Libertés fondamentales (ci-après dénommée "la convention"),   Vu les arrêts de la Cour européenne des Droits de l'Homme rendus les 23 juin 1981 et 18 octobre 1982 dans l'affaire Le Compte, Van Leuven

The relevant parts of the leaflet are as follows: Preface and Epilogue: “...

This leaflet was a reproduction of the leaflet entitled “Freedom of Thought - No. 9”, which contained statements made by Osman Murat Ülke, who is a conscientious objector.

A., distributed a leaflet concerning the conscientious objector O. M. U., outside the Ankara State Security Court.

for the sole purpose of drawing up an offence report 4,000     23385/18 04/05/2018 Arseniy Mikhaylovich POPOV 1995   Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Moscow 08/07/2017 Distribution of leaflets

The committee of citizens prepared a leaflet encouraging the inhabitants of the city to take part in the referendum.

    The third conviction   – publication of a leaflet   As regards the applicant’s final conviction, for drafting and publishing a leaflet, the Court noted that the leaflet constituted

In November 2002 criminal proceedings were brought against him as author and editor-in-chief of the offending leaflets and owner of the website.

    One of the leaflets in question was entitled “Ethical Consumer Voucher”.

The police seized 1,215 leaflets and some other material.

They also distributed leaflets in the form of a wanted poster with M.Ś’s picture on it, and leaflets containing an image of M.Ś. dressed as a pirate.

It further noted that the cardboard poster – in contrast to the leaflet – did not contain any further explanation.

Le Dr Van Leuven demande - 50.000 FB pour frais de défense; - 30.000 FB pour frais de voyage et de séjour, ainsi que pour vacations; - 15.000.000 FB pour dommages matériel et moral.

Furthermore, the applicant deposited leaflets in all letterboxes in the vicinity of the day clinic. 8.

On 31 July 1997 Izmir Magistrates' Court ordered the confiscation of a leaflet entitled “The Kurdish Problem is a problem of the people of Turkey”.

In 1986 a six-page leaflet entitled “What’s wrong with McDonald’s?” was produced and distributed as part of that campaign.

The applicant and his co-accused were also charged with distributing illegal leaflets and carrying identification cards and driving licences belonging to third parties.

a violation of Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights on account of the applicant’s criminal conviction for deciding to go on hunger strike and distributing leaflets

For the bulk of the proceedings, however, including all the hearings to determine the truth of the statements in the leaflet, they had acted alone.