BOUYID v. BELGIUM JUDGMENT 7 Following the incidents involving police officer [B.], a dialogue facilitator apparently failed in an attempt at reconciliation, owing to an intransigent attitude on the part of the women in the Bouyid family. In 1999 and 2000 the situation required the appointment of a police cadet as a mediator for this family.” 32. On 3 August 2004 the investigating judge decided to close the investigation and sent the file to the prosecuting authorities. 33. On 16 November 2004 Officer A.Z. was interviewed by a member of the investigation department of Committee P about the events of 8 December 2003. He stated in particular that he had not previously known the first applicant when he had taken him to the Saint-Josse-ten-Noode police station that particular day. 34. In an application of 10 November 2005, the Crown Prosecutor called for the discontinuance of the case on the ground that “the judicial investigation [had] not established that the facts constituted a serious or petty offence and [had] not adduced any evidence that would justify the taking of further measures”. 35. The applicants were informed that the case file would be finalised before the Committals Division of the Brussels Court of First Instance on 2 March 2006. On 1 March 2006 they sent an application to the investigating judge seeking twenty additional investigative measures. That request resulted in the adjournment sine die of the case before the Committals Division. 36. On 7 March 2006 the investigating judge ordered two of the requested measures and rejected the remainder of the application on the grounds that it concerned facts that predated the events referred to him and that the measures sought were not necessary for establishing the truth. Consequently, recapitulating all their complaints against the Saint-Josse-ten-Noode police force, the applicants and other members of their family sent the investigating judge a request for an “extension of civilparty status”, but it was rejected. The two additional measures were put into effect on 25 April, 15 May and 24 May 2006. 37. In an order of 27 November 2007, the Committals Division, endorsing the grounds set out in the Crown Prosecutor’s application, discontinued the proceedings. 38. The applicants appealed against that order. 39. In an application of 3 December 2007, the Principal Crown Prosecutor requested that the discontinuance order be upheld. 40. On 5 February 2008 the applicants and other members of their family filed a complaint as civil parties in respect of all the facts that the investigating judge had considered not to have been referred to him (see paragraphs 43-44 below). 41. On 9 April 2008 the Indictments Division of the Brussels Court of Appeal, after refusing to join the case concerning the events of 8 December