Violation of Art. 8;Just satisfaction not applied

ORG Mr PERSON and his wife PERSON , née PERSON , currently live at FAC ) . Before he retired , PERSON , with his wife ’s assistance , ran a wholesale fruit - and - vegetable business at ORG and ORG ) .

ORG On DATE the Director of ORG lodged a complaint against the applicant and CARDINAL other persons alleging tax evasion , failure to make entries in accounts and false accounting .

A judicial investigation was begun on DATE by an investigating judge at GPE , assigned by the President of the GPE tribunal de grande instance .

PERSON and PERSON home was searched as were their business LOC , pursuant to a warrant issued on DATE by the investigating judge . The latter also issued a warrant to the gendarmerie at ORG ( ORG ) on DATE requiring them to monitor and transcribe all PERSON and PERSON telephone calls - both business and private ones - on DATE and DATE .

The telephone tapping took place from TIME on DATE until TIME on DATE ; on DATE the second in command of the gendarmerie unit at ORG made a " summary report " on the tapping , which was subsequently brought to the knowledge of the applicants .

Mr PERSON was charged with tax evasion , forgery of private and business documents , failure to keep proper accounts , aiding and abetting misuse of company property and receiving funds derived from misuse of company property , and on DATE he appeared before the investigating judge , who remanded him in custody ; he was released on DATE .

PERSON , who from DATE onwards was questioned several times as a witness , was charged on CARDINAL DATE with aiding and abetting tax evasion and forgery of business documents .

ORG On DATE the investigating judge committed them for trial - with the other CARDINAL persons mentioned above - at the GPE tribunal de grande instance , in Mr PERSON ’s case on charges of forgery , uttering , aiding and abetting misuse of company property , aiding and abetting tax evasion , aiding and abetting fraud , receiving funds derived from misuse of company property , and false or incomplete accounting , and in PERSON case on charges of aiding and abetting forgery , aiding and abetting tax evasion and aiding and abetting improper keeping of accounts .

They raised as a preliminary issue several pleas of nullity , CARDINAL of which related to the telephone tapping carried out on CARDINAL and DATE . On CARDINAL DATE the court ordered that these pleas should be heard as part of the main trial , and on DATE it rejected them . Of the telephone tapping it said :

" This investigative measure , even if it must remain an exceptional one , is within the investigating judge ’s powers as part of his inquiries during an investigation ;

No infringement of the rights of the defence has been substantiated , especially as in the instant case the results were unusable and did not serve as a basis for the prosecution ... "

In the same judgment it was held that the various offences with which the applicants were charged had been made out , except that of aiding and abetting fraud in Mr PERSON ’s case ; in consequence , Mr PERSON was sentenced to CARDINAL months’ imprisonment , DATE of which were suspended , and PERSON to DATE suspended .

ORG The defendants , the civil party seeking damages and the prosecution appealed to ORG .

The defence again raised the pleas of nullity that had been put forward unsuccessfully at the original trial . ORG rejected all of them on DATE . As regards the impugned telephone tapping , it gave the following reasons for its decision :

" [ According to PERSON , the investigating judge ] infringed the rights of the defence and the guarantees afforded by law to all accused persons , seeing that , even though he had not yet had his first interview with the investigating judge ( which took place on DATE ... ) , he nonetheless had to be regarded as having already been charged , since the public prosecutor ’s application of DATE was directed against him among others ;

But , as the trial court rightly pointed out , this investigative measure , while it must remain an exceptional one , is one of the prerogatives of an investigating judge carrying out inquiries as part of an investigation he is conducting ;

The ORG has been able to check and satisfy itself that this operation , which to be effective must be carried out without the knowledge of the person suspected - or even charged - , was carried out on the investigating judge ’s authority and under his supervision , without any subterfuge or ruse being employed ;

The operation , moreover , lasted TIME ... , did not yield anything usable and did not serve as a basis for the prosecution ;

Nothing enables it to be established that the procedure thus followed had the result of jeopardising the exercise of the rights of the defence , since it must be borne in mind that Mr PERSON had not at that stage been officially charged by the investigating judge and that LAW empowers the latter to take all investigative measures he deems useful for establishing the truth ... ;

At the same time ORG upheld the judgment under appeal as to the finding that the defendants were guilty but increased the sentences passed on them by the trial court , sentencing the applicant to CARDINAL years’ imprisonment , DATE of which were suspended , and to a fine of MONEY , and his wife to DATE suspended .

ORG The applicants appealed to ORG on points of law . In the first of their grounds of appeal ORG judgment was criticised for its failure to quash the investigating judge ’s warrant of DATE :

" Firstly , investigating judges are not empowered by LAW to tap the telephone of anybody - whether it be a person charged with a criminal offence , a third party or a witness - and such a procedure is contrary to the law , since LAW has regulated searches , the seizing of property and the taking of evidence from witnesses and has not conferred on investigating judges the power to tap the telephones of persons against whom there is substantial , consistent evidence of guilt , such a procedure being prohibited both by Articles CARDINAL and CARDINAL ( article CARDINAL , article CARDINAL) of the LAW ... and by LAW , Articles L. CARDINAL and L. CARDINAL of ORG and LAW ;

Secondly , an individual who has been personally proceeded against by the civil party seeking damages and in respect of whom ... the public prosecutor has requested that an investigation be commenced is a party to the proceedings and must consequently be regarded as a person charged with a criminal offence within the meaning of LAW ; such a person must , therefore , before any statement is taken by the investigating judge , be informed of the charges against him , of his right not to make any statement and of his right to the assistance of a lawyer ; the investigating judge accordingly can not , without infringing the rights of the defence , record such a person ’s telephone conversations without the person ’s knowledge ;

Lastly , since what is at issue is a nullity that is absolute as a matter of public policy - unlawful telephone tapping being a criminal offence - , it is of little importance that the conversations recorded were not used as the basis for the prosecution . "

On pages CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the supplementary pleadings there were references to the PERSON and Others judgment of ORG DATE , Series A no . CARDINAL ) .

ORG dismissed the appeal on DATE . It rejected the foregoing ground in the following terms :

" In the judgment [ of ORG ] the plea that the investigation proceedings were null and void because of the nullity of the warrant issued by the investigating judge on DATE ordering that PERSON ’s telephone conversations should be monitored was rejected on the grounds that this measure was within the contemplation of LAW of LAW and that as , moreover , it had not served as a basis for the prosecution , it had not had the effect of jeopardising the exercise of the rights of the defence ;

As these reasons stand and seeing , furthermore , that it has not been found - nor even alleged by the appellants - that the investigative measure in question , which was carried out under the supervision of the investigating judge , entailed any subterfuges or ruses , ORG did , without laying itself open to the objection raised in the ground of appeal , provide a legal basis for its decision ;

... " ( PERSON ( ORG ) DATE , jurisprudence , pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL )

ORG NORP criminal law adopts the principle that any kind of evidence is admissible : " unless otherwise provided by statute , any type of evidence shall be admissible to substantiate a criminal charge ... " ( LAW ) .

There is no statutory provision which expressly empowers investigating judges to carry out or order telephone tapping , or indeed to carry out or order various measures which are nonetheless in common use , such as the taking of photographs or fingerprints , shadowing , surveillance , requisitions , confrontations of witnesses and reconstructions of crimes . On the other hand , LAW does expressly confer power on them to take several other measures , which it regulates in detail , such as pre - trial detention , seizure of property and searches .

ORG Under the old LAW had condemned the use of telephone tapping by investigating judges , at least in circumstances which it regarded as disclosing , on the part of a judge or the police , a lack of " fairness " incompatible with the rules of criminal procedure and the safeguards essential to the rights of the defence ( combined divisions , DATE , ministère public PERSON , PERSON , jurisprudence , pp . CARDINAL ; ORG , DATE , ORG , ORG . no . CARDINAL , pp . CARDINAL ; ORG , second section , DATE , époux PERSON c. époux Lubrano et autres , ORG , jurisprudence , pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL , and ORG ( ORG ) DATE , jurisprudence , p. CARDINAL ) . Some trial courts and courts of appeal which had to deal with the issue , on the other hand , showed some willingness to hold that such telephone tapping was lawful if there had been neither " entrapment " nor " provocation " ; this view was based on LAW , ORG , CARDINAL DATE , ministère public contre X , GPE DATE , jurisprudence , pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) .

ORG Since the DATE Code of Criminal Procedure came into force , the courts have had regard in this respect to , among others , Articles CARDINAL , CARDINAL and CARDINAL , which provide :

" The investigating judge shall , in accordance with the law , take all the investigative measures which he deems useful for establishing the truth .

If the investigating judge is unable to take all the investigative measures himself , he may issue warrants to senior police officers ( officiers de police judiciaire ) in order to have them carry out all the necessary investigative measures on the conditions and subject to the reservations provided for in Articles CARDINAL and CARDINAL .

The investigating judge must verify the information thus gathered .

" An investigating judge may issue a warrant requiring any judge of his court , any district - court judge within the territorial jurisdiction of that court , any senior police officer ( officier de police judiciaire ) with authority in that jurisdiction or any investigating judge to undertake any investigative measures he considers necessary in places coming under their respective jurisdictions .

The warrant shall indicate the nature of the offence to which the proceedings relate . It shall be dated and signed by the issuing judge and shall bear his seal .

It may only order investigative measures directly connected with the prosecution of the offence to which the proceedings relate .

" The judges or senior police officers instructed to act shall exercise , within the limits of the warrant , all the powers of the investigating judge .

An Act of DATE added to LAW an Article CARDINAL guaranteeing to everyone " the right to respect for his private life " . It also added to LAW an Article CARDINAL , whereby :

" Anyone who wilfully intrudes on the privacy of others :

By listening to , recording or transmitting by means of any device , words spoken by a person in a private place , without that person ’s consent ;

shall be liable to imprisonment for not DATE and not DATE and a fine ... or to CARDINAL of these CARDINAL penalties . "

During the preparatory work , one of the vice - chairmen of ORG , PERSON , sought " certain assurances " that this enactment " [ would ] not prevent the investigating judge from issuing strictly within the limits of the law warrants to have telephones tapped , obviously without making use of any form of inducement and in compliance with all the legal procedures " ( ORG , ORG , DATE proceedings , p. CARDINAL ) . The Minister of ORG , PERSON , replied : " ... there is no question of interfering with the powers of investigating judges , who are indeed empowered , in the circumstances laid down by law , to order tapping " ; he added a little later : " when an official taps a telephone , he can only do so lawfully if he has a warrant from a judicial authority or is acting on the instructions of a minister " ( ibid . , p. CARDINAL ) . Both ORG thereupon passed the PERSON without amending it on this point .

ORG Article CARDINAL of ORG provides that any public servant or anyone authorised to assist with the performance of relevant official duties who breaches the secrecy of correspondence entrusted to the telecommunications service shall be liable to the penalties provided for in LAW - a fine , imprisonment and temporary disqualification from any public office or employment . Article CARDINAL provides that anyone who , without permission from the sender or the addressee , divulges , publishes or uses the content of correspondence transmitted over the air or by telephone shall be liable to the penalties provided for in LAW ( on professional confidentiality ) - a fine or imprisonment .

General Instruction no . CARDINAL - CARDINAL on the telephone service - intended for ORG and ORG officials - contains the following provisions , however , given here in the amended version of DATE ( LAW ) :

" PERSON and sub - postmasters are required to comply with any requests that ... calls to or from a specified telephone should be monitored by the relevant authority , made by :

An investigating judge ( Arts . CARDINAL , CARDINAL of the Code of Criminal Procedure ) or any judge or senior police officer ( officier de police judiciaire ) to whom a judicial warrant has been issued ( Art . CARDINAL ) ;

ORG was published in the official bulletin of ORG and was described by the Government as an " implementing regulation " .

ORG The striking development of various forms of serious crime - large - scale thefts and robberies , terrorism , drug - trafficking - appears in GPE to have led to a marked increase in the frequency with which investigating judges resort to telephone tapping . The courts have as a result given many more decisions on the subject than formerly ; telephone tapping has not been held to be unlawful in itself , although the courts have occasionally shown some distaste for it ( ORG , ORG , CARDINAL DATE , PERSON , DATE , jurisprudence , pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) .

The vast majority of the decisions cited to ORG , or of which the ORG has had cognisance by its own means , are of later date than the facts of the instant case ( DATE ) and have gradually provided a number of clarifications . These do not all stem from judgments of ORG , and do not for the time being constitute a uniform body of case - law , because the decisions or reasons given in some of the cases have remained unique . They may be summarised as follows .

( a ) Articles CARDINAL and CARDINAL of LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) empower investigating judges - and them alone , as far as judicial investigations are concerned - to carry out telephone tapping or , much more commonly in practice , to issue a warrant to that effect to a senior police officer ( officier de police judiciaire ) within the meaning of LAW ( see , in particular , ORG , CARDINAL DATE , ORG . no . CARDINAL , pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL ; DATE - see paragraph CARDINAL above ; DATE , ORG , ORG . no . CARDINAL , pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL ; CARDINAL DATE , PERSON , PERSON , ORG , sommaires , p. CARDINAL ; DATE , PERSON , and DATE , PERSON . no . CARDINAL , pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) . Telephone tapping is an " investigative measure " which may sometimes be " useful for establishing the truth " . It is comparable to the seizure of letters or telegrams ( see , among other authorities , ORG , ORG , DATE , NORP , Juris - Classeur périodique ( ORG ) DATE , jurisprudence , no . DATE , and ORG , DATE , F. et autre , ORG DATE , jurisprudence , pp . CARDINAL ) and it similarly does not offend the provisions of LAW , having regard to the legislative history and to the principle that any kind of evidence is admissible ( see paragraphs CARDINAL and QUANTITY above and GPE tribunal de grande instance , DATE , PERSON , unreported ; ORG , DATE , PERSON , unreported ; ORG , ORG , judgment of DATE previously cited and judgment of CARDINAL DATE , PERSON , ORG , sommaires , pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) .

( b ) The investigating judge can only issue such a warrant " where there is a presumption that a specific offence has been committed which has given rise to the investigation " which he is responsible for conducting and not in respect of a whole category of offences " on the off chance " ; this is clear not only from ORG and CARDINAL ( second and third paragraphs ) of LAW but also " from the general principles of criminal procedure " ( see , among other authorities , ORG , judgments of DATE , CARDINAL DATE and DATE previously cited ) .

The NORP courts do not seem ever to have held that telephone tapping is lawful only where the offences being investigated are of some seriousness or if the investigating judge has specified a maximum duration for it .

( c ) " Within the limits of the warrant " that has been issued to him - if need be by fax ( ORG , ORG , CARDINAL DATE , Lecesne et autres , ORG , sommaires , p. CARDINAL ) - the senior police officer exercises " all the powers of the investigating judge " ( LAW ) . He exercises these under the supervision of the investigating judge , who by the fifth paragraph of LAW is bound to " verify the information ... gathered " ( see , among other authorities , ORG , judgments of CARDINAL DATE , DATE , DATE , CARDINAL DATE and DATE previously cited ) .

The warrant apparently sometimes takes the form of a general delegation of powers , including - without its being expressly mentioned - the power to tap telephones ( Court of Cassation , Civil Division , second section , judgment of DATE previously cited , and ORG , judgment of CARDINAL DATE previously cited ) .

( d ) In no case may a police officer tap telephones on his own initiative without a warrant , for example during the preliminary investigation preceding the opening of the judicial investigation ( see , among other authorities , ORG , CARDINAL DATE , ORG , and DATE , ORG . no . CARDINAL , pp . CARDINAL , and no . CARDINAL , pp . CARDINAL ; full court , CARDINAL DATE , ORG , ORG , p. CARDINAL , and ORG , jurisprudence , no . DATE , with the submissions of Mr Advocate - General PERSON ) .

( e ) Telephone tapping must not be accompanied by " any subterfuge or ruse " ( see , among other authorities , ORG , judgment of CARDINAL DATE , DATE , DATE , CARDINAL DATE , DATE and DATE previously cited ) failing which the information gathered by means of it must be either deleted or removed from the case file ORG , judgments of CARDINAL and DATE previously cited ) .

( f ) The telephone tapping must also be carried out " in such a way that the exercise of the rights of the defence can not be jeopardised " ( see , among other authorities , ORG , judgments of CARDINAL DATE , DATE , DATE , CARDINAL DATE , DATE , DATE and DATE previously cited ) . In particular , the confidentiality of the relations between suspect or person accused and lawyer must be respected , as must , more generally , a lawyer ’s duty of professional confidentiality , at least when he is not acting in any other capacity ( Aix - en - ORG , ORG , DATE and DATE , PERSON et autres , ORG , jurisprudence , pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL , and DATE , jurisprudence , pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL ; ORG , ORG , judgment of DATE previously cited ) .

( g ) With this reservation , it is permissible to tap telephone calls to or from a charged person ( Court of Cassation , Criminal Division , judgments of CARDINAL DATE and DATE previously cited ) or a mere suspect ( judgments of the GPE tribunal de grande instance , DATE , ORG , DATE , and ORG of ORG , DATE , previously cited ) or even a third party , such as a witness , whom there is reason to believe to be in possession of information about the perpetrators or circumstances of the offence ( see , among other authorities , Aix - en - Provence Court of Appeal , judgment of DATE previously cited ) .

( h ) A public telephone - box may be tapped ( ORG , ORG , CARDINAL DATE , Trésor public et ORG courses c. L. et autres , ORG DATE , jurisprudence , pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL ) just like a private line , irrespective of whether current is diverted to a listening station ( ORG , CARDINAL DATE , and full court , PERCENT DATE , previously cited ) .

( i ) The senior police officer supervises the tape or cassette recording of the conversations and their transcription , where he does not carry out these operations himself ; when it comes to choosing extracts to submit " for examination by the court " , it is for him to determine " what words may render the speaker liable to criminal proceedings " . He performs these duties " on his own responsibility and under the supervision of the investigating judge " ( GPE tribunal de grande instance , judgment of CARDINAL DATE previously cited , upheld by ORG on DATE ; ORG , judgment of DATE previously cited ) .

( j ) The original tapes are " exhibits " , not " investigation documents " , but have only the weight of circumstantial evidence ; their contents are transcribed in reports in order to give them a physical form so that they can be inspected ( Court of Cassation , Criminal Division , DATE , PERSON , ORG . no . CARDINAL , pp . CARDINAL ) .

( k ) If transcription raises a problem of translation into NORP , Articles CARDINAL et seq . of LAW , which deal with expert opinions , do not apply to the appointment and work of the translator ( Court of Cassation , Criminal Division , DATE , ORG , ORG . no . CARDINAL , pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL ( extracts ) , and DATE , PERSON , not yet reported ) .

( l ) There is no statutory provision prohibiting the inclusion in the file on a criminal case of evidence from other proceedings , such as tapes and reports containing transcriptions , if they may " assist the judges and help to establish the truth " , provided that such evidence is added under an adversarial procedure ( Court of Cassation , Criminal Division , judgments of DATE and DATE previously cited ) .

( m ) The defence must be able to inspect the reports containing transcriptions , to hear the original tape recordings , to challenge their authenticity during the judicial investigation and subsequent trial and to apply for any necessary investigative measures - such as an expert opinion - relating to their contents and the circumstances in which they were made ( see , among other authorities , ORG , DATE , previously cited ; DATE , GPE , unreported ; and DATE , PERSON , previously cited ) .

( n ) Just as the investigating judge supervises the senior police officer , he is himself supervised by ORG , to which he - exactly like the public prosecutor - may apply under LAW .

Trial courts , courts of appeal and ORG may have to deal with objections or grounds of appeal as the case may be - particularly by defendants but also , on occasion , by the prosecution ( ORG , judgments of DATE and CARDINAL DATE previously cited ) - based on a failure to comply with the requirements summarised above or with other rules which the parties concerned claim are applicable . A failure of this kind , however , would not automatically nullify the proceedings such that a court of appeal could be held to have erred if it had not dealt with them of its own motion ; they affect only defence rights ( Court of Cassation , ORG , DATE , ORG , not yet reported ) .

ORG Since DATE , parties have increasingly often relied on DATE ( article CARDINAL) of FAC , much less frequently , on LAW ( Court of Cassation , Criminal Division , DATE , Pellegrin et autres , ORG . no . CARDINAL , pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL , and CARDINAL DATE , PERSON ) - in support of their complaints about telephone tapping ; they have sometimes as in the instant case ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) - cited the case - law of ORG .

Hitherto only telephone tapping carried out without a warrant , during the police investigation ( see , among other authorities , ORG , judgments of DATE and CARDINAL DATE previously cited ) , or in unexplained circumstances ( see , among other authorities , ORG , judgment of DATE previously cited ) or in violation of defence rights ( ORG , ORG , judgment of DATE previously cited ) has been held by the NORP courts to be contrary to LAW ( article LAW ) ( " in accordance with the law " ) or to domestic law in the strict sense . In all other cases the courts have either found no violation ( ORG , judgments of DATE , DATE , DATE , DATE , CARDINAL DATE , DATE , DATE , DATE and DATE previously cited , and DATE , PERSON , unreported , and the judgments of CARDINAL DATE ( GPE ) , CARDINAL DATE ( GPE ) and DATE ( GPE ) previously cited ) or else ruled the plea inadmissible for various reasons ( Court of Cassation , ORG , judgments of DATE , CARDINAL DATE and CARDINAL DATE previously cited and the unreported judgments of CARDINAL DATE , PERSON ; CARDINAL DATE , PERSON ; DATE ; CARDINAL DATE , J. ; and CARDINAL DATE , B. et autres ) .

ORG While academic opinion is divided as to the compatibility of telephone tapping as carried out in GPE - on the orders of investigating judges or others - with the national and international legal rules in force in the country , there seems to be unanimous agreement that it is desirable and even necessary for ORG to try to solve the problem by following the example set by many foreign States ( see in particular NORP di PERSON , comments on the NORP judgment of DATE ( ORG ) , ORG , jurisprudence , no . DATE ; PERSON , ‘ Les résultats de l’audio - surveillance comme preuve pénale’ , Revue internationale de droit comparé , DATE , pp . CARDINAL - CARDINAL and CARDINAL ; PERSON , ‘ FAC téléphoniques’ , Studies in honour of PERSON , DATE , p. CARDINAL ; PERSON , ‘ ORG téléphoniques et Convention européenne des Droits de l’Homme’ , ORG , chronique , pp . CARDINAL ) . In DATE the ORG set up a study group chaired by Mr PERSON , who was then President of ORG , and consisting of senators and MPs of various political persuasions , judges , university professors , senior civil servants , judges and a barrister . The group submitted a report on DATE , but this has remained confidential and has not yet led to a bill being tabled .


Violation of Art. 3 (substantive aspect);Violation of Art. 3 (procedural aspect);Non-pecuniary damage - award

Alvina Gyulumyan;Corneliu Bîrsan;Ján Šikuta;Josep Casadevall;Luis López Guerra;Mihai Poalelungi;Nona Tsotsoria

The applicant was born in DATE and lives in PERSON .

The facts of the case , as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows .

On DATE general elections took place in GPE . The preliminary results of those elections were announced on DATE . According to them , the ruling ORG had narrowly won the elections .

On DATE growing discontent with the results of the elections and with alleged electoral fraud was felt , notably in various online forums . At TIME CARDINAL people , mostly young , gathered in front of ORG ) monument in the centre of PERSON . TIME there were already CARDINAL people assembled , who began to protest against the alleged electoral fraud , doing so in front of ORG and ORG buildings and then returning to ORG . A bigger demonstration was then announced for CARDINAL a.m. DATE .

On DATE the protest restarted with the participation of CARDINAL people . While the demonstration was peaceful at the beginning , CARDINAL of the participants gradually became violent . As established by the subsequently created parliamentary inquiry commission tasked with the elucidation of the causes and consequences of the events following the general elections held on DATE in GPE ( “ the Commission ” ) , CARDINAL incidents of poorly planned intervention by a fire truck and riot police brought the crowd to a point beyond which massive violent acts could no longer be prevented . Following violent attacks and stone throwing , which met very weak police resistance , CARDINAL violent protesters were eventually able to take over the lower floors of ORG and ORG buildings . They looted those floors and set the canteen in FAC alight . During TIME , several fires broke out in the ORG building , some of them breaking out after full control over the building was recovered by the authorities at TIME

At TIME on DATE various police and special forces units started a massive operation aimed at re - establishing public order . However , as established by the Commission , excessive force was used and all those still present in the main square were arrested , regardless of whether they had acted violently or not . The arrests continued for DATE . The media reported cases and showed video footage of young people being arrested and/or beaten by both uniformed police and plain - clothed officers in the city centre during DATE and thereafter , long after the protests ended on TIME DATE .

According to the applicant , on DATE he and his friend PERSON went to the centre of PERSON to see the protests .

Having spent some time peacefully attending the protests , they stopped a taxi with the intention of returning home . However , they were forced into the taxi by CARDINAL plain - clothed police officers who did not identify themselves . The officers ordered the driver to drive to GPE police station . The applicant and PERSON were taken to that police station and locked in a cell which was cold , unfurnished and lacked access to daylight .

At TIME on DATE an officer in police uniform entered the cell . He was accompanied by the CARDINAL arresting officers , who started beating the applicant and PERSON for no reason . The applicant lost consciousness and woke up with blood running from his nose and upper lip . No medical help was given to him .

According to the record of the applicant ’s arrest , he was arrested on DATE at TIME The reason indicated in the record was that he had been “ caught in the act and the investigating authority suspects that he may abscond ” . No further details were given .

On DATE the applicant was transferred to the detention facility of ORG ( “ the ORG ” ) , where he was held together with CARDINAL other people in a cell measuring QUANTITY , was given meagre quantities of inedible food and was denied water . The cell lacked access to daylight and ventilation . According to the Government , the applicant was examined by a prison doctor on DATE . No signs of ill - treatment were noted .

On DATE an investigating judge from ORG , Judge PERSON , accepted a prosecutor ’s request to order the applicant ’s detention pending trial for DATE . The hearing took place at the ORG ’s premises . On TIME , the applicant was transferred to prison no . CARDINAL . On the way there , he was allegedly made to pass through a “ death corridor ” formed of police officers , each of whom hit him as he passed by .

On DATE the ORG quashed the investigating judge ’s decision of DATE and ordered the applicant ’s release .

According to the Government , the applicant was not ill - treated during his detention or his transfers to other detention facilities . Despite being assisted by a lawyer , he made no complaints of such ill - treatment until DATE .

On DATE the applicant complained to the ORG prosecutor ’s office of his ill - treatment . He made a similar complaint to the military prosecutor ’s office on DATE , describing in detail his ill - treatment and the conditions of his detention . He relied on Articles CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the Convention and noted that he had not received any reply to his complaint of DATE . The stamps present on his complaint of CARDINAL DATE reveal that the case file was received by the military prosecutor ’s office on DATE .

Also on DATE the applicant was examined by a doctor , who found an abrasion on his face which had formed a scab and a bruise accompanying an abrasion on his upper lip on the right side , which were considered to be injuries that had not caused damage to his health . According to the applicant , he was not told to take off his clothes , and for this reason the doctor did not establish the presence of other injuries , notably on his back .

NORP In a report dated DATE the military prosecutor dealing with the applicant ’s complaint noted that requests had been made to ORG ( without specifying the nature of the requests ) but that no answer had been received . In the absence of such materials no decision as to next steps could be made . The prosecutor therefore asked for an extension of the period for finalising the case until DATE . This request was granted .

On CARDINAL DATE the same prosecutor noted that on CARDINAL DATE ORG had been asked to carry out an internal investigation to identify the officers who had allegedly ill - treated the applicant . As no officers from GPE police station had been heard , the prosecutor asked for an extension of the period for finalising the case until CARDINAL DATE . This request was granted .

CARDINALand his friend PERSON had been heard . The officers who were on duty at GPE police station on DATE were still to be heard . In such circumstances , the prosecutor asked for an extension of the period for finalising the case until DATE . This request was granted .

On DATE the military prosecutor decided not to initiate a criminal investigation into the applicant ’s allegations of ill - treatment . He noted that S. had not confirmed having been ill - treated or having seen the applicant being ill - treated . All the police officers had denied any wrongdoing and the officer on guard had denied that anyone had entered the applicant ’s cell during TIME DATE . That officer had not seen any injuries on the applicant ’s body when the applicant had returned from his interview with the investigators concerning his alleged participation in mass disorder on DATE . The CARDINAL officers who had arrested the applicant ( GPE , ORG and ORG ) stated that they had brought him and S. to ORG police station and had then returned to the centre of PERSON , where they had guarded Government buildings until TIME on DATE . They had not returned to the police station and had not entered any cells there . Moreover , according to a report concerning a medical examination of the applicant on DATE , no injuries had been noted on the applicant ’s body . The prosecutor considered that the injuries on the applicant ’s face could have been caused during his participation in the riots in the centre of PERSON .

NORP By letter dated DATE the military prosecutor ’s office informed the applicant of the decision taken on DATE .

On DATE the applicant complained about the prosecutor ’s decision to the military prosecutor ’s office . He noted that he had been in police custody DATE and that his injuries had appeared during that period . Moreover , none of the arresting officers had noted any injuries on his body at the time of his arrest . He noted the discrepancies between the CARDINAL medical reports of CARDINAL and DATE and called into question the professionalism and independence of the doctor who had filed the report of the examination on DATE . He also noted that PERSON was a former police officer and might have given a statement in support of his former colleagues , either out of solidarity with them or after having been threatened . The applicant referred to his complaint , in which he had noted that he could identify the people who had ill - treated him , but that no identity parade had been organised to verify his claim in that regard .

On DATE the military prosecutor ’s office rejected the applicant ’s complaint as ill - founded . The prosecutor referred to S. ’s statement that he had not seen any ill - treatment occurring .

On DATE the applicant complained to ORG about the decision not to initiate criminal proceedings . He considered that the investigation had been protracted , given that his complaint of DATE had reached the military prosecutor ’s office DATE . Having received no response to his complaint , he had made another complaint on CARDINAL DATE . After a decision had been taken on DATE after his initial complaint – not to initiate a criminal investigation , he had been informed of it DATE . The applicant repeated his arguments made in his complaint of CARDINAL DATE and added that the prosecution had not ordered any additional medical examination in order to dispel the doubts concerning the discrepancies between the medical reports of CARDINAL and DATE . The applicant also noted that he had been undergoing a series of extensive medical examinations which would confirm his ill - treatment .

On DATE the Memoria Rehabilitation Centre for Torture Victims , a non - governmental organisation financed by ORG and a member of ORG of ORG ( ORG ) , issued an Extract of the medical file ( NORP din PERSON ) concerning the applicant ’s examination during the period DATE . He appears to have undergone detailed medical tests and examinations by various medical specialists . According to the document , the applicant had suffered , inter alia , the consequences of a head injury including intracranial hypertension syndrome and post - traumatic stress disorder , which had had both physical and psychological effects on him . The document was submitted to ORG .

On DATE ORG rejected the applicant ’s complaint as unfounded . It found that the prosecutor had interviewed all those concerned and noted that PERSON had not confirmed the applicant ’s allegations . The ORG decisions having been adopted in full compliance with the law , there was no reason to quash the decisions taken .

On DATE ORG ( “ the ORG ” ) refused to extend the appointment of Judge PERSON ORG , following which he was dismissed from his position as a judge by the acting President of GPE . The reason for the ORG ’s decision was that the judge had examined a number of cases concerning the events of DATE outside the courtroom and at the LOC of ORG , which was “ a grave violation of the LAW and of LAW ” .

On DATE the criminal case against the applicant was discontinued for lack of evidence that he had committed a crime .

The relevant parts of the report by PERSON , Commissioner for Human Rights of ORG , following his visit to GPE from DATE , read as follows :

Commissioner PERSON and his delegation visited GPE DATE after the post - electoral demonstrations of DATE . The specific issue of the treatment of the people detained in relation to the events was the central focus of the Commissioner ’s attention .

The majority of the persons interviewed by the Commissioner ’s delegation , who had been arrested in connection with the DATE post - electoral demonstrations , alleged that they had been beaten – some of them severely - by police officers . In several cases , the medical expert accompanying the Commissioner directly observed physical marks consistent with those allegations . Moreover , the medical files in the establishments visited contained records of injuries which were consistent with the ORG accounts .

Representatives of the NORP authorities accepted that police had abused their powers in the aftermath of the protests when dealing with persons deprived of their liberty , and expressed their resolve to overcome the problem of ill - treatment by the police . It was strongly underlined by the Commissioner that such large - scale violations of the fundamental right to be free of ill - treatment must never be allowed to recur , and that active steps must be taken to pursue accountability whenever individual cases of ill - treatment emerge ...

... CARDINAL . NORP The Minister of the Interior informed the Commissioner that CARDINAL people were detained in the aftermath of the CARDINAL - CARDINAL DATE demonstrations on suspicion that they had committed criminal offences . CARDINAL of those persons were still in custody as of DATE , remanded in Prison No . CARDINAL , an institution under the authority of ORG . Moreover , CARDINAL people , including CARDINAL young women , had been detained on administrative charges related to the events in question ; all of those persons had been released by the time of the Commissioner ’s visit .

Based on the information at the Commissioner ’s disposal , the persons apprehended in the aftermath of the demonstrations were brought to CARDINAL of the following police establishments in GPE : ORG , or ORG , GPE , PERSON , PERSON and GPE district police stations . People who were initially detained in CARDINAL of the district police stations were then transferred to the detention facility at ORG .

NORP The Commissioner received no complaints regarding the treatment of persons in Prison No . CARDINAL . However , the majority of the persons interviewed by the Commissioner ’s delegation , who had been arrested in connection with the DATE post - electoral demonstrations , alleged that they had been physically ill - treated by police officers . In most cases , the persons who were subjected to the alleged ill - treatment were relatively young ( under CARDINAL ) . As ORG has himself observed , the alleged ill - treatment broadly related to CARDINAL different situations : CARDINAL ) at the time of apprehension ; CARDINAL ) during transport to a detention facility ; and CARDINAL ) ill - treatment within the detention facility , including during questioning with the objective of extracting a confession .

The physical ill - treatment alleged included punches , kicks and blows with rubber batons , wooden sticks , the butts of firearms , or other blunt and hard objects . Certain persons claimed that the ill - treatment was sufficiently severe or prolonged so as to make them lose consciousness at least once and/or to result in fractures or permanent nerve damage . Many persons also alleged that they had been threatened with physical violence or even with summary execution , verbally abused , and/or subjected to humiliating treatment ...

According to the Minister of ORG , of the CARDINAL persons admitted to Prison No . CARDINAL following a period of deprivation of liberty by the police , CARDINAL persons displayed various degrees of injuries . The Minister of the Interior informed the Commissioner that , as of DATE , CARDINAL complaints concerning ill - treatment were being processed . ORG indicated that his office had received CARDINAL complaints as of that date , and that investigations in CARDINAL further cases had been initiated ex officio . In addition , CARDINAL criminal prosecution had been initiated .

In several cases , the medical expert accompanying the Commissioner directly observed physical marks consistent with allegations of ill - treatment , despite the fact that DATE had elapsed since the time the alleged ill - treatment occurred . Moreover , the files studied by the Commissioner ’s medical expert contained records of injuries which were consistent with the accounts of physical ill - treatment given by the persons who had been in police custody . For instance , the records in ORG in GPE revealed that QUANTITY persons had sought medical attention during the relevant period because of injuries they sustained due to use of force by the police . Of those , CARDINAL had to be hospitalised because of severe injuries , including concussions , contusions of the kidneys , fractured limbs or ribs , and/or multiple soft tissue injuries ...

In contrast to the prison and hospital medical records , the Commissioner ’s medical expert observed that the records of injuries kept in the detention facility at ORG in GPE were extremely cursory and superficial . The explanation given for this was that the feldsher ( paramedic ) employed in that facility was not a forensic doctor . These deficiencies in the recording of injuries in police establishments have already been highlighted by ORG for the Prevention of Torture ( ORG ) in the report on the ORG ’s DATE visit to GPE . ... The ORG made a detailed recommendation on screening for injuries of persons within TIME of their admission to a police detention facility outside the presence of police officers , and on the imperative to record any injuries in a thorough manner . If the injuries recorded are consistent with allegations of ill - treatment , they should immediately be brought to the attention of the relevant prosecutor and an examination should be ordered by a recognised forensic doctor . In the interests of preventing ill - treatment , the Commissioner strongly urges the GPE authorities to provide for proper screening , recording and reporting of injuries , in light of the ORG ’s recommendations on this subject .

... CARDINAL . NORP ... representatives of ORG ( the National Preventive Mechanism under the UN OPCAT ) were reportedly prevented on DATE from visiting certain police establishments in GPE where persons were being held , including ORG and FAC .

The Commissioner received many complaints about the conditions of detention in police establishments following the large - scale arrests ; most of these involved reports of serious overcrowding , very poor hygiene , lighting and ventilation , as well as the lack of provision of food , clean bedding , and personal hygiene or sanitary items . As already noted , the Commissioner only visited CARDINAL police detention facility , i.e. the one at ORG in GPE . The Commissioner observed that the material conditions in the cells were poor , with very dim lighting and bad ventilation ; in general , the conditions corresponded quite closely to the descriptions provided by the persons who had been held in those cells . As for the issue of overcrowding , it was confirmed by the staff that the capacity of the establishment was exceeded during the dates in question .

... DATE . It is of great concern to the Commissioner that a large number of the CARDINAL persons – certain of whom were minors - arrested in the context of or following the protests were subjected to ill - treatment by the police , some of it severe .

... CARDINAL . The Commissioner ’s official interlocutors accepted that police had abused their powers in the aftermath of the protests when dealing with persons deprived of their liberty . The Commissioner underlined strongly that such large - scale violations of the fundamental right to be protected from ill - treatment must never be allowed to recur , and that active steps must be taken to pursue accountability whenever individual cases of ill - treatment emerge .

The Prosecutor General stated that he will investigate each case brought to his attention and also take initiatives himself upon information indicative of ill - treatment even in the absence of a complaint . According to him , special prosecutors which have not had working relations with police departments implicated in the events were being assigned to the cases . ”

The relevant part of the report of the visit to GPE carried out by ORG for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment ( “ the ORG ” ) from CARDINAL to DATE read as follows :

“ CARDINAL . The main purpose of the visit was to assess the manner in which investigations were being carried out into cases possibly involving ill - treatment by the police in the context of post - election events in DATE in GPE . The visit also provided an opportunity to review the treatment of persons detained by the police .

In the course of DATE , the ORG received reports from various sources according to which , following the parliamentary elections of DATE , CARDINAL of persons had been apprehended by the police after violent incidents occurred during public protests in front of the Presidency , ORG and Government buildings in PERSON . Those reports referred to severe physical ill - treatment at the time of apprehension , during transportation and/or during subsequent police custody . ORG also received information indicating that some persons had died as a result of police action on DATE .

... CARDINAL . During the DATE visit , the delegation observed that the practice of holding remand prisoners in police temporary detention facilities ( izolatoare de detenţie preventivă , abbreviated “ ORG ” ) continued unabated . In the report on the DATE visit , the ORG called upon the GPE authorities to give the highest priority to the implementation of the decision to transfer the responsibility for persons remanded in custody to ORG . In response , ORG indicated that it was in favour of a temporary transfer of responsibility for IDPs to ORG , pending the building of pre - trial establishments under the latter ORG authority . However , at DATE visit , the Minister of Justice indicated that the responsibility for the IDPs could not be taken over by his Ministry because conditions of detention in these facilities were substandard .

The ORG shares the view that IDPs do not offer suitable conditions for holding persons remanded in custody . ORG would nevertheless like to stress that , in the interests of the prevention of ill - treatment , the sooner a criminal suspect passes into the hands of a custodial authority which is functionally and institutionally separate from the police , the better . The delegation ’s findings from the DATE visit support that ; most cases of alleged police ill - treatment in the context of the DATE events had emerged only after the persons concerned had been transferred to an establishment under ORG or released . ...

... CARDINAL . NORP In the course of the DATE visit , the ORG ’s delegation heard a remarkably large number of credible and consistent allegations of police ill - treatment in the context of the post - election events in DATE . Many persons interviewed referred to the remarks made by police staff , which suggested that the alleged ill - treatment was inflicted in retaliation for acts of violence against the police during DATE of DATE .

... CARDINAL . The delegation also heard numerous accounts , from women , men and juveniles alike , of physical ill - treatment whilst in police custody in the course of CARDINAL DATE and/or during DATE . Most persons interviewed who had not been released shortly after apprehension complained of repeated or prolonged beatings during the initial questioning by operational police officers or between interrogation sessions ( e.g. kicks and blows with a truncheon or with a plastic bottle filled with water ) . The delegation also heard widespread allegations of threats of physical ill - treatment ( including rape ) and killing during the initial police questioning . The persons interviewed referred not only to the retaliatory nature of the alleged ill - treatment , but also claimed that it was aimed at extracting statements from them .

Many persons interviewed also alleged that they had been hit with truncheons and kicked when going through a “ corridor ” of police officers before entering a police establishment or transfer .

Further , the delegation received a few allegations of ill - treatment by custodial staff ( e.g. kicks ) upon admission to the ORG of ORG in PERSON .

Most of the above allegations were supported by forensic or other medical evidence . In some cases , the competent prosecuting authorities considered that the ill - treatment alleged was such that it could amount to torture ... The ORG shares this view . Moreover , the above findings lead the ORG to the conclusion that , rather than isolated incidents , there were patterns of alleged ill - treatment .

... CARDINAL . In its previous visit report , the ORG stressed that effective screening for injuries by health - care staff can make a significant contribution to the prevention of ill - treatment of persons detained by the police , and it made a series of recommendations designed to improve the procedures followed by feldshers working in IDPs . During the DATE visit , the delegation observed the same shortcomings as those identified in the past . There were undue delays in the examination of newly admitted detainees ( i.e. of DATE ) . The screening for injuries was generally superficial and was routinely carried out in the presence of custodial or operational staff , and a copy of the report drawn up following an examination was accessible to police staff . Not surprisingly , the injuries sustained by detained persons in the context of the DATE events had frequently been detected and/or recorded only after release or transfer to a penitentiary establishment .

In contrast , the screening for injuries on arrival at Penitentiary establishment No . CARDINAL in PERSON was generally of a better standard : newly arrived remand prisoners were examined by prison health - care staff shortly after admission and reports describing injuries observed during medical screening were forwarded to the prosecuting authorities . However , the recording of injuries was not fully satisfactory : in a number of instances , the description of lesions was succinct and the records rarely contained the ORG accounts as to the origin of their injuries .

... CARDINAL . ... A new system of free legal assistance for indigent criminal suspects came into operation in DATE , following the entry into force of ORG of DATE . However , a considerable number of detained persons interviewed by the delegation complained about the quality of ex officio lawyers . The inaction of certain ex officio lawyers during the DATE events when their clients displayed visible injuries or alleged ill - treatment provoked scepticism about their independence from the police and the prosecuting authorities .

The right of persons in police custody to have access to a doctor ( including to CARDINAL of their own choice ) , is still not expressly guaranteed by law ... Many persons who were in police custody in the context of the DATE events complained that , despite repeated requests for independent medical assistance , they had been refused such assistance . In some cases , police staff allegedly denied access to a doctor in order to obtain a confession or other statement from the injured detained persons concerned . Further , it appeared in a few cases of persons who had presented visible injuries that medical care had not been provided to them on the grounds that they had not specifically requested it . Such situations not only deprive detained persons of a safeguard which can play a significant role in the prevention of ill - treatment , but it may also have serious repercussions on the health of persons in police custody . Clearly , access to an independent doctor should not be left to the discretion of police officers .

... CARDINAL . Control of police establishments by public prosecutors has been reinforced over DATE since the first ORG visit to GPE in DATE . Shortly after the post - election events in DATE , prosecutors paid visits to police detention facilities . The delegation was informed that they had received and processed a number of complaints of ill - treatment in the context of such inspections .

However , most persons met by the delegation who had been detained at the time claimed that , before such visits , they had been warned by police staff not to make any complaints to the visiting prosecutors . Further , prosecutors were apparently accompanied by police staff and did not seek to have private interviews with detained persons .

... CARDINAL . ... In the aftermath of the DATE events , a number of persons met by the delegation had been interviewed in private by members of the [ ORG ] while in detention . ... Further , DATE , on CARDINAL occasions , members of the ORG had reportedly not been able to carry out their tasks ; denial of access ( on CARDINAL and DATE ) , delays in access ( of TIME ) and refusal to allow them to consult custody registers were among the major problems encountered . Police officers met by the delegation excused the problems of access by a lack of information , in particular as regards the composition of the ORG .

In short , the post - election period in DATE had been a litmus test of the ability of independent visiting bodies to carry out their functions effectively . However , the delegation ’s findings suggest that there had been serious shortcomings in their operation .

... CARDINAL . The ORG recognises that the high number of cases possibly involving police ill - treatment in relation to the DATE events constituted a significant challenge for the prosecuting authorities in carrying out their task . However , this should have prompted them to adopt a more proactive and holistic approach , with a particular emphasis on establishing a timeline of the incidents , including all the police officers involved , and all the alleged victims , potential witnesses and outside professionals ( e.g. medical staff ) . Indeed , many complaints and other information indicative of ill - treatment consistently referred to the same incidents , at the same locations , with the same patterns of alleged ill - treatment and , possibly , the same police officers involved . It is clearly a flawed approach to carry out individual investigations into such cases while treating them as unrelated episodes and without proper co - ordination .

... CARDINAL . In almost all the cases examined at the time of the visit , the action taken had still not led to the identification of the perpetrators of alleged ill - treatment and/or any officials who may have condoned or encouraged it . Prosecutors met by the delegation explained this situation by the impossibility in most cases to identify suspects because police officers were wearing balaclavas , or the fact that the position of the victims did not allow them to see the police officers allegedly inflicting blows . However , it clearly appeared during the DATE visit that no steps had been taken by the prosecuting authorities in a number of cases where victims indicated that they would recognise the police officers involved in the alleged ill - treatment ...

Further , key information that could have led to the identification of potential suspects and witnesses among members of the ORG “ Fulger ” ( such as apprehension reports ) had not yet been examined in the context of investigations into alleged ill - treatment ; by contrast , such information was being reviewed by prosecutors investigating mass disorder and usurpation of power on DATE . It is also noteworthy that the responsibility of senior ORG officials and police officers was not being addressed by the prosecutors dealing with cases of alleged ill - treatment ; in the ORG ’s view , the fact that such an important issue was being dealt with by prosecutors investigating mass disorder and usurpation of power could seriously undermine the impartiality of any investigative action taken in this respect .

When investigating cases possibly involving ill - treatment , the prosecuting authorities do not have an obligation of result ; however , they are under an obligation to take appropriate investigative action . Efforts had generally been made by the prosecuting authorities to react to allegations of police ill - treatment in relation to the DATE events , even in the absence of a formal complaint , when this had been brought to their attention . However , the above findings suggest that in many cases the competent prosecutors had not taken all reasonable steps in good time to secure evidence and had failed to make genuine efforts to identify those responsible .

It should also be stressed that many alleged victims interviewed by the delegation , including those who had not yet lodged official complaints , as well as their lawyers , expressed a general lack of confidence in the capability and determination of the prosecuting authorities , including military prosecutors , to carry out effective investigations into cases of police ill - treatment . In the ORG ’s view , if a police complaints mechanism is to enjoy public confidence , it should not only be independent but should be seen to be independent of the police .

In their letter of CARDINAL DATE , the NORP authorities informed the ORG that , following the visit , the prosecuting authorities “ moved to other investigation tactics ” , placing a particular emphasis on the accountability of senior police officers for their actions or lack of action ... ”

The relevant parts of the Report of the parliamentary inquiry commission tasked with the elucidation of the causes and consequences of the events following the general elections held on DATE in GPE ( “ the Commission ” ) read as follows :

“ IV . CARDINAL.CARDINAL.CARDINAL . Number and profile of detainees

... in accordance with the registers held by [ establishments belonging to ORG ] , CARDINAL individuals were arrested on DATE . ... [ The ] majority of these individuals were arrested on DATE .

In addition , an analysis of various detention records and other data provided by the ORG authorities revealed that the arrest of CARDINAL people had not been reflected in the detention centre records . In a number of cases , the registers did not reflect that the detainee had been taken to hospital due to [ his or her ] injuries suffered . Many of the entries as to the reason for the arrest made during DATE noted simply “ from PERSON ( Ştefan cel Mare ) GPE , “ from ORG ” , “ from the FAC ” , “ near Government [ offices ] ” or even “ for clarification ” and “ from office no . ... ” ( probably the office number in the relevant police station from which the detainee had been transferred ) without any further details .

Even though the authorities declared that CARDINAL police and other officers had been injured during the events of DATE , CARDINAL people were arrested for causing such injuries , most others being accused of minor hooliganism and refusing to obey or insulting the police . ORG concluded that “ the simple presence of people in the perimeter of the [ relevant few ] streets and buildings amounted to ‘ sufficient grounds’ for arresting [ them ] and bringing them to the police stations . ”

The ORG found that “ all the concerns expressed by international organisations , the media , NGOs and society as a whole concerning the inadequate and disproportionate actions of the police after the events of DATE have been fully justified . Most people were detained by the police arbitrarily , in the absence of any reasonable suspicion of having committed a crime ; the operative services of ORG have failed to identify the people who committed violent acts against their own colleagues from ORG ; the police committed ill - treatment and acts of torture against individuals held in detention and allowed serious violations of procedural rights guaranteed by the LAW ... ”

IV . DATE . Actions of the courts

For the first time in the modern history of GPE , cases against detainees whom the police suspected of having committed administrative or criminal offences connected with the DATE events were examined inside police sections .

... PERSON , a former investigating Judge of ORG , [ stated to the Commission that he ] only examined cases concerning administrative offences on DATE at the ORG , TIME and CARDINAL:CARDINAL . [ He ] examined QUANTITY cases at the GPD ... Nobody complained of ill - treatment and neither did their lawyers . Moreover , no signs of ill - treatment were apparent . ”

The ORG also drew up statistical data , according to which the judges accepted PERCENT of all the requests made by the prosecutors for the ordering of the detention of individuals accused of various criminal offences in relation to the DATE events . Of the total of CARDINAL such requests , PERCENT were examined outside courtrooms , and a majority of such cases were examined on the ORG ’s premises .

According to the data in the ORG ’s possession , Judge PERSON examined CARDINAL cases on DATE at the ORG . He accepted all the prosecutor ’s requests , spending CARDINAL on each case .

Most of the decisions taken by each investigating judge in the cases connected with the DATE events were virtually identical . Of the CARDINAL appeals lodged by defence lawyers against the decisions remanding their clients , PERCENT were accepted by ORG and the detainees were either released or subjected to preventive measures not involving detention .

All the judges who had examined cases connected with the DATE events declared to the ORG that they had not seen any evident signs of ill - treatment on the persons brought before them . Only in CARDINAL case had a detainee and his lawyer complained of ill - treatment . The ORG noted the discrepancy of these statements with the statements of a number of victims , who had allegedly complained of ill - treatment to the judges , to no avail .

According to a reply from ORG , CARDINAL complaints were received concerning alleged ill - treatment by the police during CARDINAL and DATE . Following medical examinations in respect of CARDINAL of them , CARDINAL were found to have injuries of various degrees of seriousness . In CARDINAL cases criminal investigations have been initiated as a result .

The ORG found that “ the actions of prosecutors in identifying , investigating and punishing cases of torture and ill - treatment during the initial phase were “ reserved ” , sometimes even suggesting that detainees had painted injuries on their bodies ... At the same time ... it was established that prosecutors , as well as judges , did not take firm action to stop acts of torture , even when signs of violence had been visible . ”

The Commission concluded , inter alia , that “ the actions of the police on TIME CARDINAL DATE were disproportionate and unlawful . ” ”

In their report “ ORG : DATE events in GPE ” , ORG ( ORG ) and ORG ( CReDO ) found , inter alia , that :

“ Police [ had ] responded with blunt brutality and untargeted , largely unjustified arrests , beatings and intimidation ;

Arrests and detention in the ORG custody ha[d ] been widely and systematically used as a response by the police ;

PERSON and detentions went in a substantial number of cases with no explanations of the motives and reasons ; ”

The authors of the report also found that PERCENT of those detained had claimed that they had been beaten by the police during their detention , and PERCENT had been beaten during their apprehension . This police brutality resulted in CARDINAL confirmed deaths , with CARDINAL more suspected cases . PERCENT of those detained during the DATE events were not given access to a lawyer within reasonable time and PERCENT of all legal representation had been entrusted to ORG - appointed legal aid lawyers .

The relevant part of the Declaration of the Moldovan Bar Association ( “ the MBA ” ) of DATE reads as follows :

“ [ The MBA ] condemns both the violent actions of certain persons during the protests of DATE and the disproportionally violent and repressive actions of the ORG authorities after DATE .

... [ The MBA ] declares unacceptable and condemns instances of refusing lawyers access to their clients and to the materials in the relevant case files and [ the fact ] that many arrestees were refused access to a lawyer of their own choice , having been offered , against their will , legal assistance by lawyers [ appointed under the legal aid scheme ] , some of whom had had a purely formal role and who , by their participation , validated the unlawful acts committed in respect of the detainees ... ” .


CASE OF SOCIALIST PARTY AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

Violation of Art. 11;Not necessary to examine Art. 6-1;Not necessary to examine Art. 9;Not necessary to examine Art. 10;Not necessary to examine Art. 14;Not necessary to examine Art. 18;Not necessary to examine P1-1;Not necessary to examine P1-3;Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed;Non-pecuniary damage - financial award;Costs and expenses (Convention proceedings) - claim dismissed

C. Russo;John Freeland;N. Valticos;R. Pekkanen

ORG ( “ the SP ” ) , the first applicant , was a political party that was dissolved by ORG ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) .

Mr PERSON and Mr PERSON , the second and third applicants , were respectively Chairman and former Chairman of the ORG . They live in GPE .

The ORG was formed on DATE . On DATE , its constitution and programme were submitted to the office of ORG at ORG for assessment of their compatibility with LAW and Law no . PERSON on the regulation of political parties ( “ PERSON no . CARDINAL ” – see paragraphs CARDINAL and CARDINAL below ) .

On DATE , when the ORG was preparing to take part in a general election , ORG at ORG ( “ ORG Counsel ” ) applied to ORG for an order dissolving the ORG . Relying in particular on passages from its programme , he accused the party of having sought to establish the domination of the working class with a view to establishing a dictatorship of the proletariat ( Articles CARDINAL , DATE and DATE and former LAW and sections CARDINAL and CARDINAL ) of PERSON no . MONEY ) .

In a judgment of CARDINAL DATE , published in ORG of CARDINAL DATE , ORG dismissed the application as unfounded , as it considered that the political objectives stated in the ORG 's programme did not infringe the LAW .

Criminal proceedings were then brought in ORG against some of the leaders of the ORG , including PERSON . They were accused of spreading harmful propaganda in favour of the domination of one social class over the others , contrary to LAW , as then worded ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . The allegation against PERSON was based in particular on speeches he had made at CARDINAL public meetings on DATE at ORG and DATE at Van and on an article that had appeared in a political journal on CARDINAL DATE , that is to say before his election as Chairman of the ORG on DATE . Following the repeal of LAW of LAW by Law no . ORG of DATE ( the Prevention of Terrorism Act ) , the accused were all acquitted . The ORG later published the speeches in question under the titles : “ PERSON , PERSON ateşi yaktı ” and “ FAC , GPE ekin ” ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) .

On DATE ORG DATE which had responsibility under the LAW for ensuring the fairness of elections DATE decided that the ORG satisfied all the conditions necessary to take part in the general election of DATE . The party consequently ran an election campaign .

On DATE ORG applied to ORG for a second time for an order dissolving the ORG . He accused the party of having carried on activities likely to undermine the territorial integrity of the ORG and the unity of the nation contrary to Articles CARDINAL , DATE , DATE and DATE and former LAW , and sections CARDINAL , CARDINAL and CARDINAL ) of PERSON no . PERSON .

In support of his application , ORG relied in particular on the following extracts from the ORG 's election publications and from oral statements made by its Chairman , PERSON , at public meetings and on television .

“ ... Dear friends , ... the second dynamic is the NORP dynamic . It is the call for equality and freedom , [ it is ] the NORP ' claim to rights as a nation . It is a request that the rights which the NORP enjoy ... be granted to the NORP also .

At DATE , a war of independence was waged ... in circumstances in which imperialists occupied the country and NORP and NORP depended on one another and had to unite and fight , side by side . The LAW provided : ' The homeland is composed of the lands where the NORP and the NORP live . ' At the GPE and ORG , oral and written declarations were made recognising the ethnic social and geographical rights of NORP ... once the war was over and the men had hung up their weapons , an official ideology developed ... as though there was no longer any need for people from GPE , GPE or ORG to fight ... Under that official ideology , there was no longer any room for NORP . There were no more NORP . Henceforth , only NORP existed ... ” ( pages CARDINAL–CARDINAL )

“ ... they can make this country ... a homeland of cultures , brotherhood , workers , [ a homeland ] where there is voluntary unity , where nations freely decide on their future and freely unite if they so wish ... Long live brotherhood between NORP and NORP ! Long live the NORP and NORP peoples ! ” ( page CARDINAL )

“ ... The collapse started where the regime was most tyrannical and most vulnerable . The [ political ] parties of the status quo failed to the east of the LOC ... [ They ] are no longer to be seen in the lands where the NORP people live ... ( page CARDINAL )

Why have the parties of the status quo disappeared from the NORP provinces ? Because they are nationalists ... NORP nationalism has become bankrupt in the lands where the NORP problem will be resolved . NORP nationalism has drawn its borders . It has divided ORG into CARDINAL parts , situated to the east and west of the LOC . NORP nationalism and its regime are in the process of drowning in the LOC . That is what is known as a bankrupt regime . ( page CARDINAL )

... After the mountains , the ORG also lost the villages and towns . That is why it counts directly on deterring the masses . ORG terror seeks to establish a new regime in GPE , starting from the east ... ( page CARDINAL )

The ORG pays village guards and special forces ... which it feeds to kill NORP through the taxes it collects from the people . The cost of the bullets fired at NORP , of petrol used in cross - border operations ... , in short , the cost of [ this ] special war is borne by the people ... To bring inflation and ... poverty to an end , a peaceful solution must be found to the NORP problem . The NORP problem is at the same time a NORP problem ... Living freely , in brotherhood , heart to heart , in peace and harmony with the NORP people is a need ... for the NORP people ... NORP and NORP are but CARDINAL people . No Turk will be entitled to enter paradise if a single NORP [ still ] remains in hell . ORG is determined to fight until the last NORP is saved from hell . ( pages CARDINAL )

ORG is present on both sides of the LOC . It is the party of brotherhood between NORP and NORP . ORG determination in the face of the NORP problem has been demonstrated by its fight to combat ORG pressure on the NORP nation ... , its shared destiny in the poor NORP peasants ' fight for survival ... , the fact that it has overcome the barrier of fear by holding meetings with CARDINAL of people in the NORP villages and towns and has explained the NORP problem to working people throughout GPE ... Our party imparts this awareness . It sees a solution in the common destiny of peoples and their combat . To remedy the NORP problem , ORG has courage , ... a cause and a programme . ( pages CARDINAL )

The NORP nation has a full and unconditional right to self - determination . It may , if it wishes , create a separate ORG . The interest of the proletariat lies in the establishment , through democratic popular revolution , of a voluntary union founded on absolute equality of rights and freedoms . The right to secede is , at all times , an essential condition of that voluntary union .

Whether or not people live together depends on the free will of nations . So that that will can be expressed , a referendum must be organised in the NORP provinces . During the referendum , those who are in favour of secession must also be allowed freely to express their views .

Under current historical conditions , a solution favourable to the workers of both nations lies in a democratic federal republic , to which the CARDINAL federated GPE adhere on an equal footing . In the federation , power will be exercised through popular assemblies elected democratically by districts , towns , federated GPE and the federal ORG , beginning with the neighbourhoods and villages .

The prefectures and sub - prefectures , ORG governments and the federal government will be the executive bodies of those assemblies and accountable to them .

The popular federal assembly will be composed of CARDINAL assemblies : the assembly of the members of parliament and the assembly of the nations .

The assembly of the members of parliament will be elected in a general election with CARDINAL member of parliament elected by a given number of citizens .

The assembly of nations will be constituted by an equal number of members elected from each of the CARDINAL GPE .

Legislation will be enacted on a majority vote in the CARDINAL assemblies .

Legislation which is rejected by CARDINAL of the assemblies will not come into force .

The Employment Code , and ORG will apply throughout the country and be adopted by the federal bodies .

In those districts and provinces of each ORG where minority groups are in the majority , regional self - determination will be permitted if the people so desire .

The federal LAW will be the common LAW of the CARDINAL nations . It will come into force as soon it has been accepted , by referendum , by a majority in each of the CARDINAL nations . Each ORG will also have its own LAW . LAW will cover an increasing number of matters , to the extent that the federated republics consent thereto .

The flag and national anthem of the federal republic will be the same for NORP and NORP . Each federated ORG will have its own flag and anthem . The federation shall not have a name that refers to CARDINAL of the nations .

Defence of the country , issues of war and peace , and entry into representative treaties in international relations will be the responsibility of the federal bodies .

Each federated ORG will [ however ] be entitled to establish direct commercial and cultural relations with foreign countries and to open consulates .

At each level of government , power will lie solely with the popular assemblies and the local authorities accountable to them . The prefecture , sub - prefectures , security forces and gendarmerie established under the current [ central ] government outside the scope of the proposed administrative system will be abolished . This democratic administrative system will also guarantee national equality and freedom .

Local security forces will receive their orders from local government authorities and be accountable to local assemblies . In the villages , security forces will be composed of local young people , who will receive instructions from village committees .

Seigniory , dependence on the head of a clan or any form of medieval relation that is incompatible with brotherhood or social development shall be abolished by an agrarian reform to be undertaken by the mobilisation of farmers under the direction of the village committees .

In order that regional inequalities that have been aggravated by the market economy may be removed , the federal republic will increase its share of investment in regions that are economically underdeveloped . It will therefore guarantee and develop the economic basis of the union .

With respect to the economy , a federal system of uniform statistics will be used .

The freedom and right of each nation and each national or religious minority to develop its language and culture and to pursue political and associative activities will be guaranteed .

The official languages will be NORP and NORP . Each federated republic will have its own language as its official language . Decisions of the federal bodies will be drafted in both languages . From primary school to university and in all cultural institutions , means of education , research and communication , such as journalism , publishing , radio and television , etc . , will be provided in both languages .

The democratic culture of the NORP nation will be able to develop through the removal of the pressures that have been exerted on it up till now . Those in power will strive for free democratic cultural exchange with NORP and NORP in other countries and an international culture common to all nations of the world to flourish in a pluralist and active environment .

All bodies in power will endeavour [ on the one hand ] to eradicate , with all its foundations , the former culture idolising violence and advocating the use of force to solve problems between nations and in society and [ on the other hand ] to spread among the people an internationalist proletarian culture that respects mankind and despises violence .

Against the fundamentalist nationalist culture according to which the history of the lands in which we live began with the war of ORG and against all other forms of nationalism will be developed an internationalist , universal , humanitarian and democratic culture that will seek new cultural sources , enriched by the contribution of different peoples stemming from the historic depths of our country , and will draw on those resources . Original names will no longer be changed as they reflect the wealth of our country 's universal culture ; every place will be called by its known , established name . ” ( pages CARDINAL–CARDINAL )

“ ORG is the last bridge between the NORP and NORP people ... The current status quo has failed with respect to the NORP problem and its deafening collapse can be heard from here ... What is the only possible solution ? ... This issue can only be resolved by respecting the wish of the NORP people ... the real remedy lies with the NORP people . We will ask the NORP : ' What do you want ? ' ... if , conversely , they seek secession , we will respect their wish . We will organise a referendum . We will ask the NORP people ... , everyone , from PERSON to NORP : ' Do you want to create a separate ORG in our land or not ? ' ORG prefers unification ... Who is inciting secession ? Oppression [ is ] . The oppression of the NORP people by ORG . We will defend unification by putting an end to that oppression and that will be proof of [ our ] acceptance of the NORP people 's will ... ORG will defend the union of the CARDINAL peoples within the federation and the joint [ exercise ] of power ... ORG is the last bridge between the NORP and NORP people ... No party other than ORG has shared the NORP ' destiny , taken up a position against ORG or is able to maintain that position . ”

“ ... Let us now define [ what they call ] internal security . That is the NORP problem . If you put it in terms of internal security ... , you will have recourse to the gendarmes . If the problem is seen as a NORP one , you will resolve it by democracy and freedom . In fact , it is the present regime that has transformed the LOC into a border ... It was an economic border ... Then , they made the LOC a political border ... and , lastly , an ideological one ... NORP nationalism has drowned in the LOC ; it can not cross it ... because nationalism has no place in these lands ... There is a NORP problem but also a NORP problem ... a fraternal solution will come from ORG . The [ other ] CARDINAL parties have become separatist ... because they were nationalist . We offer a fraternal solution , a federation . The NORP nation should be given the right to self - determination . That is how the right conditions for unification will come about ... Union can not be achieved through force . Your solutions have failed . You will see , the ORG solution will prevail . ”

“ ... we will put a stop to the special war being [ waged ] in the east ... we will end it by replacing it with a programme of brotherhood between NORP and NORP ... and , lastly , on a structural level , a federation in which both nations are on an equal footing ... They say that they are troubled by the fact that the LOC is a border . Who made the LOC a border ? They did ! ... PERSON , voluntary union on an equal footing of the NORP and NORP nations within a federation , provided that the NORP nation consents and so decides as master of its destiny and accepts it : that is the solution proposed by ORG . The CARDINAL peoples , CARDINAL nations are obliged [ to accept ] ... ”

“ ... Because the NORP of the village of Botan are standing up they are in the process of becoming their own masters ... Is it you , the status quo , that has forbidden the use of the name ' NORP ' ? The NORP people are standing up ; they are becoming the centre of the debate ; through their acts , they are imposing their identity and celebrating the PERSON ... The oppressed NORP are establishing their LAW , making laws . ”

“ ... ORG says that the NORP problem can not be resolved by soldiers or bullets . The solution lies in independence ... in equality . The NORP and NORP nations should have the same rights . The NORP and NORP nations will form a popular republic ... and then one of them will survive and the other be oppressed ; that is indefensible ... It is ORG that is with the oppressed NORP people ... By standing up , the NORP people have begun to demonstrate the combat they have been waging for DATE ... The NORP people will bring about a new revolution ... The oppressed NORP people ... are coming to join ORG ... Long live the awakening ! Long live our people ! ”

“ ... NORP nationalism has drowned in the LOC ... The ORG has oppressed the NORP people to the point of erasing their name , even of prohibiting its use ; but bans come to nothing ... The NORP reality is there and is asserting itself ... NORP and NORP remain brothers ; there can be no brotherhood where there is slavery ; there can be no brotherhood if one is master and the other slave ; everyone should be equal and have the same rights ... There can be no hope if NORP and NORP do not unite ... This equation should be noted down somewhere : the NORP people plus the oppressed NORP people equals democracy , independence and freedom ... Long live GPE ! ... ”

Relying on an audiovisual recording of the latter meeting , PERSON nevertheless denied , at a hearing before FAC on DATE , that he had uttered the last sentence .

On DATE ORG sent ORG application to the ORG , whose counsel filed preliminary written observations on DATE and full observations on DATE , in which they first requested a hearing or , at the very least , leave to make further submissions orally . ORG acceded to the latter request only and heard the party Chairman , PERSON , on DATE , who had ceased to be Chairman of the party a short time before .

Before the Constitutional Court the ORG 's representatives firstly contested the constitutionality of certain provisions of Law no . PERSON on which ORG relied . They also argued that the court should not admit the ORG 's publications ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) in evidence against that party . They said that CARDINAL of the publications were copies of a speech made by PERSON before his election as party Chairman on DATE ; furthermore , they had been examined by ORG and found not to contravene the law ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) .

The party representatives went on to point out that on DATE ORG had dismissed the first application to have the ORG dissolved on the basis of its programme ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) . They maintained that the court would be contradicting itself if it now decided to dissolve the ORG purely because of PERSON oral statements , which , in the case before the court , were merely reiterations of paragraph CARDINAL of the programme , which had already been reviewed by ORG . They noted , lastly , that since the enactment of PERSON no . ORG ( the Prevention of Terrorism Act ) which had , in particular , repealed LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) , it was no longer illegal to carry on ORG activities ; in their submission , if CARDINAL political party was treated differently from the others , the aim pursued by the NORP legislature would be defeated .

Pursuant to section CARDINAL of Law no . PERSON , ORG made an order on DATE dissolving the ORG , which entailed ipso jure the liquidation of the party and the transfer of its assets to the ORG , in accordance with LAW . The order was published in ORG on DATE . As a consequence , the founders and managers of the party were banned from holding similar office in any other political body ( former LAW see paragraph QUANTITY below ) .

In its judgment ORG noted at the outset that the impugned publications of the ORG bore the name and signature of its Chairman , PERSON , who was also the person who had made the oral statements on television . Those publications and statements accordingly also bound the ORG and consequently were admissible as relevant evidence under LAW no . PERSON .

ORG did not consider that either its or ORG earlier judgments ( see paragraphs CARDINAL–CARDINAL above ) in any way affected its examination of the case before it , which concerned the political activities of the party , not of its leaders . Moreover , it could not accept that the fact that a provision of LAW making it an offence to behave in a certain way had been repealed meant that similar conduct no longer constituted a valid ground for dissolution under PERSON no . PERSON .

ORG observed that unlike the issue that had been decided in its judgment of CARDINAL DATE , the one now before it was based on new facts and evidence and thus gave rise to a different question in law . It no longer had to be determined whether the programme and constitution of the ORG were in conformity with the law , but solely whether its political activities were caught by the relevant prohibitions .

In reaching its decision on the merits , ORG noted , inter alia , that the ORG referred in its political message to CARDINAL nations : the NORP nation and the NORP nation . But it could not be accepted that there were QUANTITY nations within GPE , whose citizens , whatever their ethnic origin , had NORP nationality . In reality , the statements made by the ORG concerning NORP national and cultural rights were intended to create minorities and , ultimately , the establishment of a NORP - Turkish federation , to the detriment of the unity of the NORP nation and the territorial integrity of ORG .

Like all nationals of foreign descent , nationals of NORP origin could freely express their identity , but the LAW and the law precluded them from forming a separate nation and ORG . The ORG was ideologically opposed to the nationalism of PERSON , which was the most fundamental principle underpinning GPE .

The ORG 's political activity was also incompatible in aim with LAW and CARDINAL of LAW , since it was similar to that of terrorist organisations , notwithstanding a difference in the means employed .

In short , objectives which , like those of the ORG , encouraged separatism and incited a socially integrated community to fight for the creation of an independent federated ORG were unacceptable and justified dissolution of the party concerned .

The relevant provisions of the LAW read as follows :

“ GPE is a democratic , secular and social ORG based on the rule of law , respectful of human rights in a spirit of social peace , national solidarity and justice , adhering to the nationalism of PERSON and resting on the fundamental principles set out in the Preamble . ”

“ The State of GPE shall constitute with its territory and nation , an indivisible whole . The official language shall be NORP . ”

“ No amendment may be made or proposed to the provisions of LAW providing that the ORG shall be a Republic , the provisions of LAW concerning the characteristics of the LOC or the provisions of LAW . ”

“ Sovereignty shall reside unconditionally and unreservedly in the nation .

Sovereign power shall not under any circumstances be transferred to an individual , a group or a social class ... ”

“ All individuals shall be equal before the law without any distinction based on language , race , colour , sex , political opinion , philosophical belief , religion , membership of a religious sect or other similar grounds . ”

“ None of the rights and freedoms referred to in the LAW shall be exercised with a view to undermining the territorial integrity of the ORG and the unity of the nation , jeopardising the existence of ORG , abolishing fundamental rights and freedoms , placing the control of the ORG in the hands of a single individual or group , ensuring the domination of CARDINAL social class over other social classes , introducing discrimination on the grounds of language , race , religion or membership of a religious sect , or establishing by any other means a political system based on any of the above concepts and opinions . ”

“ Everyone linked to ORG by nationality shall be NORP . ”

No political party shall be formed which aims to advocate or establish the domination of CARDINAL social class or group , or any form of dictatorship ... ”

“ Political parties shall not engage in activities other than those referred to in their constitutions and programmes , nor shall they disregard the restrictions laid down by LAW , on pain of permanent dissolution .

The decisions and internal running of political parties shall not be contrary to democratic principles .

Immediately a political party is formed , ORG shall verify as a matter of priority that its constitution and programme and the legal position of its founding members are consistent with the LAW and the laws of the land . He shall also monitor its activities .

Political parties may be dissolved by ORG , on an application by ORG .

Founding members and managers , at whatever level , of political parties which have been permanently dissolved may not become founding members , managers or financial controllers of any new political party ... ”

The relevant provisions of Law no . CARDINAL on the regulation of political parties read as follows :

“ Political parties

( a ) shall not aim , strive or incite third parties to

change the NORP form of ORG ; the ... provisions concerning the absolute integrity of ORG territory , the absolute unity of its nation , its official language , its flag or its national anthem ; ... the principle that sovereignty resides unconditionally and unreservedly in the NORP nation ; ... the provision that sovereign power can not be transferred to an individual , a group or a social class ... ;

jeopardise the existence of ORG , abolish fundamental rights and freedoms , introduce discrimination on grounds of language , race , colour , religion or membership of a religious sect , or establish , by any means , a system of government based on any such notion or concept .

( c ) shall not aim to defend or establish the domination of CARDINAL social class over the other social classes or the domination of a community or the setting up of any form of dictatorship ; they shall not carry on activities in pursuit of such aims ... ”

“ Political parties shall not aim to change the principle of the unitary ORG on which GPE is founded , nor carry on activities in pursuit of such an aim . ”

“ Political parties shall not

( a ) assert that there exist within the territory of GPE any national minorities based on differences relating to national or religious culture , membership of a religious sect , race or language ; or

( b ) aim to destroy national unity by proposing , on the pretext of protecting , promoting or disseminating a non - NORP language or culture , to create minorities on the territory of GPE or to engage in similar activities ... ”

“ The constitution , programme and activities of political parties may not contravene the LAW or this PERSON . ”

“ The Constitutional Court shall dissolve a political party whose

( a ) constitution or programme ... is contrary to the provisions of LAW this PERSON ;

( b ) ORG membership , central committee or executive committee ... take a decision , issue a circular or make a statement ... contrary to the provisions of LAW ... , or whose Chairman , Vice - Chairman or ORG Secretary makes any written or oral statement contrary to those provisions ...

( c ) NORP representative appointed ... by the administrative committee ... , makes oral statements on radio or television that are contrary to the provisions ... of this Law ... ”

“ All the assets of political parties dissolved by order of the Constitutional Court shall be transferred to the ORG . ”

LAW , which is referred to in LAW , includes in particular section CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) , which is reproduced above .

At the material time LAW provided :

“ Harmful propaganda

A person who by any means whatsoever spreads propaganda with a view to establishing the domination of CARDINAL social class over the others , annihilating a social class , overturning the fundamental social or economic order established in GPE or destroying the entire political or judicial order of the ORG shall , on conviction , be liable to a term of imprisonment of CARDINAL .

A person who by any means whatsoever spreads propaganda in favour of the ORG 's being governed by an individual or social group to the detriment of republicanism or democratic principles shall , on conviction , be liable to a term of imprisonment of DATE .

Any person who by any means whatsoever spreads propaganda inspired by racist theories aimed at abolishing in whole or in part public - law rights as guaranteed by the LAW or undermining or eliminating patriotic sentiment shall , on conviction , be liable to a term of imprisonment of DATE .