Information Note on the Court’s case-law 50

February 2003

Emrullah Karagöz v. Turkey (dec.) - 78027/01

Decision 6.2.2003 [Section III]

Article 5

Article 5-1

Lawful arrest or detention

Arrest and detention on remand in the context of an investigation into terrorist acts, and transfer to a police station for questioning: admissible

[This summary also covers the decision of the case Düşün and Others v. Turkey , no . 4080/02, 6 February 2003]

The first applicant, the second applicant's mother and the third applicant were arrested on 28 October, 29 October and 1 November 2001 respectively, and held in custody at the headquarters of the Diyarbakir brigade. They were th en taken before the judge of the National Security Court, who ordered that they be remanded in custody. They were subsequently transferred to a remand prison. Following requests from the governor of the region under a state of emergency and of the State Pr osecutor pursuant to Article 3 (c) of Decree-law n° 430 on complementary measures to be taken in the context of the state of emergency, the judge gave leave for all three of the applicants to be handed back to the gendarmerie for questioning over a period not exceeding ten days. In the case of the first and third applicants, the measure was renewed several times, in each case for ten days. One of the representatives of the first and third applicants was able to meet the applicant on his return to the remand prison following the first period of questioning at the gendarmerie. The applicant stated that he had been ill treated during the questioning. Furthermore, the first applicant lodged a complaint with the State prosecutor against the gendarmes involved in questioning him for having mistreated him in order to extract a confession from him. The prosecutor declared that he had no jurisdiction and forwarded the complaint file to the Diyarbakir prosecutor's office, which applied to the prefect of the Diyarbakir region for leave to bring criminal proceedings. The committee responsible for administration in Diyarbakir opened a preliminary inquiry against the commander of the gendarmerie, but decided not to proceed with it for want of evidence. The first and third a pplicants, as well as the mother of the second applicant, could not communicate either with their families or with their lawyers during their time with the gendarmerie, and alleged that they had been mistreated during questioning at the gendarmerie.

Admiss ible in respect of Articles 3, 5 § 1, 6 and 13 as well as Article 18. The question of exhaustion of domestic remedies was joined to the merits in the case of application N° 78027/01.

Inadmissible (N° 4080/02) as regards the first applicant as being manifes tly ill-founded.

© Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.

Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes