The applicant complained, inter alia, that the Lithuanian legal regulation on conscientious objection had violated his right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, under Article 9 of the Convention.
CASE OF KOHEN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY (European Court of Human Rights) 66616/10 and 3 others
The applications concern the alleged unfairness of criminal proceedings against the applicants owing to (i) the systemic restriction placed on their right of access to a lawyer during the preliminary investigation stage,
CASE OF YEĞER v. TURKEY (European Court of Human Rights) 4099/12
The application concerns under Article 6 of the Convention (i) the alleged unfairness of criminal proceedings owing to the applicant’s trial and conviction in absentia, (ii)
CASE OF TAGANROG LRO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA – 32401/10 and 19 others. The case concerns the forced dissolution of Jehovah’s Witnesses religious organisations in Russia
The case concerns the forced dissolution of Jehovah’s Witnesses religious organisations in Russia, the banning of their religious literature and international website on charges of extremism,
Straume v. Latvia (European Court of Human Rights)
Information Note on the Court’s case-law 263 June 2022 Straume v. Latvia – 59402/14 Judgment 2.6.2022 [Section V]
CASE OF BABAYEV AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN – 71750/13. The present case concerns the allegedly unjustified interference with the applicants’ right to freedom of assembly on account of the dispersal of an unauthorised peaceful protest
Relying on Articles 6, 10 and 11 of the Convention, the applicants alleged that their rights were breached by the domestic authorities. According to the applicants, on 4 and 5 March 2012 the mass media broadcast information
CASE OF ADAMČO v. SLOVAKIA (No. 2) (European Court of Human Rights) 20877/19
The application concerns a situation in which the applicant, being detained, deposited an appeal in a civil-law matter with the prison authorities on the last day of the period for appealing.
CASE OF ŠTEFEK v. CROATIA (European Court of Human Rights) 65173/17
The applicant was employed as an ambulance driver with the Korenica Health Centre (“the employer”), where part of his working time was spent on-call (pripravnost). The case concerns the allegedly excessive costs
CASE OF CROATIA BUS D.O.O. v. CROATIA (European Court of Human Rights) 12261/15
The applicant is a passenger transport company. The application concerns the impossibility to challenge before judicial authorities the Croatian Chamber of Economy’s refusal to approve the applicant company’s itinerary schedule
CASE OF STRAUME v. LATVIA (European Court of Human Rights) 59402/14
The case concerns detriments imposed on the applicant, a chairperson of a trade union board, for having addressed to the State officials overseeing a State-owned company a letter about trade union grievances and concerns,