
2059/16
12/12/2015
Rashad Zeynalabdin oglu HASANOV
1982
Baku
Ruslan MUSTAFAZADE
Asabali MUSTAFAYEV
3
2069/16
14/12/2015
Uzeyir Mahammad oglu MAMMADLI
1987
Sumgayit
Ruslan MUSTAFAZADE
Asabali MUSTAFAYEV
4
22318/16
15/04/2016
Rashadat Fikrat oglu AKHUNDOV
1984
Baku
Khalid BAGIROV
Fariz NAMAZLI
5
22334/16
15/04/2016
Mammad Rasim oglu AZIZOV
1992
Shaki
Khalid BAGIROV
Fariz NAMAZLI
6
23171/16
15/04/2016
Zaur Araz oglu GURBANLI
1987
Khirdalan
Khalid BAGIROV
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy