Information Note on the Court’s case-law 67

August-September 2004

Çelik v. Turkey (dec.) - 52991/99

Decision 23.9.2004 [Section I]

Article 35

Article 35-1

Six-month period

Notification of final domestic decision to lawyer with whom applicant had lost contact: inadmissible

The applicant was convicted in 1985 by a Martial Law Court for PKK membership. In 1990, the judgment was quashed and the applicant was rel eased. Following the abolition of martial law courts in Turkey, the applicant’s case-file was examined in 1998 by an Assize Court, which acquitted him of the charges. In August 1998 the judgment was served on the lawyer whom the applicant had originally ap pointed at the time of the Martial Law Court proceedings. The judgment became final on 10 September 1998. In the meantime, the applicant had appointed a new lawyer, who in March 1999 requested that the final judgment of the Assize Court be served on him. T he domestic courts subsequently awarded the applicant compensation for his unjustified detention on remand. The applicant complains that the criminal proceedings against him were not concluded within a reasonable time.

Inadmissible under Article 6 § 1 (re asonable time): The six month period began to run on 10 September 1998, when the judgment of the Assize Court had become final, and not on 19 March 1999, when the applicant alleges he became aware of the judgment. The decision had been served on his origin ally appointed lawyer, and if the applicant had not been in contact with him that was due to his own negligence. Moreover, the Court was not bound by the fact that the domestic courts had taken 19 March 1999 as the starting date for the statutory time-limi t for the compensation procedure: out of time.

© 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