Source: http://echr.ketse.com/doc/46221.99-en-20050512/
Timestamp: 2017-08-20 05:59:02
Document Index: 491205665

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 3', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 7', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'art. 6', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 2', 'Art. 14', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 7', 'Art. 34', 'Art. 3', '§ 4', '§ 2', '§ 43', '§ 22', '§ 49', '§ 202', '§ 41', '§ 27', '§ 49', '§ 54', '§ 66', '§ 62', '§ 58', '§ 194', '§ 47', '§ 79', '§ 86', 'application no. 17864', '§ 39', '§ 66', '§ 91', '§ 27', '§ 35', '§ 44', 'application no. 28780', '§ 68', '§ 72', '§ 161', '§ 162', '§ 139', '§ 88', '§ 34', '§ 52', '§ 63', '§ 92', '§ 128', '§ 72', '§ 37', '§ 30', '§ 55', '§ 56', '§ 132', '§ 249', '§ 20', '§ 88', '§ 89', '§ 103', '§ 104', '§ 86', '§ 54', '§ 167', '§ 169', '§ 23', '§ 32', '§ 36', '§ 24', '§ 61', '§ 60', 'Art. 1', 'Art. 2', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 34', 'Art. 35', 'Art. 46', 'Art. 46', 'Art. 46', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'art. 6', 'art. 6', 'art. 3', 'art. 5', 'art. 5', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 14', 'Art. 5']

Articles 10; 13; 14+2; 18; 2-1; 3; 34; 41; 46; 5-1; 5-3; 5-4; 6-1; 6-3-b; 6-3-c; 7; 8; 9
Citations 5-15-35-45-56-16-3-d1031314
No violation of Art. 3 (conditions in detention)
No violation of Art. 3 (conditions of transfer)
No violation of Art. 3 (implementation of death penalty)
Non-pecuniary damage - finding of a violation of Art. 3, 5 and 6 sufficient
Not necessary to examine remaining complaints under Art. 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 18
Violation of Art. 3 (imposition of death penalty)
Violation of Art. 6-1 (tribunal)
Violation of Art. 6-3-c (proceedings)
(art. 6-3-b) access to relevant files
Published in Reports of Judgments and Decisions 2005-IV
Represented by KENTRIDGE, Sir Sydney ; MULLER, Mark ; OTTY, Timothy ; TUGLUK, Aysel
Date of Judgment 12/05/2005
Conclusion Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) ; Violation of Art. 5-4 ; No violation of Art. 5-1 ; Violation of Art. 5-3 ; Violation of Art. 6-1 (tribunal) ; Violation of Art. 6-1+6-3-b and 6-3-c (proceedings) ; No violation of Art. 2 ; No violation of Art. 14+2 ; No violation of Art. 3 (implementation of death penalty) ; Violation of Art. 3 (imposition of death penalty) ; No violation of Art. 3 (conditions of transfer) ; No violation of Art. 3 (conditions in detention) ; Not necessary to examine remaining complaints under Art. 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 18 ; No violation of Art. 34 ; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of a violation of Art. 3, 5 and 6 sufficient ; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
Articles 2-1 , 3 , 5-1 , 5-3 , 5-4 , 6-1 , 6-3-b , 6-3-c , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 13 , 14+2 , 18 , 34 , 41 , 46
Law at Issue Article 143 of the Constitution ; Article 128 § 4, Article 144 and Article 381 § 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ; Article 125 of the Criminal Code ; Law no. 4771 (2002) ; Law no. 2845 (1990) on the State Security Courts ; Law no. 4390 (1999) ; Law no. 466 on the Payment of Compensation to Persons Unlawfully Arrested or Detained
Strasbourg Case Law Abbas Sertkaya v. Turkey, (dec.) no. 77113/01, 11 December 2003, p. 4 ; Ahmed v. Austria, judgment of 17 December 1996, Reports 1996-VI, p. 2207, § 43 ; Albert and Le Compte v. Belgium, judgment of 10 February 1983, Series A no. 58, p. 13, § 22 ; Aquilina v. Malta [GC], no. 25642/94, § 49, ECHR 1999-III ; Assanidzé v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, § 202, ECHR 2004-II ; Bankovic and Others v. Belgium and 16 Other Contracting States (dec.) [GC], no. 52207/99, ECHR 2001-XII ; Benham v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 10 June 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-III, p. 753, § 41 ; Beyeler v. Italy (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 33202/96, 28 May 2002, § 27 ; Bouamar v. Belgium, judgment of 29 February 1988, Series A no. 129, p. 21, § 49 ; Bozano v. France, judgment of 18 December 1986, Series A no. 111, p. 23, § 54 ; Brandstetter v. Austria, judgment of 28 August 1991, Series A no. 211, p. 27, §§ 66-67 ; Brannigan and McBride v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 26 May 1993, Series A no. 258-B, pp. 55-56, §§ 62-63 ; Brogan and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 29 November 1988, Series A no. 145-B, pp. 31-32, § 58 ; Broniowski v. Poland [GC], no. 31443/96, § 194, ECHR 2004-V ; Bulut v. Austria, judgment of 22 February 1996, Reports 1996-II, pp. 380-381, § 47 ; Chahal v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 15 November 1996, Reports 1996-V, p. 1855, § 79 and p. 1856, § 86 ; Cyprus v. Turkey (no 8007/77, decision of the Commission of 17 July 1978, Decisions and Reports (D.R.) 13, p. 85 ; Çinar v. Turkey, application no. 17864/91, decision of the Commission of 5 September 1994, D.R. 79, p. 5 ; Çiraklar v. Turkey, judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports 1998-VII, § 39 ; Dikme v. Turkey, no. 20869/92, § 66, ECHR 2000-VIII ; Drozd and Janousek v. France and Spain, judgment of 26 June 1992, Series A no. 240, p. 29, § 91 ; Freda v. Italy, no. 8916/80, decision of the Commission of 7 October 1980, D.R. 21, p. 250 ; Gençel v. Turkey, no. 53431/99, § 27, 23 October 2003 ; Göç v. Turkey [GC], no. 36590/97, §§ 35-37, ECHR 2002-V ; Guerra and Others v. Italy, judgment of 19 February 1998, Reports 1998-I, p. 223, § 44 ; Illich Ramirez Sánchez v. France, application no. 28780/95, decision of the Commission of 24 June 1996, D.R. 86, p. 155 ; Imrek v. Turkey (dec.) no. 57175/00, 28 January 2003 ; Incal v. Turkey, judgment of 9 June 1998, Reports 1998-IV, § 68 and § 72 ; Iprahim Ülger v. Turkey, no. 57250/00, 29 July 2004 ; Ireland v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 18 January 1978, Series A no. 25, p. 65, § 161 and § 162 ; K. and T. v. Finland [GC], no. 25702/94, §§ 139-141, ECHR 2001-VII ; Kamasinski v. Austria, judgment of 19 December 1989, Series A no. 168, p. 39, § 88 ; Kingsley v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 35605/97, § 34, ECHR 2002-IV ; Klaus Altmann (Barbie) v. France, no. 10689/83, decision of the Commission of 4 July 1984, D.R. 37, p. 225 ; Kremzow v. Austria, judgment of 21 September 1993, Series A no. 268-B, p. 42, § 52 and p. 44, § 63 ; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 92, ECHR 2000-XI ; Kuznetzov v. Ukraine, no. 39042/97, 29 April 2003 ; Luc Reinette v. France, no. 14009/88, decision of the Commission of 2 October 1989, D.R. 63, p. 189 ; Mamatkulov and Askarov v. Turkey [GC], nos. 46827/99 and 46951/99, § 128, CEDR 2005-I ; Messina v. Italy (dec.), no. 25498/94, ECHR 1999-V ; Ocalan v. Turkey, judgment of 12 March 2003, no. 46221/99, §§ 72-74, 92, 100, 106-110, 189-196 and 201-204 ; Pfeifer and Plankl v. Austria, judgment of 25 February 1992, Series A no. 227, p. 16, § 37 ; Piersack v. Belgium of 1 October 1982, Series A no. 53, pp. 14-15, § 30 ; Poltoratskiy v. Ukraine, no. 38812/97, ECHR 2003-V ; Raninen v. Finland, judgment of 16 December 1997, Reports 1997-VIII, pp. 2821-2822, § 55 and § 56 ; Refah Partysi (the welfare Party) and Others v. Turkey [GC], nos 41340/98, 41342/98, 41343/98 and 41344/98, ECHR 2003-II ; Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 132, ECHR 2000-VII ; Scozzari and Giunta v. Italy [GC], nos. 39221/98 and 41963/98, § 249, ECHR 2000-VIII ; Brumarescu v. Romania (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 28342/95, § 20, ECHR 2001-I ; Soering v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 7 July 1989, Series A no. 161, p. 34, § 88, p. 35, § 89, p. 40, § 103 and p. 41, § 104 ; Somogyi v. Italy, no. 67972/01, § 86, ECHR-IV ; Stocké v. Germany, judgment of 19 March 1991, Series A no. 199, 19, § 54 ; Stocké v. Germany, opinion of the Commission of 12 October 1989, Series A no. 199, p. 24, § 167 and § 169 ; Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 6 November 1980 (former article 50), Series A no. 38, p. 13, § 23 ; Tyrer v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 25 April 1978, Series A no. 26, p. 16, § 32 ; Van Oosterwijck v. Belgium, judgment of 6 November 1980, Series A no. 40, pp. 18-19, §§ 36-40 ; Wassink v. the Netherlands, judgment of 27 September 1990, Series A no. 185-A, p. 11, § 24 ; Weeks v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 2 February 1987, Series A no. 114, p. 30, § 61 ; Winterwerp v. the Netherlands, judgment of 24 October 1979, Series A no. 33, p. 24, § 60
External Sources The United Nations Human Rights Committee ; The Inter-American Court of Human Rights ; Case-law of various national courts
Keywords "(Art. 1) JURISDICTION OF STATES" "(Art. 2-1) DEATH PENALTY" "(Art. 3) DEGRADING TREATMENT" "(Art. 3) INHUMAN TREATMENT" "(Art. 34) HINDER THE EXERCISE OF THE RIGHT OF PETITION" "(Art. 35-1) EXHAUSTION OF DOMESTIC REMEDIES" "(Art. 46-2) EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT" "(Art. 46-2) INDIVIDUAL MEASURES" "(Art. 46-2) REOPENING OF PROCEEDINGS" "(Art. 5-1) LAWFUL ARREST OR DETENTION" "(Art. 5-1) PROCEDURE PRESCRIBED BY LAW" "(Art. 5-1-c) BRINGING BEFORE COMPETENT LEGAL AUTHORITY" "(Art. 5-1-c) REASONABLE SUSPICION" "(Art. 5-3) BROUGHT PROMPTLY BEFORE JUDGE OR OTHER OFFICER" "(Art. 5-4) REVIEW OF LAWFULNESS OF DETENTION" "(Art. 5-4) TAKE PROCEEDINGS" "(Art. 6-1) ADVERSARIAL TRIAL" "(Art. 6-1) EQUALITY OF ARMS" "(Art. 6-1) FAIR HEARING" "(Art. 6-1) IMPARTIAL TRIBUNAL" "(Art. 6-1) INDEPENDENT TRIBUNAL" "(Art. 6-3-b) ACCESS TO RELEVANT FILES" "(Art. 6-3-b) ADEQUATE FACILITIES" "(Art. 6-3-b) ADEQUATE TIME" "(Art. 6-3-b) PREPARATION OF DEFENCE" "(Art. 6-3-c) DEFENCE THROUGH LEGAL ASSISTANCE"
MAMATKULOV AND ASKAROV v. TURKEY
IPRAHIM ÜLGER v. TURKEY
6-1, 10 Court (Third Section) Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction)
SOMOGYI v. ITALY
6 Court (Second Section) Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction)
SERTKAYA v. TURKEY
11 Court (Grand Chamber) Judgment (Merits)
AHMED v. AUSTRIA
C.R. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
5 (art. 6-1) fair hearing
2 (art. 6-3-d) examination of witnesses
2 (art. 3) torture
2 (art. 5-3) length of pre-trial detention
1 (art. 5-1-e) persons of unsound mind
1 6-3-a
1 5-1-e
2 Violation of Art. 6-1 (composition of state security court)
2 No violation of Art. 3
1 No separate issue concerning other complaints under Art. 6
1 Not necessary to examine remaining complaints
1 No violation of Art. 14
1 Not necessary to examine Art. 5-4
10, 5-1 Court (Third Section) Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction)
AVCI (CABAT) AND OTHERS v. TURKEY
5-3, 5-5 Court (Second Section) Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction)
KRASNIKI v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC
FATMA TUNC v. TURKEY
5-3, 5-4, 5-5 Court (Third Section) Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction)
YILDIZ YILMAZ v. TURKEY
5-3, 5-5, 6-1, 3, 13, 14 Court (Second Section) Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction)
TEMIRKAN v. TURKEY
NAKACH v. THE NETHERLANDS
5-1 Court (Third Section) Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction)