### Fulfilled Accessibility Requirements
#Public Order Acts and Criminal Codes
Various acts and codes, such as the Public Order Act 1936 (
3_94,
3_95), Assembly Act (
5_58,
5_89,
90_32), and Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (
86_84,
86_85), were found to be accessible and prescribed by law. This was further confirmed in subsequent cases (
102_27,
102_31,
104_194,
115_147,
119_30,
121_33,
121_34,
121_35,
121_36,
126_38,
130_26,
131_216,
138_31,
143_60,
158_38,
180_123,
180_124,
181_76,
195_28,
195_29).
#Professional Conduct Regulations
Article 106 of the Decree of 9 June 1972 was found to be sufficiently precise and accessible (
10_44,
10_45,
112_85).
#Road Traffic Regulations
Measures based on sections of the Road Traffic Regulations and the Administrative Offences Act were deemed accessible and prescribed by law (
17_89,
17_90,
18_103,
195_28,
195_29).
#Penal Codes
Provisions published in the Official Gazette were accessible and allowed individuals to foresee the consequences of their actions (
76_198,
76_199,
115_147,
119_30,
121_33,
121_34,
121_35,
121_36,
130_26,
138_31,
143_60,
158_38,
180_123,
180_124,
181_76,
195_28,
195_29).
#Royal Decrees and Fisheries Acts
Sections of the Sea-Water Fisheries Act and the Royal Decree were found to be accessible and prescribed by law (
60_103,
60_104,
60_106,
60_107,
115_147).
#Cypriot Criminal Code
Sections 70 and 71 of the Cypriot Criminal Code and section 14 of the Criminal Procedure Law were found to be accessible and prescribed by law (
23_115,
26_104,
29_119,
30_105).
#Code of Administrative Offences
The fine imposed on the applicant under Article 185-1 of the CAO for violations of the procedure for organizing and holding demonstrations was based on accessible domestic law (
247_38). Additionally, Article 166 of the CAO, which explicitly prohibited the use of offensive language in public, was found to be clear and foreseeable (
432_39).
#Criminal Code
The interference had a legal basis in national law, specifically section 260(1) of the Criminal Code, and was thus “prescribed by law” with sufficient foreseeability (
266_30). The Criminal Code provision cited in snippet
615_21 clearly states the penalties for preventing the lawful exercise of freedom to assemble or demonstrate, or for seriously disturbing the proceedings of a lawful assembly or demonstration (
615_21).
#Published Laws
The provisions of Laws nos. 5237, 3713, and 2911 were accessible, and the decision of 4 March 2008, although not published in the Official Gazette, was available on the Internet (
256_107). Similarly, Law no. 60/1991 on Public Gatherings was accessible and provided a clear legal basis for regulating public gatherings (
414_84,
414_85).
#Clear Legal Provisions
The Court found that the interference was "prescribed by law" when it was based on clear legal provisions, such as Article 173 of the CAO. This provision was deemed accessible and allowed individuals to foresee the consequences of their actions (
598_54).