target stringlengths 11 70 | prompt stringlengths 200 10k |
|---|---|
July and August 2004 | 18. In November 2004 the applicant lodged an action against the head of the medical unit of the temporary detention facility IZ-73/3 in Inza, the police station administration and an investigator from the Inza Town Police Department, seeking compensation for damage to his health and loss of earnings. In particular, he... |
19 - 15 July 2007 | 67. On 8 November 2007 the Tekirdağ Assize Court, ruling on the basis of the case file and having taken cognisance of the State Prosecutor’s opinion, found that the impugned decision had been unobjectionable in procedural and legal terms and dismissed the applicant’s appeal. 2. Proceedings relating to the failure to ... |
24 May 2001 | 36. The Government submitted that the same cell measured 20.7 square metres, had five sleeping places, artificial and natural ventilation systems, and was lit by two 150-watt bulbs. On 17 April 2001 it had accommodated four inmates. The prison administration submitted a letter in which it certified that on |
15 October 2009 | 8. The applications in the present case concern prolonged non‑enforcement of domestic final judicial decisions. They raise issues similar to those examined in the pilot judgment in the case of Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov v. Ukraine (no. 40450/04, |
14 February 2001 | 12. On 8 February 2001 the applicant asked, in writing, for the Malatya public prosecutor to refer him to a hospital so that the marks left on his shoulders by the ill‑treatment could be documented. On |
15 December 2008 | 62. The fifth applicant brought civil proceedings against the Ministry of Defence for damages in respect of his son’s death. The claim was settled without going to hearing, by the payment of 115,000 pounds sterling (GBP) on |
30 June 2004 | 10. Thereupon, the applicant companies lodged complaints with the Constitutional Court and the Administrative Court against the Federal Minister’s decision. Before the Constitutional Court they complained that the surcharges imposed had violated their constitutional right to property. Before the Administrative Court, ... |
8 January 2002 | 25. On 24 January 2002 the judge at the District Court rejected the applicant's requests for release dated 29 December 2001 and 2 January 2002 respectively, which, according to the Government, had been submitted to him on |
17 April 1992 | 5. The applicants were born in 1938, 1938 and 1964 respectively and live in Istanbul. The first two applicants are the parents and the third applicant is the wife of Mr Taşkın Usta, who was shot dead by police officers at a flat in the Kadıköy district of Istanbul on |
15 September 2000 | 9. Having examined the claims of the third and the fourth applicant, on 5 September 2000 the Town Court granted them RUR 1,461.78 (approximately EUR 59) and RUR 2,320.81 (approximately EUR 93) respectively against the State. This judgment came into force on |
15 November 2000 | 42. In October and November 2000 the investigators of the Achkhoy-Martan District Prosecutor's Office questioned the applicant, her husband and several other passengers of the Gazel minibus. The applicant, questioned on |
27 March 2007 | 58. From the materials and explanations produced by the Government it appears that neither Ms S.D. herself (the alleged victim) nor her twin sister, Ms N.D., appeared in court. Thus, at the hearing of |
29 June 2006 | 57. On 3 August 2006 the Justice of the Peace of Court Circuit no. 7 of the Kalininskiy District of Cheboksary held a hearing in the administrative proceedings against the applicant. The applicant contested the police officers’ versions of events on |
4 September 1998 | 21. On 9 August 1999 the Sovietskiy District Court of Vladivostok dismissed the applicant’s civil action, finding as follows:
“Under these circumstances, the court considers that it has been established in court that [the applicant] lived in the contested flat, which [fact] is corroborated by postcards addressed to Mr... |
27 May 2010 | 25. The applicant submitted that inmates Mr Artyomov, Mr Sk., Mr T., Mr G., Mr Ks., Mr Gr. and Mr M. had been subjected to the same treatment on the way to and from the car. A detailed description of the same events by Mr Artyomov can be found in the Court’s judgment in the case of Artyomov v. Russia (no. 14146/02, §§... |
from 23 September 2009 to 29 September 2009 | 9. From 22 October 2008 to 10 November 2010 the second applicant was detained in Lukiškės Remand Prison, except for the following periods when he was moved to Švenčionys police station:
- from 3 December 2008 to 10 December 2008;
- |
10 November 1994 | 34. A hearing was held on 6 June 1994 at which observations were submitted in reply. The next hearing, scheduled for 4 July 1994, was adjourned by the court of its own motion until 3 October 1994 and then until |
Several days later | 11. When questioning the second applicant on 24 September 2002 in the presence of D. and officer Yakh., S. lifted up his shirt and saw marks of beatings on his back (bruises, marks from electric wires and swellings). When asked how they had been caused, the second applicant said that he had fallen down the stairs. |
23 March 2010 | 57. On 17 March 2010 the SBU replied that they had no information about the applicant’s travel outside the territory of Ukraine or his possible involvement in the political opposition in Belarus. A similar reply was given by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine on |
10 January 2011 | 23. On 14 April 2011 the Federal Constitutional Court declined to accept the applicant’s constitutional complaint against the Court of Appeal’s decision not to stay the execution of the detention order against him, lodged on |
24 and 28 October 2002 | 29. M., an expert from the Volgograd regional forensic medical bureau and A., a radiologist from the Volgograd Regional Hospital examined the applicant’s medical records, X-ray images of his skull and temporal bones taken on |
31 December 2003 | 40. The Government confirmed their version of events as outlined above (see paragraphs 37 and 39 above). They denied that the applicant had been detained and ill-treated by State agents in the hotel, that he had been handed over to CIA agents, and that the latter had ill-treated him at Skopje Airport and transferred h... |
23 July 2001 | 11. On 27 July 2001 the applicant was dismissed from his post as an official at the Human Resources Department of the Ministry of the Interior. The decree by which he was dismissed stipulated that the reason for the dismissal was the information regarding his collaboration, which the Commission had published on |
the same day | 4. On 18 June 1993 a car was broken into and a number of items were stolen. Shortly thereafter the police apprehended the applicants and took them to a police station. There they confessed that they had committed the offence and gave explanations on the manner in which they had acted. On |
22 May 2012 | 63. At the relevant time, the fourteenth applicant was an employee of the women’s prison in Požarevac. On an unspecified date in 2012 she lodged a civil claim with the Basic Court in Požarevac. Her complaint was rejected on |
7 December 2004 | 12. On 5 April 2003 the applicant remarried. His second wife had dual citizenship of Germany and Switzerland. On the basis of this marriage he applied for a residence permit to the Office for Migration of the Canton of Geneva (L’office cantonal de la population de Genève), which refused his request on |
17 May 2007 | 27. On 28 March 2007 the applicants were accused of robbery committed in September 2001 and theft. They were also suspected of having committed a number of other robberies and thefts as part of an organised group. The investigator advanced reasons for the extension of the applicants’ detention on remand similar to tho... |
19 January 2005 | 89. On 2 February 2005 “TRNC” Nicosia police headquarters published a notice to all branches of police informing them that they were also looking for another person, M.K., who they also considered to be a suspect in the case. It transpired that this suspect had left for Turkey on |
the first, second and third Saturdays | 29. On 23 December 1997 the Warsaw Regional Court issued an order concerning the applicant's contacts with his daughter pending the divorce proceedings. It decided that the meetings should take place on |
29 April 2008 | 25. On 6 October 2008 the Berlin Court of Appeal rejected the applicant’s appeal, in which the applicant’s counsel had stated that the applicant’s ability to stand trial was not reduced due to his prior heart surgery. The Court of Appeal found that the strong suspicion of the applicant having engaged in drug trafficki... |
26 November 1998 | 14. On 9 January 1998 the applicant requested the Bratislava III District Court to examine the lawfulness of the decision delivered by the Ministry of Defence on 10 December 1997. On 29 May 1998 the District Court found, with reference to section 83(1) of the Minor Offences Act of 1990, that the decision in question c... |
1 July 2002 | 27. According to the Government, the Preobrazhenskiy District Court listed two hearings which were adjourned because the applicant's lawyer defaulted. They further submitted that no decision on the merits of the applicant's complaint had been taken, but that on |
20 to 25 January 2003 | 126. In September and October 2002 Mr Ménard, Secretary-General of “Reporters sans frontières”, visited Kyiv twice as the representative of the deceased's mother in the criminal case. He met the Prosecutor General and had access to the results of the forensic examinations in the case. Moreover, samples were taken for ... |
30 March 2001 | 7. On 3 March 1998 enforcement proceedings were instituted but the judgment was not enforced because the facility lacked funds. The enforcement proceedings were closed and re-opened on several occasions. The most recent decision by which the enforcement proceedings were discontinued was taken on |
10 January 2002 | 122. The thirteenth applicant, the wife of Magomed Soltymuradov, applied to the district court for an order declaring her husband a missing person. On 3 April 2003 the Urus-Martan District Court granted her request and declared him a missing person with effect from |
9 June 1997 | 14. On 13 June 1996 the Bucharest District Court set comminatory damages of ROL 50,000 per day until the applicant's effective reinstatement. The court held that CASROM had systematically refused to reinstate the applicant. That judgment became final on |
a period of 15 days | 30. On 26 October 2005 the Municipal Court again ruled in favour of the applicant. She was granted sole custody and child maintenance, while the respondent obtained extensive access rights and was ordered to surrender the children “within |
22 January 2008 | 8. The award was subsequently index-linked in the course of the enforcement proceedings by the decisions of 02 March 2006 (final on 14 March 2006), 09 April 2007 (final on 20 April 2007), 09 January 2008 (final on |
between 1998 and 2006 | 17. The applicant company Agro-S.A.V.V.A. S.R.L. submitted a document issued by the Moldovan tax office, which showed that it had paid tax on plots of land rented from 281 owners. According to a certificate from the mayor of Pîrîta village, the applicant company had rented plots of land (104 hectares) from people in t... |
17 March 2005 | 22. During the trial by the County Court, of the eight hearings held between 22 September 2004 and 3 May 2006 three were adjourned at the applicant’s request. This includes a stay of proceedings between 13 October 2004 and 15 June 2005, as the applicant raised a plea of unconstitutionality in respect of a legal provis... |
16 June 1994 | 11. The applicants, who were born in 1954, 1961, 1955, 1957, 1955, 1961, 1942, 1951, 1956, 1946, 1961, 1959 and 1948 respectively, are Turkish nationals. They were members of the Turkish Grand National Assembly and the DEP (Democracy Party – Demokrasi Partisi), a political party which was dissolved by the Constitution... |
27 February 2007 | 14. On request by the defence the Town Court heard a number of witnesses and rejected their testimony as unreliable. Two defence witnesses testified that they had visited the applicant on 9 March 2007 and had been in his flat at the time when the police had allegedly performed the controlled drug purchase. They insist... |
4 October 2002 | 207. It appears from the medical certificate of 6 August 2002, drawn up by the doctor in the Ministry of Security's investigation prison that Mr Khanchukayev was in good health but was suffering from swollen legs. The entry in his medical records on |
23 December 2002 | 9. On 27 June 2002 the criminal case was sent for trial before the Zarechenskiy District Court of Tula (“the District Court”). A hearing scheduled for September 2002 was adjourned owing to the absence of seven witnesses. Hearings were held on 3, 4, 5 and |
at least one week | 48. On 8 November 2005 the CASA invited the representative of UV to another meeting to be held on 10 November. The representative declined the invitation, however, on the ground that he was busy on that date. He asked the CASA to notify him of meetings |
28 March 2006 | 7. An incident report regarding events that took place between 28 March and 1 April 2006 was prepared on 3 April 2006 by the police and was signed by more than 220 officers. It stated that on 24 March 2006 fourteen PKK militants had been killed by the security forces and that the remains of four of the militants were ... |
10 November 1997 | 51. The court scheduled the next hearing for 6 November 1997 and invited B.B. to submit the evidence he relied on in his written reply to the plaintiffs’ claims. However, he failed to do so and also did not appear at the hearing. The plaintiffs’ counsel submitted that B.B. was found guilty for fraud in criminal procee... |
27 October 1989 | 14. State Counsel’s Office and the civil party appealed against the judgment of 22 March 1994.
In their appeal submissions the applicants argued, among other things, that the royal decree of 27 October 1989, which had formed the basis for the prosecution, was unlawful, particularly as it concerned a matter dealt with ... |
20 December | 18. On 17 December 1996 the Aarberg District Government Office ordered the applicant's placement for an unlimited period in the S. Nursing Home on account of serious neglect (schwere Verwahrlosung). The Office relied on Articles 397a et seq. of the Swiss Civil Code (Zivilgesetzbuch) and section 9 of the Deprivation of... |
13 October 2014 | 14. On 23 July 2014 the Constitutional Court dismissed the constitutional appeal. It held that the lower courts’ assessment “was based on a correct application of substantive law and a constitutionally acceptable interpretation thereof, in accordance with Article 6 of the Convention”. As regards Article 1 of Protocol ... |
19 March 2010 | 13. On 19 March 2010 the trial court noted that the applicant had again failed to appear and decided to remand him in custody in absentia. According to the applicant, he and his lawyer had not been notified about the hearing of |
24 April 2007 | 42. The Government submitted a copy of the list of judges of the Krasnoarmeyskiy District Court approved by the Volgograd Regional Legislature on 2 July 2002. The list mentioned Ms G. and Mr R. They also produced a certificate issued on |
the period between 1 January and 30 November 2004 | 22. On 11 January 2005 the Warsaw Regional Court dismissed the application for exemption. It found that the applicant company had failed to substantiate its assertion that it had been unable to pay the court fees. It noted that the applicant company had failed to submit all requested documents concerning its financial... |
18 January 2011 | 18. In December 2010, the applicant’s wife, anticipating his discharge from the hospital, complained to the head of the Regional Department of the Federal Service for Execution of Sentences in St Petersburg and Leningrad Region and to the Investigative Committee of the Leningrad Region that the applicant’s medical tre... |
19 October 2007 | 14. On 19 October 2007 the Nasimi District Court granted the prosecutor’s request by extending the applicant’s detention pending trial by three months, until 24 January 2008. The court substantiated the need for the extension by the necessity of additional time to carry out further investigative actions, as well as by... |
11 January 2002 | 180. On 18 January 2002 the fifth applicant submitted a complaint to the Chechnya Prosecutor’s office, stating that at about 3 a.m. on 11 January 2002 her brother Magomed Soltymuradov had been taken away by unidentified servicemen. She referred to the written complaints her family had submitted on |
16 October 2001 | 8. Subsequently, all the defendants contested the above charge. The applicant denied any knowledge of the matter. He maintained that his trip to Estonia had only been for pleasure and that he had not received any instructions from L.J. relating to it. Nor had he kept any contact with the supplier. He further denied an... |
4 April 2000 | 22. On 30 March 2000 T. withdrew the initial request since it could not provide a certificate of title regarding the immovable property at issue. It also made a fresh request proposing an alternative means of enforcement, namely an inventory and public sale of the debtor’s movable property. T. also proposed that the c... |
29 November 2006 | 44. On an unspecified date in 2006 the applicant brought proceedings against O.M.M., seeking an injunction for a fine of between RON 20 and RON 50 (approximately EUR 5 to 13) for every Sunday O.M.M. refused to allow him to see his daughter as required by the final judgment of |
25 December 2003 | 25. On 22 November 2004 the applicant challenged the admissibility as evidence of transcripts of his telephone conversations with G. on 26 and 27 December 2003. He argued that G. had been his counsel as from |
23 May 2005 | 11. On 12 September 2003 the applicant appealed to the Celje Higher Court. ZT cross-appealed on 22 September 2003.
On 8 June 2005 the court allowed the applicant's appeal in part, dismissed ZT's appeal and increased the damages awarded.
The judgment was served on the applicant on |
12 October 2005 | 16. Six hearings later, on 13 April 2005 the court set the case down for hearing of oral submissions on 8 June 2005. On that date judgment was reserved. According to information provided by the applicant on |
8 June 1988 | 18. On 15 September 2008 the applicants instituted constitutional redress proceedings. They lodged an action against the Director of Social Housing. The Housing Authority and C.C. were later joined to the proceedings. The applicants complained that the requisition order had breached their rights under Article 1 of Pro... |
21 February 2001 | 9. On 15 January 2001 the Katowice Regional Court decided that some of the charges laid against the applicant would be considered in separate proceedings before the Sosnowiec District Court. However, on |
from 5 May 2009 to 26 May 2009 | 11. On 18 December 2009 the applicant lodged the application complaining about the prison conditions of his detention from 25 August 2009. In the supplement to his application of 17 September 2013, he complained also about the conditions of his detention |
14 January to 14 May 2007 | 13. The prison director’s certificates specify that cell 44 “was equipped with three sleeping places” and measured 14.3 square metres. They also indicate, in particular, that the applicants were held in the following cells:
Mr Reznik
Cell
Surface, sq. m
Inmates
Period
118
8
2
|
23 October 2002 | 62. The Government further referred to the information received from the Chechnya Department of the Federal Security Service (the Chechnya FSB) and the Oktyabrskiy ROVD of Grozny that the Chechnya FSB had not conducted any special operations in Pogranichnaya Street, Grozny on |
8 December 1999 | 7. On 24 April and 8 June 2000 the police interviewed the individuals from the above group. Their statements concurred as to the fact that they had been friends with the applicant until the incident of |
10 to 24 March 2005 | 34. On 9 March 2005 investigator K. conducted an examination of the corpse in the presence of two witnesses and with the participation of Deputy Prosecutor General Sh., two medical experts Mal. and Mat., and prosecutor S. It appears that both video and photographic records of the examination were made. The report cont... |
the last ten years | 8. The applicants, who had transferred to Italy the contributions they had paid in Switzerland, requested the Istituto Nazionale della Previdenza Sociale (“INPS”) to calculate their pensions, in accordance with the 1962 Italo-Swiss Convention on Social Security (see Relevant domestic law and practice below), on the ba... |
twenty-nine | 8. At about 9.30 p.m. on 16 January 2002 Mr Dejan Petrović was arrested by the Vračar Police Department (OUP Vračar-SUP Beograd) on suspicion of having snatched a woman’s handbag earlier that evening and was kept overnight in police custody. Mr Dejan Petrović, then aged |
August and September 2004 | 51. On 14 December 2004, during a court hearing in the first set of criminal proceedings against the applicant, he complained that he had been subjected to unlawful pressure and ill-treatment in the SIZO. He claimed, in particular, that in |
16 January 2003 | 18. On 18 June 2002 the Pecherskyy District Court of Kyiv refused to consider the applicant's administrative complaint lodged against the Regional State Treasury Department, the National Bank of Ukraine and the Pecherskyy District Bailiffs' Service for improper enforcement of the judgments in her favour, as it should ... |
3 June 2003 | 13. Having regard to the contents of S.T.’s statement, the judge also observed that it was crucial to the prosecution on count one as there was no other direct evidence of what took place during the consultation on |
18 December 2008 | 41. Lastly, the first applicant alleged that the District Court had erred in establishing his income, which in fact exceeded the living wage in St Petersburg. Referring to the Court’s judgment in the case of Saviny v. Ukraine (no. 39948/06, |
22 May 2000 | 40. Following a number of complaints made by Mr Evtimov, in the beginning of 2000 the Inspectorate of the Ministry of Justice reviewed Judge R.P.’s actions in relation to decision no. 9 (see paragraph 17 above) and concluded that she had breached the relevant rules of procedure in many respects. On the basis of these ... |
7 June 2004 | 23. On 31 May 2004 the Uzlovaya Town Court set the opening date for the trial and held that all three defendants should remain in custody, without citing any grounds for the continuation of their detention on remand or setting a time-limit for it. On |
9 December 2003 | 15. In a decision of 25 November 2004 the Constitutional Court (Ústavní soud) held that the Municipal Court had violated the applicant’s rights guaranteed under Article 8 §§ 2 and 5 of the Charter in that it had not decided on extension of the applicant’s pre-trial detention or his release within the statutory time-li... |
eighteen months | 6. He was convicted of offences of sexual activity with a child and breach of a Sexual Offences Prevention Order. In May 2007 he received an indeterminate sentence for public protection (“IPP sentence”). A minimum term (“tariff”) of |
four years' | 16. The same day the Kočani Court of First Instance gave judgment. It found the applicant and the other accused guilty and sentenced them to terms of imprisonment of three to four years. The applicant obtained the longest sentence ( |
the summer of 1998 | 57. D.C. asserted that ever since his former wife had left him he had had to struggle in the courts in order to be able to see his son, as she had done everything possible to keep him from having any contact with his son. In that respect, he had even had to lodge a criminal complaint against her, as she was not comply... |
December 2007-April 2010 | 10. The applicants alleged that the judgments had remained unenforced. According to the Government, all the judgments, except the one delivered on 16 October 2009 in Mr Martov’s favour, had been fully enforced in |
7 December 2000 | 13. According to a letter from the head of the Supreme Commercial Court of the Russian Federation of 11 October 2007, the applicant had not forwarded the writs of execution in respect of the judgment of |
2 November 1998 | 5. In 1998 and 2001, respectively, the applicant instituted two sets of proceedings in the Pervomaisk Town Court against the Pervomaisk chemical factory “Khimprom” (the “PCFK”) – a State-owned enterprise – to recover unpaid salary. By decision of |
20 July 2009 | 11. On 29 May 2007 the Federal Court of Justice refused a request by the applicant for legal aid on the grounds that the applicant’s intended appeal on points of law lacked sufficient prospect of success. On |
1 July 2004 | 6. On 2 August 2005 the Berlin Tiergarten District Court issued an arrest warrant against the applicant on suspicion of two counts of drug trafficking. The arrest warrant specified that the strong suspicion that the applicant had committed the offences resulted from statements made by one of his co‑suspects, the separ... |
7 July 2009 | 29. On 21 March 2011 the Alba Iulia Court of Appeal allowed the appeal on points of law submitted by J.V. and upheld with final effect the judgment of the Deva District Court of 20 April 2010. The Alba Iulia Court of Appeal based its verdict on the statements given by J.V., F.C.B. and M.S.B. as well as the account of ... |
25 September 2001 | 9. According to the applicant, he was arrested again on 14 September 2001. However, the arrest report refers to 15 September 2001. On 18 September 2001 the Kirovsky District Court of Donetsk (hereafter “the District Court”) extended the applicant’s arrest until |
16 July 2001 | 16. On 26 April 2002 the Kandıra prosecutor decided not to prosecute anyone in relation to the allegations of ill-treatment made by the first applicant and 42 other detainees. In his decision the prosecutor referred to a decision not to prosecute that had been given on |
23 May 2008 | 31. On 1 May 2008 a medical panel at the prison hospital, including an oncologist, chemotherapy doctor and a liver specialist, concluded that treating both of the applicant’s diseases simultaneously was not advisable. They concluded that chemotherapy was the priority and that the antiviral treatment should be postpone... |
1 March 2002 | 18. By a decision of 20 December 2001 the Rostock Court of Appeal provisionally suspended the execution of the Stralsund District Court’s decision of 14 February 2001 to the extent the applicant had been granted contact rights that went beyond supervised access. It further appointed a curator ad litem to represent the... |
17 July 2011 | 52. On 6 July and 9 November 2011 the Lublin District Court gave new decisions authorising the guardian to take the child from the mother to ensure compliance with the access arrangement on terms specified in those arrangements.
On |
10 February 2006 | 29. On 13 February 2006 the public prosecutor issued a “written conclusion” (писмена констатација) concerning the applicant’s criminal complaint. It was based on a statement by the taxi driver given on |
19 November 2007 | 22. On 18 June 2007 a Trial Chamber of the State Court convicted him of torture as a war crime and sentenced him to eleven years’ imprisonment for that crime under Article 173 § 1 of the 2003 Criminal Code. An Appeals Chamber of the same court upheld that judgment on |
28 April 2007 | 9. On 21 April 2007 Ramazan Umarov told his former fellow prison inmate Mr S.S. about his problems with the police and asked him for help in finding a place to live. Mr S.S. allowed Ramazan to stay in his flat in a block at 41 Salavatova Street, Makhachkala, Dagestan.
(b) The events of |
30 July 2006 | 23. On 22 July 2006 the applicant, using electrical wiring, slashed his wrists again in Zugdidi Prison. He was immediately transferred from the prison to a civilian hospital in Zugdidi, where he was provided with the necessary emergency care. Subsequently, on |
8 March 2001 | 14. The applicant appealed, claiming inter alia that the case against him had been fabricated, that the court had based its conclusions on evidence obtained by force, and that the conviction was arbitrary. On |
more than fifty years later | 8. On 26 June 2012 the judge gave directions (despacho saneador) setting out those matters that had already been established and those that remained outstanding. In addition, the judge dismissed T.S.’s objection that the applicant’s claim was time-barred, holding that the time-limit set by Article 1817 § 1 was unconst... |
31 May 2001 | 33. On 16 May 2001 Human Rights Watch wrote to the Military Prosecutor’s Office for the Northern Caucasus, asking the prosecutor to quash the decision by the military prosecutor of military unit no. 20102 not to open a criminal investigation. The letter referred to the contents of the videotape and to the fact that Ya... |
10 November 2003 | 20. On 26 August 2003 the applicant was informed of the conclusion of the investigation and was granted access to the case file which apparently consisted of 34 volumes of written materials. It appears that the applicant finished familiarising himself with the materials of the case on |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.