4.  The applicants were born in 1957, 1965, 1973, 1952 and 1966 and live in Diyarbakır, Şanlıurfa, Kars, Ankara and Diyarbakır respectively. 5.  At the time of the events the applicant, Ms Şükran Aydın, was the mayor of Bismil and was standing for election in the parliamentary elections of 3 November 2002 as a candidate for the People’s Democratic Party (DEHAP) in the province of Diyarbakır. 6.  On 2 January 2003 criminal proceedings were initiated against the applicant before the Lice Criminal Court of First Instance for conduct contrary to Law no. 298 on the fundamental provisions governing elections and voter registration (Seçimlerin Temel Hükümleri ve Seçmen Kütükleri Hakkında Kanun), on the ground that on 26 October 2002 she had campaigned for election in Kurdish. 7.  In the course of the trial the applicant submitted that she had addressed the crowd partly in Kurdish because the population was Kurdish and she had taken into consideration the fact that there were many elderly people and women in the crowd who would not understand Turkish. 8.  On 26 January 2005 the Lice Criminal Court of First Instance, having examined the evidence in the case file including the verbatim transcript of a video recording, found that the applicant had campaigned for election in Kurdish on 26 October 2002, in breach of section 58 of Law no. 298. In accordance with section 151(2) of Law no. 298, the court sentenced the applicant to six months’ imprisonment and to a heavy fine. Taking into account the applicant’s good behaviour during the trial, the circumstances of the case and her personality, the court first reduced the sentence, then commuted the prison sentence to a fine and finally ordered that payment of the fine be suspended as the applicant had no criminal record and the judge was satisfied that she would not reoffend. 9.  On 11 May 2006 the Court of Cassation altered the amount of the fine and upheld the judgment of the first-instance court. The decision was returned to the registry of the first-instance court on 13 June 2006. 10.  At the time of the events the applicant, Ms Ayşe Gökkan, was standing for election in the parliamentary elections of 3 November 2002 as a candidate for the People’s Democratic Party (DEHAP) in the province of Şanlıurfa. 11.  On 6 November 2002 criminal proceedings were initiated against the applicant before the Viranşehir Criminal Court of First Instance for conduct contrary to Law no. 298 on the fundamental provisions governing elections and voter registration, on the ground that on 27 October 2002 she had campaigned for election in Kurdish. 12.  In the course of the trial the applicant maintained that she had spoken in Kurdish because she was addressing a crowd of Kurdish women who did not understand Turkish. 13.  On 15 December 2005 the Viranşehir Criminal Court of First Instance, having examined the evidence in the case file including the verbatim transcript of a video recording, found that the applicant had campaigned for election in Kurdish on 27 October 2002, in breach of section 58 of Law no. 298. In accordance with section 151 of Law no. 298, the court sentenced the applicant to six months’ imprisonment and to a heavy fine. Taking into account the circumstances of the case and the applicant’s personality, the court commuted the prison sentence to a fine and subsequently ordered that payment of the fine be suspended as the applicant had no criminal record and the judge was satisfied that she would not reoffend. 14.  On 29 November 2006 the Court of Cassation declined to examine the applicant’s appeal on the ground that it was not written in Turkish. The court altered the amount of the fine and upheld the judgment of the first‑instance court. 15.  On 1 November 2007 criminal proceedings were initiated against the applicant, Mr Ayhan Erkmen, who was mayor of Dağpınar, before the Digor Criminal Court of First Instance for conduct contrary to Law no. 298 on the fundamental provisions governing elections and voter registration, on the ground that on 18 July 2007 he had given a speech in Kurdish during a rally organised by Mr Alınak, who was standing for election in the parliamentary elections as an independent candidate in the province of Kars. 16.  In the course of the trial the applicant maintained that he had spoken in Kurdish so that the crowd, many of whom did not understand Turkish, could understand him better. On 24 March 2008 the Digor Magistrates’ Court, having examined the evidence in the case file including the verbatim transcript of a video recording, found that the applicant had spoken in Kurdish during an election rally on 18 July 2007, in breach of section 58 of Law no. 298. In accordance with section 151 of Law no. 298, the court sentenced the applicant to six months’ imprisonment. Taking into account the applicant’s good behaviour during the trial, the circumstances of the case and his personality, the court first reduced the sentence to five months and finally decided to suspend pronouncement of the judgment (hükmün açıklanmasının geriye bırakılması) for five years under Article 231 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 17.  On 20 May 2008 the Digor Criminal Court of First Instance dismissed an objection lodged by the applicant against the above-mentioned decision. 18.  Criminal proceedings were initiated against the applicant, Mr Orhan Miroğlu, who had stood for election in the parliamentary elections as an independent candidate in the province of Mersin, for conduct contrary to Law no. 298 on the fundamental provisions governing elections and voter registration, on the ground that on 27 June 2007 he had campaigned for election in Kurdish. 19.  In the course of the trial the applicant maintained that he had spoken in Turkish but that, since there were people in Mersin who spoke Kurdish, he might have greeted them in Kurdish. 20.  On 3 April 2008 the Mersin Magistrates’ Court, having examined the evidence in the case file including the verbatim transcript of a video recording, found that the applicant had spoken partly in Kurdish during an election rally on 27 June 2007, in breach of section 58 of Law no. 298. In accordance with section 151 of Law no. 298 the court sentenced the applicant to six months’ imprisonment. Taking into account the applicant’s good behaviour during the trial, the circumstances of the case and his personality, the court decided to suspend pronouncement of the judgment for five years under Article 231 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 21.  On 7 July 2008 the Mersin Criminal Court of First Instance dismissed an objection lodged by the applicant against the above-mentioned decision. 22.  On 16 June 2004 criminal proceedings were initiated against the applicant, Mr Mesut Beştaş[3], who had stood for election in the municipal elections of 28 March 2004 as a candidate for the Social Democratic People’s Party (SHP) in the province of Siirt, for conduct contrary to Law no. 298 laying down the fundamental provisions governing elections and voter registration, on the ground that on 20 March 2004 he had campaigned for election in Kurdish. 23.  In the course of the trial the applicant maintained that nothing in the speeches he had given could be construed as constituting an offence and that it was not illegal to speak in Kurdish. 24.  On 10 May 2005 the Siirt Criminal Court of First Instance, having examined the evidence in the case file including the verbatim transcript of a video recording, found that the applicant had spoken in Kurdish during an election rally on 20 March 2004, in breach of section 58 of Law no. 298. In accordance with section 151 of Law no. 298 the court sentenced the applicant to six months’ imprisonment and to a heavy fine. Taking into account the applicant’s good behaviour during the trial, the circumstances of the case and his personality, the court first reduced the sentence and then commuted the prison sentence to a fine. At the request of the principal public prosecutor’s office, the Siirt Criminal Court of First Instance re‑examined the applicant’s conviction and sentence on 18 October 2005 and sentenced him to an administrative fine. This decision was quashed by the Court of Cassation on 11 October 2006. 25.  On 6 April 2007 the Siirt Criminal Court of First Instance found the applicant guilty as charged. In accordance with section 151 of Law no. 298 the court sentenced the applicant to six months’ imprisonment and to a heavy fine. It later commuted the applicant’s prison sentence to a fine. This decision was quashed by the Court of Cassation on 8 April 2008. 26.  On 27 October 2008 the Siirt Criminal Court of First Instance decided to suspend pronouncement of the judgment against the applicant for five years under Article 231 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On 18 December 2008 the Siirt Assize Court dismissed an objection lodged by the applicant against the above-mentioned decision.