GAHRAMANOV v. AZERBAIJAN DECISION 3 16. The applicant arrived at Baku Heydar Aliyev Airport at 8.30 a.m. on 18 July 2006. Check-in for the Dubai flight began at 9 a.m. and the applicant checked in his baggage. After checking it in the applicant went to the passport control desk. The officer who examined his documents told him to wait and called her supervisor. Without identifying himself, her supervisor instructed the applicant to go to the neutral zone and wait there. 17. A few minutes later an officer identifying himself as E.H. explained to the applicant that he had been removed from the flight by order of the MNS and that he should wait in the State Border Service (“the SBS”) room until MNS officers arrived. The applicant was taken to the SBS room and was not otherwise informed of the reasons for this measure. 18. During his stay in the SBS room, the applicant was not free to leave the room and had no opportunity to contact others. In the meantime the applicant’s baggage was searched by SBS officers. The applicant asked the SBS officers to draw up a record of his detention and of the search of his baggage. However, they refused to do so. 19. The applicant remained in the SBS room until 2.20 p.m., when, after a telephone conversation with an unidentified person, E.H. allowed him to leave the airport. The applicant refused to leave the airport without obtaining documents regarding his detention. Following the applicant’s continued requests, a person identifying himself as an officer of the MNS threatened him on the telephone and insisted that he leave the airport immediately. 20. Before the applicant left the airport the customs officers issued him with a report on the search of his baggage. (ii) The Government’s version of the events 21. On 18 July 2006 the applicant was removed from the flight from Baku to Dubai, following the passport control carried out by officers of the SBS, because his name appeared on a “Border crossing restriction” list with the status “to be stopped” (saxla). A record of the prevention of the passenger from crossing the State border was drawn up. 22. The applicant was then taken to the SBS room for further clarification and to be handed over to officials of the MNS. Following clarification of the applicant’s situation, he was permitted to leave the airport. As to the reason why the applicant’s name appeared on the list with the status of “to be stopped”, the Government pointed out that this was because the MNS had failed to remove his name from the “Border crossing restriction” list after he had been pardoned by a presidential decree of 30 March 2005. The applicant spent only two hours in the SBS room. 23. As regards the record of the applicant’s detention, the Government noted that a document on this had been drawn up, but subsequently destroyed following the decision of the MNS to take no further action.