The Court heard addresses by Mr Seeger, Mr Kley, Mr Golsong and Mr   Stein. THE FACTS I.     THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 6.

The court refused Mrs   Van Geyseghem’s counsel leave to address it and make submissions on his client’s behalf.

    Merits 1.     The parties’ submissions 68.

It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time (Article 29 § 1). THE FACTS I.     THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 5.

During the interview the applicant was unable to indicate his exact address in Russia. 53.

It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time (Article 29 § 1). THE FACTS I.     THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 5.

In 2003 and 2004 respectively the Commander of the Armed Forces awarded him the “Exemplary Service” and “Merit” medals. 7.

The Decree called on the gas companies to “reveal and address violations of safety rules”, and required the local municipalities to aid the gas companies in this task.

    Merits 35 .

He was therefore corresponding with the Court through another address. 25 .

    Merits 1.     The applicants’ arrests and their subsequent detention at police stations (a)     Parties’ submissions 48.

The CEC nevertheless decided to examine the complaint on the merits. 24.

The Court finds that these questions are closely linked to the substance of the applicant’s complaint and should accordingly be joined to the merits. 3.

    Merits 1.     The parties’ submissions 53.

  The Court heard addresses by Mr Misson, Mr Pierre and Mr Lemmens and their replies to questions put by its members. THE FACTS I.     THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 9.

    The applicant and the Government each filed observations on the merits (Rule 59 § 1).

The Court heard addresses by Mr Van Ommeslaghe, Mr Trechsel and Mr Gillardin, as well as their replies to its questions. 8.

No statements were taken from the applicant and her sister Mekiye, since they no longer resided in Karataş and their new address could not be established. 23.

and documents presented to date that the applicant had committed the acts under investigation, that any pieces of evidence obtained during the search would further corroborate these facts, and that merely