Human rights — Right to freedom of expression — Treaties — African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1981 — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 — Revised Treaty of the Economic Community of West African States, 1993 — Rights of journalists — Whether Sections 109 and 110 of the Information Code and Section 178 of the Penal Code of Burkina Faso restricting freedom of expression — Defamation — Whether criminalization of defamation violating international human rights principles — Whether Burkino Faso violating Article 9 of Charter, Article 19 of Covenant and Article 66(2)(c) of ECOWAS Treaty — Whether provisional measures appropriate — Whether compensation payable

International tribunals — African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights — Jurisdiction — Whether Court required to investigate jurisdiction proprio motu — Admissibility — Local remedies rule

Damages — Reparations — Claim for damages for violations of African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1981, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 and Revised Treaty of the Economic Community of West African States, 1993 — Restitution — Material damage — Moral damage — Whether amounts claimed justified — Evidence — Amounts to be awarded

Human rights — Right to a fair trial — Right to legal aid and representation — Right to be tried within reasonable time — African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1981 — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 — Whether Tanzania violating Charter and Covenant

International tribunals — Jurisdiction — Whether African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights having jurisdiction to hear application — Admissibility — Whether application admissible in the Court — Local remedies rule

Human rights — Fundamental rights — Prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment — Common European Asylum System — Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 — Transfer of asylum seeker to Member State responsible for examining asylum application — Whether transfer of asylum seeker compatible with Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2000, European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 and Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951 — Obligations of transferring Member States — Whether acceptable under European Union law for a transferring Member State to apply conclusive presumption that responsible Member State would act in compliance with fundamental rights — Obligation on transferring Member State to exercise right to assume responsibility to examine application itself under Article 3(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — European Union law — Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 — Interpretation — Scope of Article 3 of Regulation — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2000 — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951 — Common European Asylum System — Transfer of asylum seeker to Member State responsible for examining asylum application — Member State responsible for examining asylum application listed as safe country in United Kingdom Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004 — Whether transfer risking breach of asylum seeker’s fundamental rights — Obligations of transferring Member States — Whether transferring Member State under obligation not to expose asylum seeker to risk of human rights violations in responsible Member State

International organizations — European Union — Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003, Article 3 — Interpretation — Scope — Transfer of asylum seeker to Member State responsible for examining asylum application — Whether transfer risking breach of asylum seeker’s fundamental rights — Obligations of transferring Member States — European Union law — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951 — Whether transferring Member State under obligation not to expose asylum seeker to risk of human rights violations in responsible Member State

Aliens — Asylum seeker — Common European Asylum System — Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003, Article 3 — Transfer of asylum seeker to Member State responsible for examining asylum application — Whether transfer risking breach of asylum seeker’s fundamental rights — Obligations of transferring Member States — European Union law — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951 — Whether transferring Member State under obligation not to expose asylum seeker to risk of human rights violations in responsible Member State — The law of the European Union

Economics, trade and finance — Economic sanctions — Freezing of assets — Implementation in European Union law of sanctions imposed by United Nations Security Council — United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 (2003) to combat terrorism — Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 610/2010 implementing Article 2(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 — Applicants’ assets frozen by Dutch authorities pursuant to EU Implementing Regulation — Applicants’ assets frozen on basis of funding organization regarded as terrorist organization — Organization listed under Article 2(3) of Regulation — Whether organization engaged in terrorist acts — Definition of terrorist acts — Whether actions by armed forces during periods of armed conflict within meaning of international humanitarian law constituting “terrorist acts” for purposes of European Union law — Validity of Implementing Regulation

Terrorism — Measures to combat terrorism — European Union law — International law — Treaties — International humanitarian law — United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 (2003) — Implementation by European Union — Organization regarded as terrorist organization — Organization listed under Article 2(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 — Whether actions by armed forces during periods of armed conflict within meaning of international humanitarian law constituting “terrorist acts” for purposes of European Union law — EU Framework Decision 2002/475 — Council Common Position 2001/931/CFSP and Regulation 2580/2001 — Objectives — Definitions of “terrorist act” — Relevance — Validity of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 610/2010

War and armed conflict — Non-international armed conflicts — Actions of armed forces governed by international humanitarian law — Geneva Conventions, 1949, Common Article 2 — Geneva Conventions, Common Article 3 — Article 1 of Protocol I — Articles 1, 4, 6 and 13(2) of Protocol II — Whether actions of armed forces capable of constituting terrorist acts for purposes of European Union law — Validity of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 610/2010

International organizations — United Nations — United Nations Security Council Resolutions (“UNSCRs”) — UNSCR 1373 (2003) to combat terrorism — Implementation by European Union — Council Common Position 2001/931/CFSP — Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 — Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 610/2010 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 — Organization listed under Article 2(3) of EU Regulation — Whether actions by armed forces during periods of armed conflict within meaning of international humanitarian law constituting “terrorist acts” for purposes of European Union law — Validity of Implementing Regulation

International organizations — European Union — Implementing Regulation — Interpretation — Context — Imposition of restrictive measures — Freezing of funds — Inclusion of group on list of those whose funds were to be frozen pursuant to Article 2(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 — Whether actions by armed forces during periods of armed conflict within meaning of international humanitarian law precluded from constituting “terrorist acts” for purposes of European Union law — Validity of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 610/2010

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — International humanitarian law — United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 (2003) to combat terrorism — Implementation by European Union — European Union law — Objectives — Council Common Position 2001/931/CFSP — Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 — Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 610/2010 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 — Dutch law — Dutch authorities freezing assets of applicants pursuant to EU Implementing Regulation — Applicants’ assets frozen on basis of funding organization regarded as terrorist organization — Organization listed under Article 2(3) of Regulation — Whether organization engaged in terrorist acts — Definition of terrorist acts — Whether actions by armed forces during periods of armed conflict within meaning of international humanitarian law constituting “terrorist acts” for purposes of European Union law — Validity of Implementing Regulation

International tribunals — Court of Justice of the European Union — Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Admissibility of actions for annulment of Implementing Regulation by applicants — Inclusion of group on list of those whose funds were to be frozen pursuant to Article 2(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 — Applicants not themselves appearing on list — Whether applicants permitted to invoke invalidity of Implementing Regulation in main proceedings — The law of the European Union

Jurisdiction — Extraterritorial jurisdiction — Moroccan applicants complaining that cartoons published in Danish newspaper offensive — Whether discriminatory against applicants as Muslims — Moroccan applicants complaining that Denmark violating their rights under Articles 9 and 14, and 10 and 17 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether applicants within jurisdiction of Denmark within meaning of Article 1 of Convention — Interpretation of Article 1 — Concept of jurisdiction — Meaning of “within their jurisdiction” in public international law — Whether jurisdictional link between any of Moroccan applicants and Denmark — Whether exceptions applicable — Whether any extraterritorial act — Whether applicants’ complaints admissible under Article 35 of Convention

Human rights — Human rights treaties — Nature and scope — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 1 — Interpretation — Duty of Contracting States to secure Convention rights and freedoms to persons “within their jurisdiction” — Applicants outside territory of Contracting State — Whether jurisdictional link between any of Moroccan applicants and Denmark — Whether any extraterritorial act — Whether Court having competence to examine applicants’ substantive complaints under Articles 9 and 14, and 10 and 17 of Convention

Human rights — Property rights — Pecuniary rights — State pension system — Prohibition of discrimination — Applicant employed prior to 1991 in territory of former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics — Latvian State Pensions Act providing for pension entitlement for this period to Latvian citizens regardless of contributions — Applicant not eligible as non-citizen of Latvia — Whether discriminatory — Whether Republic of Latvia violating Article 14 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, taken together with Article 1 of Protocol No 1

Human rights — Right to a fair trial — Applicant unable to attend hearing of appeal on points of law — Section 471 of Latvian Civil Procedure Act guaranteeing right to take part in public hearing of Supreme Court — Whether Republic of Latvia violating Article 6(1) of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950

Jurisdiction — Extraterritorial jurisdiction — Whether subject matter of application falling within jurisdiction of Republic of Latvia — Article 1 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — State responsibility — Whether Republic of Latvia responsible for rights and obligations of former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics — Whether Latvia’s preliminary objection to be dismissed

Territory — Occupation — Illegal annexation — Incorporation of Baltic States into Union of Soviet Socialist Republics — Whether Baltic States inheriting rights and obligations of former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics — Independence of Latvia in 1991 — Whether Republic of Latvia responsible for pension promises made by USSR — Whether applicant as non-Latvian citizen entitled to pension for period prior to 1991 in same way as Latvian citizens

State succession — State continuity — Successor State to Union of Soviet Socialist Republics — Illegal annexation of Latvia by USSR — Independence of Latvia in 1991 — Whether Latvia responsible for employment years accrued under Soviet Union — Whether applicant as non-Latvian citizen entitled to pension for period prior to 1991 in same way as Latvian citizens — Whether difference in treatment justified — Inter-State agreements on social security with Ukraine and Russia

Nationality — Latvian citizenship — Applicant non-citizen of Latvia — Applicant formerly having USSR citizenship — Applicant now stateless — Applicant treated differently with respect to pension entitlement on basis of nationality — Whether discriminatory — Whether distinction justified — Whether legitimate aim — Whether proportionate to means employed — Whether Republic of Latvia violating Article 14 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, taken together with Article 1 of Protocol No 1

Human rights — Right to a fair trial — Right of access to a court — Applicants bringing libel action against former head of State in domestic courts — Domestic courts failing to consider whether impugned statements made in exercise of official duties — Competing interests — Whether head of State enjoying absolute immunity — Whether manner in which immunity rule applied constituting disproportionate restriction on applicants’ right of access to a court — Whether Republic of Moldova violating Article 6(1) of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950

State immunity — Head of State immunity — Functional immunity — Whether absolute — Applicants bringing libel action against former head of State in domestic courts — Domestic courts failing to consider whether impugned statements made in exercise of official duties — Competing interests — Whether head of State enjoying blanket immunity — Whether manner in which immunity rule applied constituting disproportionate restriction on applicants’ right of access to a court — Whether Republic of Moldova violating Article 6(1) of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950

Human rights — Prohibition of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment — Right to privacy — Right to obtain information — Prohibition of discrimination based on gender — Prohibition of abortion in a non-viable pregnancy — Whether State Party violating its obligations under Articles 7, 17, 19(1) and 26 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 — United Nations Human Rights Committee

International organizations — Privileges and immunities — Staff members — Former staff members — Exemption from taxation on salaries and emoluments received — Whether monthly pension payments exempt from Australian income tax — Construction of Section 6(1)(d), International Organisations (Privileges and Immunities) Act 1963 (Cth)

Treaties — Interpretation — Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies, 1947 — Whether Australia required not to tax monthly pension payments received by former officer of specialized agency — State practice and preparatory work — The law of Australia

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Distinction between acta jure imperii and acta jure gestionis — Deployment of air force as a sovereign act — Whether plaintiff barred from suing respondent State in Austria for damages caused by an airstrike

State succession — State succession in court proceedings — Whether Federal Republic of Yugoslavia remaining defendant in civil case brought against Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia — The law of Austria

Human rights — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, Article 8 — Article 14 — Exclusion of same-sex couples from certain medically assisted methods of reproduction as disproportional interference with the rights enshrined in the Convention — The law of Austria