PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 29766/03) against the Republic of Turkey lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by two Turkish nationals, Mr Umar Karatepe and Ms Sevil Ulaş (“the applicants”), on 22 August 2003.

The applicants were represented by Mr A.T. Ocak, a lawyer practising in Istanbul. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

The applicants alleged that the treatment to which they had been subjected by police offices during their arrest had amounted to a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.

On 8 December 2006 the Court decided to give notice of the application to the Government. Under the provisions of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention, it decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility.

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicants were born in 1975 and 1978 respectively and live in Istanbul.

On 1 September 2001 at about 7 p.m. the applicants went to the Milli Egemenlik Park in Bakırköy (Istanbul) to attend a meeting, namely the so-called “peace festivities” organised by the Bakırköy branch of the Republican People’s Party (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi). While they were about to enter the park, the applicants were stopped and searched by the police. The officers found fifty-three copies of a bulletin in a black plastic bag. As the applicants appeared suspicious, the police officers arrested them. The applicants were allegedly beaten up, insulted and threatened with death during their arrest. In particular, two police officers applied pressure to their necks from behind and made them lie down. Following the arrival of two more police officers, they dragged both applicants along the ground, kicked and slapped them and put them in a police car. Once in the car, the police officers continued to punch and slap them, hit them with wooden sticks, insult and threaten them. One of the police officers first sat on the head of Sevil Ulaş and then hit her against the roof of the car. When the applicants asked where they were being taken, one of the officers said: “We are taking you to a stream where your corpses will be found”.

However, according to the arrest and seizure report drafted by two police officers, the applicants were arrested because they had been acting suspiciously. The report further stated that the applicants had resisted the police officers, and had self-inflicted certain scratches and bruises on their bodies during the incident. In particular, Umar Karatepe had hit his elbow on the wall of the park and Sevil Ulaş had bruised her left elbow whilst resisting getting into the police car. The applicants refused to sign this report.

On the same day at about 8 p.m. the applicants were taken to the Bakırköy State Hospital for a medical examination. The doctor who examined the applicants drafted a provisional report. She observed that the first applicant had two scratches on his right elbow and a bruise on his back. As for the second applicant, the presence of a bruise on her left elbow was noted.

On 2 September 2001, at about 1 a.m., the applicants were taken to the Bakırköy State Hospital once again. The same doctor examined the applicants and reiterated her earlier findings in her report. Following this medical examination, the applicants were released.

On 3 September 2001 the Bakırköy Forensic Institute delivered its final report in respect of the applicants. It was stated that the first applicant had several bruises and scratches on his body. In particular, the doctor noted the presence of bruises measuring 3x1 cm, 0.5x0.5 cm, 2x1 cm and 0.5x0.3 cm on the right elbow, a scratch of 2 cm below the bruises described above, an ecchymosis of 6x3 cm on the inner part of the right arm, an ecchymosis of 1x2 cm in the middle inner part of the right biceps, a scratch of 3 cm on the right waist area, two ecchymosis of 1,5x1 cm and 0,3x0,3 cm on the inner middle part of the left biceps and a bruise of 2x2 cm on the inner part of the left elbow.

In respect of the second applicant, the doctor noted the presence of a 3x3 cm swelling in the right occipital temporal region. The report further concluded that both applicants were unfit to work for three days.

Again on 3 September 2001 the applicants filed a criminal complaint with the Bakırköy Public Prosecutor. They complained that the police officers had used excessive force during their arrest. They also stated that a person called Ö.U. had been an eyewitness to the events. Sevil Ulaş complained that in the course of her arrest she had received blows to her head and upper part of her body, that her head had been banged against the window, that her hair had been pulled and that these assaults by police officers had continued in the police car. Umar Karatepe alleged that he had been kicked and slapped during his arrest and that he had been beaten up in the police car on the way to the police station.

In his preliminary investigation report dated 28 December 2001, a senior police lieutenant, acting as the investigator, found that the complainants had shouted political slogans, such as “human dignity will defy torture” and that they hated the police because they had been arrested and detained on a number of occasions in the past and that the medical reports did not indicate the presence of any bruises which could have been caused by ill-treatment. Furthermore, considering that the police officers denied the allegations against them, the investigator concluded that there was no evidence on which to commit the accused for trial.

On 28 December 2001, relying on the investigator’s above report prepared in accordance with Article 5 of Law no. 4483, the Bahçelievler District Governor decided not to authorise the prosecution of the accused police officers. The applicants filed an objection against this decision.

On 9 April 2002 the Istanbul Regional Administrative Court set aside the District Governor’s decision of non-authorisation on the ground that the investigation into the applicants’ allegations was inadequate. The court noted that the investigator had failed to take evidence from the complainants and their witnesses. It therefore asked the District Governor’s office to conduct a new investigation. The District Governor appointed M.A., a police lieutenant, as the new investigator.

Between 30 May 2002 and 14 July 2002 M.A. conducted his investigation into the applicants’ allegations of ill-treatment. Having heard the applicants, police officers and an eyewitness named by the applicants, he found that the medical reports merely indicated the presence of scratches on the arms and hands of the complainants and that there was no indication of physical violence. He therefore concluded that the applicants’ allegations were not corroborated by evidence and that therefore no permission should be given for prosecution of the accused police officers.

In view of the investigator’s above-mentioned conclusion, on 15 July 2002 the Bahçelievler District Governor refused authorisation for the prosecution of the accused police officers.

On 7 October 2002, referring to the Bahçelievler District Governor’s decision, the Bakırköy Public Prosecutor issued a non‑prosecution decision in respect of the accused police officers. The applicants appealed against this decision.

On 17 December 2002 the Eyüp Assize Court dismissed the applicants’ appeal. This decision was notified to the applicants on 26 February 2003.