PROCEDURE

The case originated in two applications (nos. 16231/06 and 4890/08) 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 Hakan Yılmaz and Mr Taner Zabun (“the applicants”), on 3 April 2006 and 15 January 2008, respectively.

The first applicant was represented by Mr H. İşler, a lawyer practising in Ankara. The second applicant was represented by Mr A. Okat, a lawyer practising in Kütahya. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

On 13 May 2009 the President of the Second Section decided to give notice of the applications to the Government. It was also decided to examine the merits of the applications at the same time as their admissibility (Article 29 § 3).

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASES

The applicants were born in 1980 and 1975, respectively, and live in Ankara and Kütahya.

The first applicant lost the sight of his right eye and the second applicant was injured in the legs during their compulsory military service. Upon the refusal of the Retirement Fund (Emekli Sandığı) to grant them special disability benefits, they applied to the Supreme Military Administrative Court, separately, for annulment of the Retirement Fund's decisions.

On 6 October 2005 and 5 April 2007, respectively, the Supreme Military Administrative Court rejected their requests. In delivering its decision in respect of the first applicant, the Supreme Military Administrative Court relied on an old expert report which it had obtained during an action for damages filed previously by the applicant regarding the same disability. The written opinions submitted by the principal public prosecutor to the Supreme Military Administrative Court regarding their cases were not communicated to the applicants.

The applicants' requests for rectification were rejected by the Supreme Military Administrative Court on 15 December 2005 and 5 July 2007, respectively. The decision of 5 July 2007 was served on the second applicant on 17 July 2007.