Lexploria

Resolution CM/ ResDH (2011)307 [1]

Execution of the judgment s of the European Court of Human Rights

49 cases against Turkey mainly concerning the failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion before the Court of Cassation and/or the lack of an oral hearing

(see details in Appendix)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);

Having regard to the judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee once they had become final;

Recalling that the violation s of the Convention found by the Court in these cases mainly concern the breach of the applicant s ’ right to a fair trial on account of the failure to communicate to the applicants the prosecutor’s opinion before the Court of Cassation and/or lack of an oral hearing in compensation proceedings (violations of Article 6, paragraph 1) and also, in some cases, late payment of compensation granted by domestic courts (violations of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1) (see details in Appendix);

Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the mea s ures taken to comply with its obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Conve n tion to abide by the judgments;

Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee’s Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;

Having satisfied itself that, the respondent state paid the a p plicant s the just satisfaction provided in the judgments where applicable (see details in Appendix),

Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded in the judgments, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate, of

- individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum ; and

- general measures preventing similar violations;

DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix), that it has exe r cised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases and

DECIDES to close the examination of these cases.

Appendix to Resolution CM/ ResDH (2011)307

Information on the measures taken to comply with the judgments

in 49 cases against Turkey mainly concerning the lack of an oral hearing and the failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion before the Court of Cassation and/or the lack of an oral hearing in compensation proceedings

Introductory case summary

The se cases concern the breach of the applicants ’ right to a fair trial on account of the non-communication to the applicants of the written opinion submitted by the Principal Public Prosecutor to the Court of Cassation on the merits, and/or the absence of an oral hearing (violations of Article 6§1 (in some cases in combination with Article 6§3)).

The cases of Apaydın , Deniz Faruk , Göktaş Ali, Göktaş and, Kılıç and Korkut also concern the late payment of compensation granted by domestic courts (violation s of Article 1, Protocol No. 1).

I. Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures

a) Details of just satisfaction

Case and Application

Judgment of

Final on

Pecuniary damage

Non-pecuniary damage

Costs and expenses

Total

Paid on

GÖÇ Mehmet 36590/97

11/07/02

--

2 000 EUR

1 862,03 EUR

3 862,03 EUR

09/10/2002

ÖZATA Zahide Songül

19578/02

20/10/2005

15/02/2006

--

1 000 EUR

15/08/2006

DÄ°NDAR 32456/96

20/12/2005

20/03/2006

--

1 000 EUR

210 EUR

1 210 EUR

01/06/2006

AYÇOBAN and others

42208/02+

22/12/2005

22/03/2006

--

1 000 EUR

21/06/2006

DOÄžAN Halis 75946/01

07/02/2006

07/05/2006

--

315 EUR

20/07/2006

IÅžIK Mehmet Fehmi

62226/00

21/02/2006

21/05/2006

--

1 000 EUR

02/08/2006

TOSUN 4124/02

28/02/2006

28/05/2006

No just satisfaction awarded

HOCAOÄžULLARI 77109/01

07/03/2006

07/06/2006

--

1 000 EUR

31/08/2006

ŞAHİN Çağdaş 28137/02

11/04/2006

11/07/2006

--

1 000 EUR

10/10/2006

KÖMÜRCÜ 77432/01

22/06/2006

22/09/2006

--

1 000 EUR

08/12/2006

KABASAKAL and ATAR

70084/01+

19/09/2006

19/12/2006

--

1 000 EUR

07/03/2007

SAÄžIR

37562/02

19/10/2006

19/01/2007

--

1 500 EUR

19/04/2007

DOÄžAN Halis No.3

4119/02

10/10/2006

10/01/2007

No just satisfaction awarded

MAÇİN No. 2

38282/02

24/10/2006

24/01/2007

--

1 500 EUR

20/04/2007

KOÇAK and others

23720/02+

21/12/2006

21/03/2007

--

1 000 EUR

26/03/2007 [2]

KAYA Öner 9007/03

10/04/2007

10/07/2007

--

1 000 EUR

21/09/2007

TURÄžAY 21085/02

12/04/2007

12/07/2007

No just satisfaction awarded

YALÇIN

8628/03

03/05/2007

03/08/2007

No just satisfaction awarded

SÖĞÜT 16593/03+

31/05/2007

31/08/2007

No just satisfaction awarded

KAYMAZ 6247/03

26/06/2007

26/09/2007

--

1 000 EUR

14/12/2007

DEMİREL Hünkar

10365/03

14/06/2007

14/09/2007

--

1 000 EUR

6/12/2007

ÖZMEN and others

9149/03

14/06/2007

14/09/2007

No just satisfaction awarded

YENÄ°AY 14802/03

26/06/2007

26/09/2007

--

1 000 EUR

14/12/2007

YURTSEVER Mesut

42086/02

19/07/2007

19/10/2007

--

1 000 EUR

15/01/2008

MARTI

9709/03

19/07/2007

19/10/2007

--

1 000 EUR

16/01/2008

TAÅž Erdal No.5

29848/02

20/09/2007

20/12/2007

--

500 EUR

18/03/2008

TAÅž Erdal No.2

13021/02

20/09/2007

20/12/2007

--

500 EUR

18/03/2008

ÜNLÜ Suat 12458/03

15/01/2008

07/07/2008

No just satisfaction awarded

ARSLAN Abdülkerim

67136/01

20/09/2007

31/03/2008

No just satisfaction awarded

ÖLMEZ Cemal 7404/03

27/11/2007

27/02/2008

No just satisfaction awarded

YAYAN

9043/03

27/11/2007

27/02/2008

No just satisfaction awarded

GÖKTAŞ 66446/01

29/11/2007

29/02/2008

250 EUR

--

250 EUR

12/05/2008

TAN Mehmet Zülfi

31385/02

04/12/2007

04/03/2008

No just satisfaction awarded

APAYDIN

502/03

12/02/2008

12/05/2008

121 EUR

225 EUR

--

346 EUR

11/08/2008

DENÄ°Z Faruk 19646/03

12/02/2008

12/05/2008

2 480 EUR

3 000 EUR

--

5 480 EUR

11/08/2008

KILIÇ and KORKUT

25949/03+

12/02/2008

12/05/2008

503 EUR

2 000 EUR

--

2 503 EUR

11/08/2008

GÖKTAŞ Ali 9323/03

12/02/2008

12/05/2008

3040 EUR

3 000 EUR

--

6 040 EUR

11/08/2008

KIZIL and others 1375/03

08/04/2008

08/07/2008

No just satisfaction awarded

TEKELÄ°OÄžLU 16139/03

27/05/2008

27/08/2008

--

1 000 EUR

19/11/2008

DEMÄ°RCÄ° 21843/02

03/06/2008

03/09/2008

No just satisfaction awarded

BALABAN 4236/03

24/06/2008

24/09/2008

--

1 000 EUR

18/12/2008

UÇMA

15071/03

04/03/2008

04/06/2008

No just satisfaction awarded

KEÅž

17174/03

02/12/2008

02/03/2009

--

2 000 EUR

2 000 EUR 29/05/2009

DUMAN 17149/03

27/01/2009

27/04/2009

--

1 900 EUR

1 900EUR

06/07/2009

KARAKOÇ Şahin 19462/04

29/04/2008

29/07/2008

--

1 000 EUR

1 000 EUR 8/10/2008

DEMİREL Hünkar No.2

12166/03

20/10/2009

20/01/2010

--

1 000 EUR

1 000 EUR 30/04/2010

ARGA

27803/02

28/07/2009

28/10/2009

No just satisfaction awarded

ÇALIŞKAN 25506/03

20/10/2009

20/01/2010

No just satisfaction awarded

ÅžENTÃœRK 27577/04

24/11/2009

24/02/2010

No just satisfaction awarded

b) Individual measures

Taking into account the Committee ’ s Recommendation Rec (2000)2 and the particular circumstances of each case, it was considered that the violations found by the Court in these cases concern procedural shortcomings which were not serious enough to pose doubt as to the outcome of the domestic proceedings complained of and that the domestic decisions at issue are not contrary to the Convention with respect to the merits.

The just satisfaction provided in the European Court ’ s judgments has been paid to the applicants.

Consequently, no other individual measure was considered necessary by the Committee of Ministers.

II. General measures

- Concerning the issue of the non-communication of the Public Prosecutor ’ s opinion , Article 297 of the new Code of Criminal Procedure, adopted on 17/12/2004 and entered into force on 01/06/2005, requires notification of written opinions of the Principle Public Prosecutor to parties by the competent chamber of the Court of Cassation.

- As far as the absence of a hearing in compensation proceedings is concerned , Arti cle 142, paragraph 7 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that the competent court shall render its decision only after hearing a plaintiff, the public prosecutor and the representative of the Treasury.

- As far as the late payment of compensation granted by the domestic courts ( Apaydın , Deniz Faruk , Göktaş Ali, Göktaş , and Kılıç and Korkut cases) is concerned , the measures had already been taken to prevent new violations of the same kind (see Resolutions ResDH (2001)70 and ResDH (2 0 01)71 in the cases Aka and Akkuş against Turkey , respectively), in particular through the entry into force on 1 January 2000 of Law No. 4489, which brought the statutory rate of default interest into line with the annual rediscount rate applied by the Turkish Central Bank to short-term debts (the latter rate is fixed and permanently reviewed in accordance with the country ’ s inflation rate).

III. Conclusions of the respondent state

The government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences for the applicants of the violations found by the Court in these cases, that the general measures adopted will prevent similar violations and that Turkey has thus complied with its obligati ons under Article 46, paragraph 1 , of the Convention

[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers by tacit procedure in accordance with the decision taken at the 1128 th meeting (December 2011) under item F.

[2] The applicants did not claim the payment of default interest in view of the minimal sum involved.

Menu

CASE OF GOC AND 48 OTHER CASES AGAINST TURKEY

CASE OF GOC AND 48 OTHER CASES AGAINST TURKEY