003-7594380-10445413

issued by the Registrar of the Court ECHR 079 (2023) 15.03.2023 Forthcoming judgments and decisions The European Court of Human Rights will be notifying in writing 13 judgments on Tuesday 21 March 2023 and 38 judgments and / or decisions on Thursday 23 March 2023. Press releases and texts of the judgments and decisions will be available at 10 a.m. (local time) on the Court's Internet site (www.echr.coe.int). Tuesday 21 March 2023 Deltuva v. Lithuania (application no. 38144/20) The applicant, Juozas Deltuva, is a Lithuanian national who was born in 1976 and lives in Kaunas (Lithuania). The case concerns a prosecutorial decision restricting Mr Deltuva's phone calls and direct contact � including with his ten-year-old daughter � while he was on remand, owing to the need to protect the integrity of an investigation against him. He was wanted on suspicion of leading an organised group involved in drug trafficking from the Netherlands to Russia via Lithuania, the trial for which is still pending. He relies on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights. Simona Mihaela Dobre v. Romania (no. 8361/21) The applicant, Simona Mihaela Dobre, is a Romanian national who was born in 1976 and lives in Bucharest. The case concerns the domestic courts' refusal to allow her request for permission to move her and her child's residence to Canada, where she argued she would be able to offer him better living conditions and better access to education. Relying on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention, the applicant complains that the domestic courts' decision did not give priority to the child's best interests and breached her right to respect for her private and family life. Chief Rabbinate of the Jewish Community in zmir v. T�rkiye (no. 1574/12) The applicant is the Chief Rabbinate of the Jewish Community in zmir. At the relevant time it was a religious institution whose members were Turkish citizens of the Jewish faith. On 13 December 2011 it acquired the status of foundation and took the name "Foundation of the Jewish Community of zmir". The case concerns judicial proceedings following which the foundation was denied permission to register property, namely a plot of land on which was erected a former synagogue, its claim being that the land had belonged to it for a long time. The applicant foundation relies on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the Convention and on Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of the Convention. Telek and Others v. T�rkiye (nos. 66763/17, 66767/17, and 15891/18) The applicants, Alphan Telek, Edgar ar and Zeynep Kivilcim, are Turkish nationals who were born in 1990, 1991 and 1971 respectively. The first two applicants live in T�rkiye and the third in Germany. At the relevant time the three applicants worked in Turkish universities. They were among the signatories of a petition headed "We will not be accomplices to this crime" and signed by 1,128 academics and other intellectuals calling themselves "Academics for Peace". The petition was published in January 2016. The case concerns the withdrawal of the applicants' passports pursuant to the legislative decrees adopted in connection with the state of emergency declared after the attempted coup d'�tat of 15 July 2016 in T�rkiye. The applicants were also dismissed from the civil service pursuant to those decrees on the grounds that they were considered to have a connection with � the fact of belonging to, being a member of, being affiliated to or associated with � a terrorist organisation or an organisation, structure or group which has been found by the National Security Council to have engaged in activities that are harmful to national security. Relying on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life), and Article 6 (right of access to a court) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy), the first two applicants argue that the withdrawal of their passports has prevented them from pursuing their university and professional plans and their academic research activities abroad. Under the same Articles the third applicant argues that her inability to obtain a valid passport caused difficulties for her in her private and professional life during a stay in a foreign country. In addition, the first two applicants rely on Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 (right to education) to the Convention. Thursday 23 March 2023 Pirtskhalava and Tsaadze v. Georgia (no. 29714/18) The applicants, Irakli Pirtskhalava and Giorgi Tsaadze, are Georgian nationals who were born in 1968 and 1972 respectively. In 2006 two civilians were shot dead in a major police operation in Tbilisi. The applicants were among the approximately 50 police officers involved. At the material time the first applicant was deputy head of the criminal police unit of the Ministry of the Interior (the unit in charge of implementing the operation) and the second applicant was a senior officer of that unit. The case concerns the applicants' being charged for their role in the events along with nine others. The case against seven of the others was later separated and those officers became witnesses against the applicants along with other witnesses. The applicants were convicted of aggravated murder. Relying on Article 6 (right to a fair trial), the applicants complain that their convictions were based on unreliable witness testimony by police officers who had previously been their co-accused. Mr Pirtskhalava also complains that he was unable to call certain witnesses in his favour. Rogalski v. Poland (no. 5420/16) The applicant, Rafal Rogalski, is a Polish national who was born in 1976 and lives in Warsaw. He is a lawyer. The case concerns Mr Rogalski's lodging of a criminal complaint on behalf of a client in connection with an ongoing investigation into forged contracts. He was found guilty of making a criminal complaint without reasonable suspicion in the course of his legal work. He was fined and also had to pay costs. Relying on Article 10 (freedom of expression) and Article 6 (right to a fair trial), Mr Rogalski complains of the national courts' finding him at fault for lodging what was for them an unsubstantiated criminal complaint. He also alleges that two judges of the High Disciplinary Court were biased. Udovychenko v. Ukraine (no. 46396/14) The applicant, Alla Anatoliyivna Udovychenko, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1977 and lives in Rivne (Ukraine). In December 2008 Ms Udovychenko witnessed a road accident in Rivne in which a pedestrian was severely injured. The incident raised media interest at local level and, when visiting the victim in hospital, she told a journalist that she had seen the son of a former member of Parliament, getting out of the driver's side of the car involved in the accident. The case concerns the civil-court-proceedings requirement for the applicant for the applicant to prove what she had said. In the absence of such proof, the courts concluded that her statement was untrue and damaged the honour, dignity and reputation of the claimants. The applicant was ordered her to retract her statement and to pay damages. Relying in particular on Article 10 (freedom of expression), Ms Udovychenko complains about the proceedings against her, arguing that simply reporting what she had seen did not amount to the harming of the claimants' reputation. The Court will give its rulings in writing on the following cases, some of which concern issues which have already been submitted to the Court, including excessive length of proceedings. These rulings can be consulted from the day of their delivery on the Court's online database HUDOC. They will not appear in the press release issued on that day. Tuesday 21 March 2023 Name Mitichyan v. Armenia Tamaryan v. Armenia Beus v. Croatia Orasanin v. Croatia Golovchenko v. the Republic of Moldova Radika Prevozi doo Ljubljana v. North Macedonia Brdean and Others v. Romania Kop v. T�rkiye Uslu v. T�rkiye Main application number 34787/12 37096/12 16943/17 24811/16 66418/14 52003/18 21680/18 47404/20 51590/19 Thursday 23 March 2023 Name Abazi v. Albania Riestra Gonzalez de Ubieta v. Andorra Abishov v. Azerbaijan Gayibova v. Azerbaijan Tutundzi v. Bosnia and Herzegovina Mitov and Others v. Bulgaria Brnabi v. Croatia Main application number 48393/12 13387/21 46419/16 33085/12 44312/19 80857/17 4746/16 Name Hansen v. Denmark Lepasaar and Smigelskite v. Estonia Hakobyan v. Georgia Benziane v. Greece Palazzi v. Italy Wierzbicka v. Poland P.V. and Lavos v. Portugal Chelaru v. Romania erban-Pru v. Romania Askerov and Others v. Russia Bagautdinov and Others v. Russia Bazhenov and Others v. Russia Gukovskiy and Others v. Russia Kudryashova and Others v. Russia Rogachev and Others v. Russia Kali�k and Fico v. Slovakia Gozalbo Moliner v. Spain M.P.A. v. Spain Akkurt v. T�rkiye Ate and Others v. T�rkiye Ekelik and Others v. T�rkiye Halla�olu v. T�rkiye Kohen and Others v. T�rkiye Koum v. T�rkiye Tekmen�ray and ncedere v. T�rkiye Bolshenko v. Ukraine Chystyakova v. Ukraine Omelchenko v. Ukraine Main application number 54155/21 55082/19 64300/16 39200/16 24820/03 26750/16 58367/18 45444/16 60804/19 1712/20 48041/16 10149/20 39118/12 2606/12 64754/14 40734/22 23896/21 42590/21 40796/19 52051/17 46183/12 26605/19 66614/10 22916/20 35527/19 9725/20 50572/20 44158/19 This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions, judgments and further information about the Court can be found on www.echr.coe.int. To receive the Court's press releases, please subscribe here: www.echr.coe.int/RSS/en or follow us on Twitter @ECHR_CEDH. Press contacts [email protected] | tel.: +33 3 90 21 42 08 We would encourage journalists to send their enquiries via email. Tracey Turner-Tretz (tel.: + 33 3 88 41 35 30) Denis Lambert (tel.: + 33 3 90 21 41 09) Inci Ertekin (tel.: + 33 3 90 21 55 30) Neil Connolly (tel.: + 33 3 90 21 48 05) Jane Swift (tel.: + 33 3 88 41 29 04) The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. 4