CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 3 octobre 2019

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .sC2E73220 { width:87.22%; margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s54F1E238 { width:8.26%; border-top:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; border-right:0.75pt solid #f8f8f8; border-left:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#5f5f5f } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s3FAB130A { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#f8f8f8 } .sCC037FAC { width:22.94%; border-top:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; border-right:0.75pt solid #f8f8f8; border-left:0.75pt solid #f8f8f8; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#5f5f5f } .sF61BF5EC { width:22.94%; border-top:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; border-right:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; border-left:0.75pt solid #f8f8f8; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#5f5f5f } .s2F0B4A65 { width:8.26%; border:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s12C0A550 { width:22.94%; border:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB268EDDE { width:8.26%; border:0.75pt solid #0072bc; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e8e8e8 } .s816B3540 { width:22.94%; border:0.75pt solid #0072bc; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e8e8e8 } Communicated on 3 October 2019   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 3231/17 Fattoum HASSAN and Others against Hungary lodged on 30 December 2016 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the house arrest of the applicants, Syrian nationals, on charges of illegal border crossing, from 19   September 2015 until 1 July 2016. The third applicant, Mr Ghazy Fahdawy, complains that his deprivation of liberty after 19 December 2015 was entirely devoid of legal basis, in breach of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention. Moreover, all three applicants complain that, during the prolongations of the measure, the domestic procedural rules were repeatedly infringed, effectively undermining the “equality of arms” inherent in Article   5 § 4 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Was the deprivation of liberty of the third applicant, Mr Ghazy Fahdawy, imposed “in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law” in the period after 19   December 2015 (see, mutatis mutandis , X.Y. v. Hungary , no.   43888/08, §§ 11 and 28, 19 March 2013)?   2.     Were the proceedings, by which the measure depriving the applicants of their liberty was prolonged, in compliance with the lawfulness requirement of Article   5 §   4 of the Convention? In particular, was the principle of “equality of arms” respected (see Bandur v. Hungary , no.   50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016; Galambos v. Hungary , no.   13312/12, §§   29 to 36, 21   July 2015)?   APPENDIX   No. Applicant’s Name Birth date Nationality Place of residence 1 Fattoum HASSAN 01/05/1960 Syrian Benesh 2 Mohammed AZIZ 01/03/1963 Syrian Alepo 3 Ghazy FAHDAWY 27/01/1986 Syrian Damascus