4.  The applicants were born in 1939 and 1944 respectively and live in Dumbrăvița, Timiș County.
5.  The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, refer to the same context and domestic criminal proceedings as those described in Association “21 December 1989” and Others v. Romania (nos. 33810/07 and 18817/08, §§ 12-41, 24 May 2011) and Şandru and Others v. Romania (no. 22465/03, §§ 7-47, 8 December 2009).
6.  Between 17 and 28 December 1989 many people, including the applicants’ son, participated in anti-communism demonstrations in Timișoara, Bucharest and other cities in Romania.
7.  The applicants’ son was killed by gunfire on 23 December 1989 in Timișoara.
8.  In 1990 the military prosecutor’s office opened several investigations into the December 1989 armed crackdown on the anti-communism demonstrations. A main criminal investigation concerning the use of violence against civilians in Bucharest and other cities was also registered with the highest prosecutor’s office – the military prosecutors section − under no. 97/P/1990 (current number 11/P/2014).
9.  In cases concerning the events in Timișoara, a separate investigation was carried out under file no. 11/P/1996, culminating in the referral to court and subsequent conviction of senior military officers by a decision of the High Court of Cassation and Justice of 3 April 2007, which became final on 15 October 2008. As is apparent from the documents submitted by the parties, the death of the applicants’ son did not form part of this investigation, but in the court proceedings the first applicant nonetheless lodged a civil claim regarding his son’s death during the December 1989 events. The court dismissed it on the grounds that he had failed to submit documents substantiating this claim.
10.  As acknowledged by the Government, both applicants are parties in the main criminal investigation file. On 26 June 2013 they brought civil claims before the prosecutor requesting the right to participate, being civil parties in this file. The applicants had first made statements and raised civil claims in criminal investigation files other than file no. 97/P/1990 (current number 11/P/2014) on 11 January 1990 and 1 March 2000. The parties did not inform the Court whether these files had been joined to the main criminal investigation (see paragraph 8 above).
11.  The most important steps taken by the prosecutors in the main criminal investigation are summarised in Association “21 December 1989” and Others (cited above, §§ 12-41) and Anamaria‑Loredana Orășanu and Others v. Romania ([Committee] nos. 43629/13 and 74 others, §§ 10‑11, 7 November 2017). Further developments are as follows.
12.  On 14 October 2015 the prosecutor’s office closed the main investigation, finding that the offences of homicide and instigation to homicide of which the applicants’ son had been a victim had become statute‑barred.
13.  Although the parties have not communicated any information regarding the lodging of an appeal against this decision, it is apparent from the prosecutor’s office website that it was subsequently quashed and to date the main criminal investigation is still ongoing (see Anamaria‑Loredana Orășanu and Others, cited above, § 11).