PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 1236/05) 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 three Turkish nationals, Ms Havva Kaba, Miss Edanur Kaba and Miss Elif Kaba (“the applicants”), on 30 November 2004.

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

On 15 September 2009 the President of the Second Section decided to give notice of the application to the Government. It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time (Article 29 § 1).

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicants were born in 1978, 2001 and 1997 respectively and live in Istanbul. The first applicant is the wife and the second and third applicants are the children of Mr Yusuf Kaba, who was an officer in the Turkish Navy and died of cancer in 2003. According to the applicants, Mr Kaba's exposure to asbestos at Hasköy Dock had caused his cancer. They were also concerned about the allegedly inadequate treatment he received at the GATA military hospital.

Following Mr Kaba's death, on 22 August 2003 the applicants initiated compensation proceedings in the Military Supreme Administrative Court against the Ministry of Defence. They requested a total of 650,000,000,000 Turkish liras (TRL) (approximately 400,000 euros (EUR) at the time) in both pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages. In their application, the applicants complained that Mr Kaba's death was the result of the asbestos levels at Hasköy Dock and stated that he had not received adequate medical treatment at the GATA military hospital. In their submissions the applicants relied on the medical records of the applicant, a report on the asbestos levels at Hasköy Dock and an expert report. The applicants also requested legal aid for the court fees. In their legal-aid claim they submitted documents attesting to their poor financial situation. The official documents attested that the applicants had no income.

On 19 November 2003 the Military Supreme Administrative Court, without giving any reason, decided that the applicants did not qualify for legal aid. The applicants were notified that they had to pay TRL 8,758,870,000 (approximately EUR 5,000) in court fees within one month for the proceedings to be continued, and that failure to do so would result in the discontinuation of the proceedings. In January 2004 the applicants again requested legal aid to pay the court fees. On 21 January 2004 the Military Supreme Administrative Court refused to grant the applicants legal aid, once again without giving reasons. The applicants were requested to pay the fees due within one month in order to be able to continue the proceedings. They were warned that failure to do so would result in the discontinuation of the proceedings.

On 22 April 2004 the applicants requested a rectification of the decision dated 21 January 2004. Subsequently, on 26 April 2004 the applicants' lawyer also lodged a request with the Military Supreme Administrative Court and requested clarification (tavzih) of the decision dated 21 January 2004. In his request the applicants' lawyer referred to the relevant statements of means provided by the domestic authorities. He further stated that while lodging the case he had submitted the relevant medical records concerning Mr Yusuf Kaba, a report on the asbestos levels at Hasköy Dock and an expert report, and that this evidence should be sufficient to prove that they had a well-founded case.

On 12 May 2004 the Military Supreme Administrative Court examined both requests and decided that, as the decision dated 21 January 2004 was not a final decision on the merits of the case, a rectification or a clarification request was not possible under domestic law. The court also decided to discontinue the compensation proceedings because the applicants had not paid the necessary court fees. This decision was served on the applicants on 4 June 2004.