In his statement İ.D. denied the charges against him.

Edward FitzGerald, counsel practising in London.   3.     The application is directed against the United Kingdom.   The respondent Government are represented by Mr.

    The accused denied the charges against them throughout the proceedings. They declared that they had never had any contact with C.A. save at the start of the interrogation.

They fiercely denied that any force or pressure had been used against him. They also stated that the applicant had had no visible injuries.

During the investigation, G.A. denied that he had murdered E.A., but refused to testify in connection with his stabbing. 11.

The three police officers suspected of ill-treating Leonid Ghimp denied that he had been treated violently and unanimously maintained that he had been found drunk and sleeping at a bus stop and brought

Not all the testimonies have been proven; on the contrary, the police officers (involved in the events) have denied them.

    As part of the ensuing investigation, the prosecutor questioned the alleged perpetrators, who denied the applicant’s allegations.

The unlawful actions of the occupation government inflicted enormous damage not only on the owners whose rights of ownership were denied but also on the whole society and the entire State.

  The applicant states that Customs and Excise officers denied the involvement of an informant and gave evidence that when they followed him they were unaware of his destination.   20.

He was subsequently represented by Mr   Edward   Preston, of Edward Fail Bradshaw and Waterson solicitors, also based in London.

Mahoney,   Krzysztof Wojtyczek,   Faris Vehabović, judges, and Françoise Elens-Passos, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 19 January 2012, Having deliberated, decides

  48939/99, § 91, ECHR 2004 ‑ ..., and, mutatis mutandis , Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom , no. 46477/99, § 54, ECHR 2002 ‑ II). 86.

devices by way of support activities.

Early , Deputy Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 22 February 1999 and to the applicants’ supplementary submissions of 30 January 2001, Having deliberated, decides as

The applicant denied his involvement in the attempt on S.’s life. Then the man in camouflage rammed a gun in the applicant’s mouth, making his lower lip bleed.

The judge examining the request shall decide whether to authorise measures involving interference with the above-mentioned constitutional right, or to refuse authorisation, indicating reasons. ...”

    Mr   Edward Egan was born in 1939 and lives in Glasgow, Scotland. 35.

If the person concerned does not consent to being extradited, the case is also examined by the Supreme Court, which decides whether the extradition request may lawfully be granted.