Search
document

Document text Analytics

ZARAKOLU v. TURKEY

Doc ref: 24761/94 • ECHR ID: 001-1997

Document date: October 11, 1994

Inbound citations: 0
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 0

ZARAKOLU v. TURKEY

Doc ref: 24761/94 • ECHR ID: 001-1997

Document date: October 11, 1994

Cited paragraphs only

AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

Application No. 24761/94

by Ayse Nur ZARAKOLU

against Turkey

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on

11 October 1994, the following members being present:

MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President

S. TRECHSEL

A. WEITZEL

F. ERMACORA

E. BUSUTTIL

G. JÖRUNDSSON

A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

J.-C. SOYER

H.G. SCHERMERS

H. DANELIUS

Mrs. G.H. THUNE

MM. F. MARTINEZ

C.L. ROZAKIS

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. L. LOUCAIDES

J.-C. GEUS

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

G.B. REFFI

M.A. NOWICKI

I. CABRAL BARRETO

B. CONFORTI

N. BRATZA

I. BÉKÉS

J. MUCHA

E. KONSTANTINOV

D. SVÁBY

G. RESS

Mr. H.C. KRÜGER, Secretary to the Commission

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection

of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the application introduced on 29 July 1994 by

Ayse Nur Zarakolu against Turkey and registered on 3 August 1994 under

file No. 24761/94;

Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules

of Procedure of the Commission;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant is a Turkish citizen, born in Antalya. She is the

director and owner of a publishing house in Istanbul. She is

represented before the Commission by Professor Kevin Boyle and Ms.

Francoise Hampson, both university teachers at the University of Essex,

England.

The facts, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as

follows:

In July 1991 the publishing house owned by the applicant

published a book by the Turkish sociologist Dr. Ismail Besikci,

entitled "The Republican Popular Party's Program (1931) and the Kurdish

Problem".

On 8 August 1991 the Public Prosecutor of Istanbul State Security

Court issued an indictment against both Ismail Besikci and the

applicant and charged them, as the author and the publisher of the

book, with making propaganda against the indivisibility of the State.

The Public Prosecutor referred to the provisions of the Anti-Terror

Law. Pursuant to the indictment, criminal proceedings were initiated

before the State Security Court of Istanbul against the applicant and

the author.

On 1 July 1993 the Court held that the applicant and the author

were guilty of the offences with which they were charged. The applicant

was sentenced to five months' imprisonment and fined 41,666,666 Turkish

Lira.

The applicant's legal representative challenged the judgment of

the State Security Court before the Supreme Court. On 5 November 1993

the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. This decision was communicated

to the applicant's legal representative on 10 November 1993.

On 3 January 1994 the applicant applied to the Chief Public

Prosecutor of the Supreme Court, through the Chief Public Prosecutor

of the Istanbul State Security Court, and requested that the case be

brought before the Supreme Court for rectification of the judgment

(tashihi karar). On 31 January 1994 the Chief Public Prosecutor of the

Supreme Court rejected this request.

At the time the application was presented to the Commission, the

applicant was in Bayrampasa prison to serve her sentence.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains, under Article 7 of the Convention, that

she was held guilty of a criminal offence on account of an act which

did not constitute a criminal offence under Turkish law at the time

when it was committed. She asserts that until her case it had always

been understood that a publication as in her case, would not fall

within the definition of "a periodical", for the dissemination of which

the law foresees the imprisonment of the owner or the director of the

publishing house.

The applicant further complains that there has been an

interference with her right to freedom of expression by public

authority in that her right to impart information and ideas as

guaranteed by Article 10 has been undermined by her conviction for

publishing a book.

THE LAW

The applicant complains that she was convicted of a criminal

offence on account of an act which did not constitute a criminal

offence under Turkish law at the time when it was committed (Article

7 (Art. 7) of the Convention). She further complains that there has

been an interference by a public authority with her right of freedom

of expression (Article 10 (Art. 10) of the Convention).

The Commission considers that the applicant's petition to the

Chief Public Prosecutor of the Supreme Court requesting him to bring

the case before the Supreme Court for the rectification of the judgment

does not constitute an effective remedy under domestic law (e.g.

No. 18549/91, Sever v. Turkey, Dec.12.2.92; No. 22273/93, Varli v.

Turkey, Dec. 20.1.94).

The final decision regarding the applicant's conviction and

sentence is accordingly the decision of the Supreme Court which was

given on 5 November 1993 and communicated to the applicant on

10 November 1993. The present application was submitted to the

Commission on 29 July 1994, that is more than six months after the date

of this decision.

Furthermore, an examination of the case does not disclose the

existence of any special circumstances which might have interrupted or

suspended the six months period provided for in Article 26 (Art. 26)

of the Convention.

It follows that the application has been introduced out of time

and must be rejected under Article 27 para. 3 (Art. 27-3) of the

Convention.

For these reasons, the Commission, by a majority,

DECLARES THE APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE.

Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission

(H.C. KRÜGER) (C.A. NØRGAARD)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant