 Ozdil and others v. the Republic of Moldova, 42305/18, 11.06.2019. The plaintiffs were teachers in a network of private schools in Moldova, called Orizont, which has been active since 1993. On the morning of 6 September 2018, the applicants were arrested at their home or on their way to work, and taken to an unknown direction ,by people wearing civilian clothes. Later, the Moldovan Intelligence and Security Service made several statements regarding a large-scale counterterrorism operation that took place that day, during which seven foreign nationals suspected of links to an Islamist organization were arrested and removed from the territory of the Republic of Moldova, in collaboration with the secret services of other countries. The Court reiterated that a person who is subject to a measure based on national security considerations must not be deprived of all guarantees against arbitrariness. He or she must, inter alia, be able to verify the measure in question examined by an independent and impartially competent body in order to examine all relevant factual and legal grounds, to determine the legality of the measure and to censure possible abuse by the authorities. Before that control body, the person concerned must benefit from contradictory procedures in order to present his point of view and reject the arguments of the authorities. ... the national courts could not, in any event, have examined the real reasons for the expulsion, since the national legislation did not provide that the note from the Secret Service which served as the ground for expelling the plaintiffs should be made available to the judges. 7.5. Protocol no. 7 ECHR, Article 1 „Procedural safeguards relating to expulsion of aliens” Article 1, Protocol no.7 ECHR states that: 1. An alien lawfully resident in the territory of a State shall not be expelled therefrom except in pursuance of a decision reached in accordance with law and shall be allowed: a. to submit reasons against his expulsion, b. to have his case reviewed, and c. to be represented for these purposes before the competent authority or a person or persons designated by that authority. 2. An alien may be expelled before the exercise of his rights under paragraph 1.a, b and c of this article, when such expulsion is necessary in the interests of public order or is grounded on reasons of national security. As regards its scope, this article refers only to a foreigner legally resident in the territory of the State concerned. The word resident is intended to exclude from the application of the article any foreigner who has arrived at a point of entry but has not yet passed immigration control or who has been admitted to the territory only for the purpose of transit or for a limited period for non-residential purposes. This period also covers the period pending a decision on the application for a residence 62