PROCEDURE

The case originated in two applications (nos. 42596/98 and 42603/98) against the Republic of Turkey lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights under former Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by two Turkish nationals, Mr Mustafa Sarı and Ms Sibel Çolak (“the applicants”), on 3 April 1998.

The applicants, who had been granted legal aid, were represented by Mrs E. Çıtak, a lawyer practising in Istanbul. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) did not appoint an agent to represent them before the Court.

On 1 February 2000 the First Section decided to join the applications, to declare them partly inadmissible and to give the Government notice of the complaints under Article 5 §§ 1 and 3 and Article 8 of the Convention.

On 1 November 2001 and 1 November 2004 the Court changed the composition of its Sections (Rule 25 § 1 of the Rules of Court). This case was assigned to the newly composed Second Section (Rule 52 § 1).

The applicants and the Government each filed observations on the merits of the case (Rule 59 § 1). The parties replied in writing to each other’s observations.

Applying Article 29 § 3 of the Convention, the Court decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the applications at the same time.

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicants, Mr Sarı and Ms Çolak, were born in 1973 and 1977 respectively. At the material time they lived in Ankara.

On 17 November 1997, at 11.45 p.m., the applicants were arrested and taken into police custody by officers of the Ankara security police in connection with an investigation into the illegal organisation THKP-C Dev Yol – Devrim Hareketi (Turkish People’s Liberation Party-Front – Revolutionary Way – Revolutionary Movement).

The applicants’ detention in police custody was extended, under section 16 of Law no. 2845 (see paragraph 17 below), initially until 21 November 1997, on the authorisation of the public prosecutor at the Ankara National Security Court, and subsequently until 23 November 1997 (inclusive) by order of a judge of that court.

Before the end of their police custody period, on 23 November 1997 at 11.45 p.m., the applicants were questioned by the public prosecutor. They were not brought before a judge until the following morning, that is to say on 24 November 1997. The judge ordered Ms Çolak to be released for the duration of the proceedings and remanded Mr Sarı in custody.

By a bill of indictment of 8 December 1997, the public prosecutor committed the applicants to stand trial before the National Security Court. He called for their conviction, under Article 168 § 2 of the Criminal Code, on a charge of belonging to an armed gang.

Following a hearing on 9 June 1998 before a trial court, Mr Sarı was granted provisional release.

In a judgment of 22 April 1999, after reclassifying the offence, the National Security Court found the applicants guilty of aiding and abetting an armed gang, an offence punishable under Article 169 of the Criminal Code. It sentenced them to three years and nine months’ imprisonment each, and banned them from holding public office for three years.

The applicants appealed on points of law against that judgment.

In a judgment of 23 February 2000, the Court of Cassation quashed the judgment on account of an erroneous classification of the offence.

The National Security Court, in a judgment of 7 November 2001, deferred its decision on the applicants’ case.