The court will follow the prosecution's demands to the letter.

As the prosecution’s new submissions had to be communicated to him, the court again adjourned the case.

They may make an order on an application by Crown Counsel in several instances, including the case of "juveniles ... proceeded against for an act classified as an offence".

On 16 November 1992 the file, together with the public prosecutor’s submissions, was sent to the Third Division of the Lisbon Criminal Court (tribunal criminal).

On 30 November, the applicant nevertheless filed his reply (réplica) to the pleadings lodged by State Counsel, who made a rejoinder (tréplica) on 17 December.

On 23 January 1994 the applicant applied to the judge personally in English, asking for a translation of the prosecution submissions into German, his native language.

On 11 January 1978, on an application by the prosecuting authority, the President of the Regional Court designated as third court-appointed defence counsel, Mr Hauser, a lawyer practising in Stuttgart.

Siarhei Khmialeuski was initially sentenced to life imprisonment but the sentence was later changed to the death penalty at the request of the prosecutor.

Cases are referred to the Examining Judge either at the request of the Public Prosecution Department or as a result of a complaint brought by an injured party (against persons unknown or by way of an application to join civil proceedings).

He also replied to the prosecutor’s requisitions – indignant to hear such statements – that there was also very little talk of German soldiers starving “by the will of the Zionist Eisenhower.

However, in the cases contemplated in the final paragraph of Article 524, the public prosecutor’s pleading shall be filed at the registry of the Court and notice of the said filing shall be given forthwith to the applicant’s lawyer.

It consequently decided to exclude as having been filed out of time all pleadings submitted by the parties after that date, including State Counsel’s (see paragraph 20 above).

The investigating judge shall give his decision in chambers, after an adversarial hearing in the course of which he shall hear the submissions of the public prosecutor, then the observations of the accused and, if appropriate, of his counsel.

He went on to hold that the evidence was not sufficient to enable a reliable assessment to be made of the probability that four of the co-defendants were guilty, and he consequently rejected the prosecution’s charges against them.

The investigating judge shall give his decision in chambers, after an adversarial hearing in the course of which he shall hear the submissions of the public prosecutor, then the observations of the accused and, if appropriate, of his counsel.