iv. Dismisses the other objections to the admissibility of the Application; v. Finds the Application admissible. On merits vi. Holds that the Respondent State did not violate the Applicants’ right to information guaranteed in Article 9(1) of the Charter; vii. Holds that the Respondent State did not violate the Applicants’ right to dignity guaranteed in Article 5 of the Charter; viii. Holds that the Respondent State did not violate the Applicants’ right to equality before the law, guaranteed in Article 3 of the Charter; ix. Holds that the Respondent State did not violate the Applicants’ right to the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms guaranteed in Article 2 of the Charter; x. Holds that the Respondent State violated the Applicants’ right to be tried within reasonable time guaranteed in Article 7(1)(d) of the Charter; xi. Holds that the Respondent State violated the Applicants’ right to the execution of a court decision guaranteed in Article 7(1) of the Charter. On reparations Material damage xii. Dismisses the prayer for compensation; xiii. Dismisses the prayer for reimbursement of lawyers’ fees in respect of proceedings before domestic courts; xiv. Dismisses the prayer for reimbursement of expert’s fees; 42