PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 30326/03) 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 a Turkish national, Mr Ergin Erkuş (“the applicant”), on 12 August 2003.

The applicant was represented by Mr S. Çetinkaya, a lawyer practising in Izmir. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

On 20 May 2008 the Court declared the application partly inadmissible and decided to communicate to the Government the complaint concerning the lawfulness and length of the applicant’s detention and the absence of an investigation into his detention. It also decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility (Article 29 § 3).

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1982 and lives in Izmir.

While the applicant was in compulsory military service in Kırklareli, on 19 November 2002 he got ten days’ leave and went to Izmir to see his family. He did not return to his barracks afterwards.

On 22 February 2003 at 3 p.m., the applicant was arrested by police officers at the Narlıdere police station during a routine identity check on suspicion of being an army deserter (asker kaçağı). At 4 p.m. he was taken to the Üçkuyular Military Station Command where the officials determined that he had not returned to his army command when his leave had ended. He was questioned, inter alia, about which army command he belonged to, why he had deserted and whether he had committed a crime during this time.

On the same day at 8 p.m., the applicant was taken to Şirinyer Military Station Command where he remained in custody. The next day at 11 a.m., he was transferred to the Military Recruitment Office.

On 7 March 2003 at 1.30 p.m., the applicant was transferred to his army command in Kırklareli. The verbatim record of this transfer noted that the applicant, having committed the offence of army desertion, was requested to be transferred to his army command. It further indicated that the applicant had entered the “security room” on 23 February 2003 and “exited” on 6 March 2003.

On the same day at 2 p.m., the applicant was questioned by two army officials who informed him that he had committed the offence of exceeding his leave.

Between 7 March and 11 March 2003, the applicant was held in custody at his army command.

On 11 March 2003 he was brought before the Çorlu Military Court, which remanded him in custody.

On 12 March 2003 the Çorlu Military Prosecutor filed an indictment charging the applicant with exceeding his leave (“izin tecavüzü”) under Article 66 § 1 of the Military Criminal Code.

On 14 April 2003 the Çorlu Military Court convicted the applicant as charged and sentenced him to ten months’ imprisonment. In its decision the court noted that the applicant had failed to return to his army command at the end of his leave, that he had been apprehended on 22 February 2003 and that he had been held in custody between 7 and 11 March. It deducted the period spent on the road and in custody between 22 February and 11 March 2003 from his prison sentence.

On 22 April 2003 the judgment of the Çorlu Military Court became final as neither the military prosecutor nor the applicant appealed.