ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 OF THE CONVENTION 8.

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 § 4 of the Convention 6.     The applicants complained of the deficiencies in proceedings for review of the lawfulness of detention.

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 § 4 of the Convention 6.     The applicants complained of the deficiencies in proceedings for review of the lawfulness of their detention.

On 5 March 2010 the applicant was indicted. The Constitutional Court dismissed his subsequent appeal based on his complaints under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention on 6   October 2011.

    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 8.

It took the view that, even though they were compliant with domestic law, the sanctions were in breach of Article 5 §   1 of the Convention. The applicant did not make use of the remedies.

    SUR LA VIOLATION ALLÉGUÉE DE L’ARTICLE 5   §   3 DE LA CONVENTION 30.

THE LAW         ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 § 4 of the Convention 5.

    There has accordingly been a violation of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention in this respect too. III.     ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 § 5 OF THE CONVENTION 49.

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 7.

In its reasoning it referred to Article 5 § 1 (f) of the Convention. 4.

(b)    Whether the deprivation of liberty breached Article 5 § 1 of the Convention (i)   General principles 37.

    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5   §   3 OF THE CONVENTION 55.

    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 33.

Belgium - 26402/17 Judgment 18.5.2021 [Section III] Article 5 Article 5-4 Review of lawfulness of detention Reporting judge’s draft decision sent to the advocate-general but not to the applicant ahead

THE LAW ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 § 1 of the Convention 5.     The applicant complained of the unlawful detention in view of the events described in the appended table.

THE LAW ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 § 1 of the Convention 6.

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 § 4 of the Convention 6.     The applicants complained of the deficiencies in the proceedings for review of the lawfulness of detention.

    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 16.