SECOND SECTION

36. but had understood that they concerned only the demonstrators. The court found it established that the police actions had been legal and that the applicant had been aware

of reformatio in peius in the reopened proceedings which had been commenced due to the fact that the Supreme Court had found, on the basis of the applicants’ application,

The applicant complains under Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention about the length of his criminal proceedings which are still pending before the first instance. The applicant

The Court notes that the applicant, in his appeals to the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, stated, inter alia, that he had been convicted solely on the basis of the

Before the Migration Court of Appeal the first applicant additionally submitted that he had been actively involved for the Kurdish cause on Newroz TV, where he had

They argued that the restriction imposed on the first applicant’s parental authority over the second applicant had resulted in their continued separation and

In the light of the foregoing, the Court considers that the proceedings instituted against the applicant under Article 177 § 1 of the 1998 Criminal Code concerned essentially

Accordingly, Article 3 of the Convention is engaged in the present case, as the applicant alleged that he had been subjected to physical force while detained in a