Case: case_377

Atomic Facts:
[{"fact_id": "F001", "text": "The applicant was born in 1965.", "source_paragraph": 5, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F002", "text": "The applicant lives in Budapest.", "source_paragraph": 5, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F003", "text": "The applicant intended to organise a demonstration protesting against \"the persecution of national radicalism\".", "source_paragraph": 6, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F004", "text": "The demonstration was planned to take place between 4 p.m. and 7 p.m. on 15 August 2009.", "source_paragraph": 6, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F005", "text": "The planned venue for the demonstration was Venyige Street in Budapest Xth District, in front of Budapest Penitentiary.", "source_paragraph": 6, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F006", "text": "According to the Government's submissions, Venyige Street is five metres wide.", "source_paragraph": 7, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F007", "text": "According to the applicant's submissions, Venyige Street is eight metres wide.", "source_paragraph": 7, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F008", "text": "Parallel to the main driveway of Venyige Street, there is a service lane with a width equivalent to that of two cars.", "source_paragraph": 7, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F009", "text": "The service lane parallel to the main driveway of Venyige Street is normally used as a car park.", "source_paragraph": 7, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F010", "text": "According to the applicant's submissions, the service lane could have accommodated largely all the demonstration participants without them creating any major traffic incident.", "source_paragraph": 7, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F011", "text": "The applicant submitted a notification to Budapest Police Department under Act no. III of 1989 on the Right of Assembly.", "source_paragraph": 8, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F012", "text": "In the notification to Budapest Police Department, the applicant indicated that a maximum of 200 participants were to be expected at the demonstration.", "source_paragraph": 8, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F013", "text": "The applicant's notification to Budapest Police Department was made at 5.40 p.m. on 12 August 2009.", "source_paragraph": 8, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F014", "text": "On 14 August 2009, Budapest Police Department banned the demonstration.", "source_paragraph": 9, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F015", "text": "Budapest Police Department banned the demonstration in pursuit of its prerogatives under section 8(1) of Act no. III of 1989 on the Right of Assembly.", "source_paragraph": 9, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F016", "text": "Budapest Police Department was of the view that there was no alternative route for traffic in the neighbourhood of Venyige Street.", "source_paragraph": 9, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F017", "text": "Budapest Police Department concluded that the demonstration would impede traffic inordinately because there was no alternative route for traffic in the neighbourhood.", "source_paragraph": 9, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F018", "text": "The applicant was reproached by Budapest Police Department with the fact that the notification did not contain the agenda for the gathering.", "source_paragraph": 9, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F019", "text": "Because of the prohibition by Budapest Police Department, the demonstration did not take place.", "source_paragraph": 10, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F020", "text": "On 17 August 2009, the applicant requested judicial review of the Budapest Police Department's decision banning the demonstration.", "source_paragraph": 11, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F021", "text": "The applicant explained that he had not specified the agenda in the notification because the meeting had been intended as a rather small one.", "source_paragraph": 11, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F022", "text": "The applicant explained that the actual course of events at the demonstration, such as speeches or discussion, was hard to predict because the meeting was intended as a small one.", "source_paragraph": 11, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F023", "text": "On 19 August 2009, the Budapest Regional Court rejected the applicant's complaint against the Budapest Police Department's decision banning the demonstration.", "source_paragraph": 12, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F024", "text": "The Budapest Regional Court observed that the question of previous notification of the agenda was immaterial to the case.", "source_paragraph": 12, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F025", "text": "The Budapest Regional Court found that the only valid reason for banning the demonstration was the disproportionate difficulties which would be caused to traffic by the demonstration.", "source_paragraph": 12, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F026", "text": "The Budapest Regional Court relied on an expert opinion provided by the Traffic Division of Budapest Police Department.", "source_paragraph": 13, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F027", "text": "According to the Traffic Division of Budapest Police Department's expert opinion, the demonstration would have significantly impeded traffic heading to the shops located in Venyige Street, a dead end.", "source_paragraph": 13, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F028", "text": "According to the Traffic Division of Budapest Police Department's expert opinion, the demonstration would have significantly impeded traffic heading to the local waste disposal site accessible via Venyige Street.", "source_paragraph": 13, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F029", "text": "According to the Traffic Division of Budapest Police Department's expert opinion, the demonstration would have significantly impeded traffic heading to the suppliers' entrance of Budapest Prison via Venyige Street.", "source_paragraph": 13, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F030", "text": "According to the Traffic Division of Budapest Police Department's expert opinion, the disruption caused by the crowd might have extended to Maglódi Road, a major thoroughfare in the vicinity of Venyige Street.", "source_paragraph": 13, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F031", "text": "Maglódi Road has lines of city transport running along it.", "source_paragraph": 13, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}, {"fact_id": "F032", "text": "Relying on the expert opinion of the Traffic Division of Budapest Police Department, the Budapest Regional Court endorsed the Budapest Police Department's decision banning the demonstration.", "source_paragraph": 13, "section_path": ["THE FACTS", "THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE"]}]

Fact Mapping:
{"list1": {"scope": ["F003", "F012"], "interference": ["F014", "F019"], "prescribed_by_law": ["F011", "F015"], "legitimate_aim": ["F014", "F017"], "necessity": ["F006", "F007", "F008", "F012", "F025", "F027", "F028", "F029", "F030", "F031", "F032"], "positive_obligation": []}, "list2": {"scope": ["F003", "F012"], "interference": ["F014", "F019"], "prescribed_by_law": ["F015"], "legitimate_aim": ["F017"], "necessity": ["F006", "F007", "F008", "F012", "F025", "F027", "F030"], "positive_obligation": []}, "list3": ["F014", "F019", "F015", "F012", "F027", "F008", "F030", "F025"]}

Conclusion:
{"violated": true, "elements": {"scope": {"conclusion": "yes", "discussed": "implied"}, "scope_assembly_exists": {"conclusion": "yes", "discussed": "implied"}, "scope_participation": {"conclusion": "yes", "discussed": "implied"}, "scope_peaceful": {"conclusion": "yes", "discussed": "explicit"}, "interference": {"conclusion": "yes", "discussed": "explicit"}, "prescribed_by_law": {"conclusion": "yes", "discussed": "explicit"}, "prescribed_by_law_foreseeable": {"conclusion": null, "discussed": "not_discussed"}, "prescribed_by_law_accessible": {"conclusion": null, "discussed": "not_discussed"}, "prescribed_by_law_safeguards": {"conclusion": null, "discussed": "not_discussed"}, "legitimate_aim": {"conclusion": "yes", "discussed": "explicit", "aims": ["prevention_of_disorder", "rights_of_others"]}, "necessity": {"conclusion": "no", "discussed": "explicit"}, "positive_obligation": {"conclusion": null, "discussed": "not_discussed"}}}