Search
document

Document text Analytics

NOVRUZLU v. AZERBAIJAN and 5 other applications

Doc ref: 57334/15;2059/16;2069/16;22318/16;22334/16;23171/16 • ECHR ID: 001-205744

Document date: October 5, 2020

Inbound citations: 1
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 0

NOVRUZLU v. AZERBAIJAN and 5 other applications

Doc ref: 57334/15;2059/16;2069/16;22318/16;22334/16;23171/16 • ECHR ID: 001-205744

Document date: October 5, 2020

Cited paragraphs only

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

57334/15

16/11/2015

Shahin Ibrahim oglu NOVRUZLU

1995Baku

Nemat KARIMLI

2059/16

12/12/2015

Rashad Zeynalabdin oglu HASANOV

1982Baku

Ruslan MUSTAFAZADE

Asabali MUSTAFAYEV

2069/16

14/12/2015

Uzeyir Mahammad oglu MAMMADLI

1987Sumgayit

Ruslan MUSTAFAZADE

Asabali MUSTAFAYEV

22318/16

15/04/2016

Rashadat Fikrat oglu AKHUNDOV

1984Baku

Khalid BAGIROV

Fariz NAMAZLI

22334/16

15/04/2016

Mammad Rasim oglu AZIZOV

1992Shaki

Khalid BAGIROV

Fariz NAMAZLI

23171/16

15/04/2016

Zaur Araz oglu GURBANLI

1987Khirdalan

Khalid BAGIROV

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant