PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 21179/02) 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 Mr Sabri Taş.

The applicant was represented by Mr Mesut Beştaş and Ms Meral Beştaş, lawyers practising in Diyarbakır. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) did not designate an Agent for the purposes of the proceedings before the Court.

On 8 July 2004 the Court declared the application partly inadmissible and decided to communicate the complaint concerning the length of the applicant’s detention on remand and the length of the criminal proceedings to the Government. Applying Article 29 § 3 of the Convention, it decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time.

The applicant and the Government each filed observations on the merits and admissibility (Rule 59 § 1).

On 1 November 2004 the Court changed the composition of its Sections (Rule 25 § 1). This case was assigned to the newly composed Second Section (Rule 52 § 1).

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1964 and lives in Batman.

On 7 February 1993 the applicant was taken into custody in Batman by police officers from the Batman Anti-Terrorist Branch and he was held in custody until 5 March 1993.

On 5 March 1993 the Batman Criminal Court ordered the applicant’s remand in custody.

On 6 April 1993 and on 10 October 1994 the Public Prosecutor at the Diyarbakır State Security Court filed two different bills of indictment accusing the applicant of being a member of an illegal terrorist organization and undermining the integrity of the State.

On 5 May 1993 the State Security Court commenced the trial against the applicant and twenty-one other suspects, and prolonged the applicant’s detention.

On 1 December 1995, the State Security Court convicted the applicant under Article 125 of the Criminal Code, and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The charges had been brought under Articles 168 and 125 of the Criminal Code.

Thereafter, the Court of cassation quashed the judgment three times, remitting it to the first-instance court, which reached the same conclusions as before: – Court of Cassation decisions quashing the judgments on 9 July 1996, 31 January 2000 and 2 April 2001; – the repetitive State Security Court decisions on 11 June 1999 (after numerous hearings), 28 September 2000 (after numerous hearings in the applicant’s absence) and 31 January 2002 (also after numerous hearings).

On that latter date, the State Security Court convicted the applicant under Article 168/2 of the Criminal Code and sentenced him to twelve years and six months’ imprisonment. He was released the same day.

The applicant did not appeal against this judgment. On 7 February 2002 it became final.