Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

GASIMOV v. AZERBAIJAN and 4 other applications

Doc ref: 37457/09;48475/12;33162/13;41673/17;76810/17 • ECHR ID: 001-186532

Document date: September 3, 2018

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 3

GASIMOV v. AZERBAIJAN and 4 other applications

Doc ref: 37457/09;48475/12;33162/13;41673/17;76810/17 • ECHR ID: 001-186532

Document date: September 3, 2018

Cited paragraphs only

Communicated on 3 September 2018

FIFTH SECTION

Application no. 37457/09 Polad Siyavush oglu GASIMOV against Azerbaijan and 4 other applications (see list appended)

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES

The applications mainly concern the applicants ’ complaints of detention without legal basis. The domestic courts dismissed the applicants ’ complaints of unlawfulness of their detention .

QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES

1. Were the applicants deprived of their liberty in breach of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, did the deprivation of liberty fall within the paragraphs of that provision? In this connection, was the detention of the applicant in application no. 48475/12 without a court order during the periods between 18 April and 3 May 2012 and between 3 and 22 June 2012 in breach of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention?

2. Was the applicant in application no. 37457/09 s ubjected to inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention? In particular, as part of the relevant safeguards against ill-treatment:

(i) was the applicant informed of his rights? If so, when, and what rights was he informed about and

(ii) was he given the possibility of informing his family about his apprehension and, if so, when?

Having regard to the procedural protection from inhuman or degrading treatment (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 131, ECHR 2000-IV), was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article 3 of the Convention?

3. Was the applicant in application no. 37457/09 informed of the reasons for his detention, as required by Article 5 § 2 of the Convention?

4. Did the domestic courts give sufficient and relevant reasons for the detention of the applicant in application no. 33162/13 for the purposes of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention?

5. Did the applicant in application no. 37457/09 have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against him, in accordance with Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 of the Convention? In particular, have the requirements of a fair trial been satisfied as regards the admission into evidence of the incriminating statements made by the applicant and his co-accused to the prosecuting authorities, which were then retracted at a later stage of the proceedings? Was the principle of equality of arms respected as regards the conditions afforded to the defence to present its case? Was the applicant informed in a language which he understood and in sufficient detail of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, as required by Article 6 § 3 (a) of the Convention? Was the applicant afforded adequate facilities to prepare his defence, as required by Article 6 § 3 (b) of the Convention? Was the applicant able to defend himself through legal assistance, as required by Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention, in particular, at the initial stage of the proceedings? Was the applicant able to obtain the attendance of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him and to examine witnesses against him, as required by Article 6 § 3 (d) of the Convention?

6. Has there been an interference in application no. 41673/17 with the applicant ’ s freedom of expression, within the meaning of Article 10 § 1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article 10 § 2 of the Convention?

7. Has there been an interference in application no. 76810/17 with the applicant ’ s right to peaceful enjoyment of his possessions under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention on account of the seizure and retention of his money by the police officers?

APPENDIX

No.

Application no.

Lodged on

Applicant

Date of birth

Place of residence

Represented by

37457/09

23/06/2009

Polad Siyavush oglu GASIMOV

01/04/1969

Baku

Adil İSMAYILOV

48475/12

26/07/2012

Ildar Rustam oglu FAYZOV

10/03/1983

Baku

Sabina ALIYEVA

33162/13

01/05/2013

Javid Mammadhasan oglu MAMMADOV

17/12/1977

Baku

Javad JAVADOV

41673/17

30/05/2017

Izolda Heydar gizi AGAYEVA

04/09/1988

Baku

Yalchin IMANOV

76810/17

25/10/2017

Ruslan Nizami oglu MURADOV

01/08/1998

Baku

Khalid BAGIROV

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846