Case no 47329/99
4. The applicant further alleges under Articles 9, 10 and 11 of the Convention that his conviction resulted in a violation of his rights to freedom of thought, expression and assembly.
The Court observes that the applicant was not convicted for having expressed his opinions or for having participated in a meeting, but for membership of an illegal organisation, pursuant to Article 168 of the Criminal Code. Having regard to the applicant's previous convictions and speeches, the domestic court found it established that the applicant had been continuously engaged in the making of propaganda on behalf of Hezbollah in order to recruit members. On the basis of that evidence, the court, contrary to the applicant's denials, concluded that he was a member of that organisation. There is therefore nothing in the case file that could support the applicant's claims concerning his complaints under Articles 9, 10 and 11 (see in this respect, Kiliç v. Turkey, cited above).
It follows that this part of the application is manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 of the Convention and must be rejected pursuant to Article 35 § 4.