SEVINÇ v. TURKEY and 252 other applications
Doc ref: 63634/16, 13853/17, 14439/17, 14942/17, 14976/17, 34032/17, 40177/17, 41766/17, 41864/17, 43739/17, ... • ECHR ID: 001-205997
Document date: October 16, 2020
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 3
Communicated on 16 October 2020 Published on 2 November 2020
SECOND SECTION
Application no. 63634/16 Şamil SEV İ NÇ against Turkey and 252 other applications (see list appended)
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1 . A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix.
2 . The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.
3 . During the night of 15 to 16 July 2016 a group of members of the Turkish armed forces calling themselves the “Peace at Home Council” attempted to carry out a military coup aimed at overthrowing the democratically installed parliament, government and President of Turkey.
4 . During the attempted coup, soldiers under the instigators ’ control bombarded several strategic State buildings, including the parliament building and the presidential compound, attacked the hotel where the President was staying, and held the Chief of General Staff hostage. They also attacked television channels and fired shots at demonstrators. During the night of violence, more than 250 people were killed and more than 2,500 were injured.
5 . The day after the attempted military coup, the national authorities blamed the network linked to Fetullah Gülen , a Turkish citizen living in Pennsylvania (United States of America) and considered to be the leader of an organisation known as FETÖ/PDY (“ Gülenist Terror Organisation/Parallel State Structure”). Several criminal investigations were subsequently initiated by the appropriate prosecuting authorities in respect of suspected members of that organisation.
6 . On 16 July 2016, the Council of Judges and Prosecutors ( Hakimler ve Savcılar Kurulu – hereinafter “HSK”) suspended from office 2,735 judges and prosecutors, including some of the applicants, for a period of three months, pursuant to Article 77 § 1 and Article 81 § 1 of Law no. 2802. The HSK held that there were strong suspicions that the judges were members of the terrorist organisation that had undertaken the attempted coup d ’ état and that their remaining in office would undermine the proper conduct of the investigation and the authority and reputation of the judiciary. In doing so, HSK relied on information and documents contained in investigation files transmitted to it before the attempted coup d ’ état , as well as on information obtained as a result of investigations carried out by the intelligence services.
7 . On 20 July 2016 the Government declared a state of emergency for a period of three months as from 21 July 2016; the state of emergency was subsequently extended for further periods of three months by the Council of Ministers, chaired by the President.
8 . On 21 July 2016 the Turkish authorities gave notice to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe of derogation from the Convention under Article 15.
9 . During the state of emergency, the Council of Ministers chaired by the President passed thirty-seven legislative decrees (nos. 667-703) under Article 121 of the Constitution. One of them, Legislative Decree no. 667, published in the Official Gazette on 23 July 2016, provided in particular, under its Article 3, that the HSK was authorised to dismiss any of its members who were considered to belong to or be affiliated with or linked to terrorist organisations or organisations, structures or groups found by the National Security Council to have engaged in activities that were harmful to national security. The legislative decrees also placed significant restrictions on the procedural safeguards laid down in domestic law for anyone held in police custody or pre-trial detention (for example, extension of the period in which people could be held in police custody, and restrictions on access to case files and on the examination of objections against detention orders).
10 . On 10 August 2016, HSK further suspended 648 magistrates from their posts for a period of three months, including some of the applicants, on the grounds that they belonged to, or were affiliated with or linked to the FETÖ/PDY.
11 . By a decision of 24 August 2016, pursuant to Article 3 of Legislative Decree no. 667, the HSK, meeting in plenary session, dismissed 2,847 judges, all of whom were considered to be members of, affiliated with or linked to the FETÖ/PDY. Then, by a decision of 31 August 2016, it dismissed 543 other judges for the same reason. The applicants were thus dismissed from their functions.
12 . On 18 July 2018, the state of emergency was lifted.
(a) The applicants ’ arrests and pre-trial detention
13 . On 16 July 2016, the office for offences undermining the constitutional order of the Ankara prosecutor ’ s office opened a criminal investigation and notified all regional and departmental prosecutors. Acting within the framework of that investigation, the prosecutors initiated criminal investigations into the involvement, during or after the attempted coup d ’ état , of persons linked with the FETÖ/PDY and of those not directly involved but having links with that organisation, including some members of the judiciary.
14 . The applicants were taken into police custody on various dates in the course of those investigations. At the end of their detention in police custody, they were brought before the magistrate ’ s courts, which ordered their detention on remand. The magistrate ’ s courts relied essentially on the fact that the applicants had been suspended from their functions by the HSK on the grounds that they were members of the organisation that had undertaken the coup d ’ état , and that the Ankara public prosecutor ’ s office had requested that an investigation be initiated into their involvement. The judges took into consideration the nature of the offence with which the applicants were charged, the evidence adduced and the potential penalty. They also noted that the investigations into the attempted coup d ’ état were being conducted nationwide, that statements had not been collected from all suspects, and that the offence with which they were charged was among the “catalogued” offences listed in Article 100 § 3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the “CCP”). The judges concluded that the applicants ’ pre-trial detention appeared, at that stage, to be a proportionate measure.
15 . Objections lodged by the applicants against the detention decisions were dismissed by other magistrate ’ s courts, in similar terms to the first decisions.
(b) Decisions on the continuation of the applicants ’ pre-trial detention and the dismissal of their objections
16 . The applicants ’ continued pre-trial detention was reviewed automatically pursuant to Article 108 of the CCP, which provides for a review every thirty days. The judges ruled on the applicants ’ requests for release at the same time as the detention reviews, pursuant to Article 3, paragraph 1 (ç), of Legislative Decree no. 668.
17 . In most cases, the magistrate ’ s courts ordered the continued pre-trial detention of the applicants, along with several other suspects. In their decisions, they essentially repeated the reasons given in the original detention decisions. They noted that a large proportion of those suspected of being members of FETÖ/PDY had fled and were still wanted. Taking into account the resources available to that organisation and its characteristics, the judges considered that there was a risk that the applicants might abscond, tamper with evidence and reoffend. The judges also stressed the seriousness of the offence with which the applicants were charged and the fact that not all the evidence had yet been collected. They concluded that the decisions to continue detention were in accordance with the information, documents and evidence contained in the investigation files. They added that given that there was still a clear and imminent danger associated with the attempted coup d ’ état , continued detention appeared to be a proportionate measure. They specified that since the suspects were former magistrates, there was a risk that they would try to influence or put pressure on the magistrates in office.
18 . In subsequent decisions on continued pre-trial detention, the magistrate ’ s courts also relied on the use of the ByLock encrypted messaging system by the persons concerned, and on witness statements.
19 . Objections lodged by the applicants were rejected by the magistrate ’ s courts, which relied on grounds similar to those indicated in their previous decisions.
20 . At the investigation stage, both applications for extension of the detention and objections to decisions to continue detention were examined on the basis of the case files, pursuant to Article 6, paragraph 1, subparagraph 1, of Legislative Decree no. 667.
21 . On various dates, the first-instance courts convicted some of the applicants of membership of a terrorist organisation. The criminal proceedings against some of the applicants are still pending before the local courts.
22 . During the trial, the trial courts, ruling either at the end of the hearings or during reviews carried out between the hearings, ordered the applicants ’ continued detention. Appeals lodged against those decisions were dismissed.
(c) Individual applications to the Constitutional Court
23 . The applicants each lodged one or more individual applications before the Constitutional Court. On different dates, the Constitutional Court declared the applications inadmissible. As can be seen from those decisions, the various complaints submitted by the applicants were declared inadmissible on the following grounds:
24 . With regard to the lawfulness of the applicants ’ detention, the Constitutional Court noted that, according to the indictments and/or the investigation files, the applicants were users of ByLock . It considered that, given the characteristics of that application, its use or its downloading for use could be considered by the investigating authorities as evidence of a link with FETÖ/PDY. In this connection, it referred to its judgment in the case of Aydın Yavuz , delivered on 20 June 2017. The use of encryption by the applicants had been considered, depending on the circumstances of the case, as “strong evidence” that they had committed the offence of membership of FETÖ/PDY. Consequently, it could not be concluded that the investigating authorities or the courts that had decided on detention had taken an unfounded and arbitrary approach. In addition, taking into account the reasons given in the decisions on detention and the dismissal of objections, the Constitutional Court held that there were grounds for detention and that the measure was proportionate. It also considered the applicants ’ grievances to be manifestly unfounded. As concerns some of the applicants, the Constitutional Court noted that the indictments and/or investigation files contained witness statements indicating that the applicants were members of FETÖ/PDY. They had therefore been detained on the basis of “reasonable grounds to suspect” that they had committed an offence.
25 . As regards the complaints that the magistrate ’ s courts were not independent and impartial, and that the examination of the appeals by the same judges had deprived the applicants of an effective remedy against the deprivation of liberty, the Constitutional Court noted that it had already examined those complaints in several cases. Having taken into consideration the structural characteristics of the magistrate ’ s courts, it had concluded that the complaints were manifestly ill-founded. The Constitutional Court held that there was no reason to reach a different conclusion in the applicants ’ cases. It also declared inadmissible the applicants ’ complaints that magistrates lacked knowledge of certain procedural guarantees, as well as their complaints that the justice of the peace had lacked jurisdiction to decide on detention, as manifestly ill-founded. Given the nature of the offence with which the applicants were charged and the manner in which it had been committed, the Constitutional Court considered that it was appropriate to accept the ruling of the magistrate ’ s courts which had ordered the applicants ’ detention, and found no error of assessment or arbitrariness.
26 . With regard to the absence of a hearing during the review of the detention decision, the Constitutional Court considered that there was no reason to depart from its landmark decision in the case of Aydın Yavuz , in which it had considered that the absence of a hearing during the review of the detention decision, lasting approximately nine months, had not violated the right to liberty and security. It therefore considered that those complaints were manifestly ill-founded.
27 . With regard to the restriction on access to the investigation file, the Constitutional Court considered, after examining the transcripts of the hearing, the decisions relating to the applicants ’ detention, the objections against those decisions lodged by the applicants or their lawyers, and the documents and information contained in the investigation file, that the applicants had been informed of the elements that constituted the main grounds for detention, that they had had sufficient knowledge of their content and that they had been given the opportunity to challenge the decisions on their detention. It also found those grievances to be manifestly ill-founded.
28 . With regard to the applicants ’ complaints regarding the lawfulness and length of their police custody, based on its well-established case-law on the subject, the Constitutional Court declared those complaints inadmissible for failure to exhaust the compensation remedy provided for in Article 141 of the CCP.
29 . The Constitutional Court dismissed the complaints lodged by some of the applicants concerning the lack of an oral hearing, non-notification or belated notification of the detention decision, lack of or delay in the examination of the case by the magistrate ’ s courts, and the lawfulness of the searches conducted by the authorities on the grounds that they had failed to use the compensation remedy provided for by Article 141 of the CCP.
30 . The Constitutional Court also dismissed the remaining complaints on the grounds that the applicants had not used the appropriate remedies.
31 . The relevant domestic law and practice are set out in Alparslan Altan v. Turkey (no. 12778/17, §§ 46-64, 16 April 2019) and Baş v. Turkey , (no. 66448/18, §§ 52-104, 3 March 2020).
COMPLAINTS
32 . The applicants complained of a violation of Article 5 of the Convention for the following reasons:
- Some of the applicants claim that they were detained on remand in breach of the procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law for prosecutors and judges.
- Some of the applicants complain that they were held in detention in the absence of any suspicion that they had committed an offence and without relevant and sufficient grounds.
- Some of the applicants complain that they were not informed of the reasons for their arrest and any charge against them.
- Some of the applicants claim that the length of their pre-trial detention was excessive.
- Some of the applicants complain that the domestic courts did not hold a hearing when reviewing their pre-trial detention, that they were not notified of the opinion of the public prosecutor on those reviews and that their access to the investigation file was restricted.
- Some of the applicants complain that their release requests and objections were not examined or were examined belatedly.
- Some of the applicants complain that the decisions to extend their detention were not notified to them or were notified belatedly, and that therefore they were unable to appeal against those decisions.
- Some of the applicants complain that they did not receive effective legal assistance and facilities to challenge their detention; in particular, their communication with their lawyers was monitored by the prison authorities.
- Some of the applicants complain that the time taken by the Constitutional Court to conduct its examination of the case was excessive.
- Some applicants allege that there was no remedy available to them to obtain compensation.
The specific complaints in respect of each applicant can be found in the appended table.
33 . Lastly, relying on Article 8 of the Convention, some of the applicants (in applications nos. 24366/19, 25280/19, 26378/19, 27075/19) complain that the searches conducted by the authorities in their homes were unlawful.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
On the basis of the complaints communicated in accordance with the list in the Appendix
1. ( a) Did the applicants ’ pre-trial detention take place “in accordance with the law”, in view of the procedural guarantees provided to the judges and prosecutors by domestic law?
(b) Can the applicants be considered to have been detained on the basis of “a reasonable suspicion” that they had committed an offence (see, in particular, Fox, Campbell and Hartley v. the United Kingdom , 30 August 1990, § 32, Series A No. 182)?
In particular, the parties are invited to answer this question taking into account ,
- on the one hand, Article 100 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which requires “concrete evidence demonstrating the existence of strong suspicions” as to the commission of the offence, and
- on the other hand, the fact that the Constitutional Court based the existence of reasonable suspicion on evidence discovered after the decisions had been taken to detain the applicants.
2. Was the applicants informed promptly of the reasons for their arrest and of any charge against them, as required by Article 5 § 2 of the Convention?
3. Did the judges, who ordered the applicants ’ pre ‑ trial detention and examined the objections lodged against that measure, fulfil their obligations to provide relevant and sufficient grounds in support of the deprivation of liberty in question (see, in particular, Buzadji v. Republic of Moldova [GC], no. 23755/07, § 102, ECHR 2016 (extracts))?
4. Was the length of the applicants ’ pre-trial detention in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention?
5. Did the applicants have at their disposal a remedy by which they could challenge the lawfulness of their deprivation of liberty, as required by Article 5 § 4 of the Convention? In particular, the Government are invited to respond to the following complaints made by the applicants:
- that the principle of equality of arms had not been respected, as the decisions to extend their detention and their objections to those decisions had been examined without a hearing and the prosecutors ’ opinions had not been communicated to them;
- because of the restriction imposed on their access to the case file, they had been unable to challenge effectively their detention;
- that their objections had not been examined or had been examined belatedly;
- that the decisions to extend their detention had not been notified to them or had been notified belatedly, so they had been unable to lodge objections against them;
- that they had had no effective legal assistance or facilities to challenge their detention; in particular, that their communication with their lawyers had been monitored;
- and lastly, that the time taken by the Constitutional Court to examine their individual applications had been protracted.
6. Was the compensation remedy provided for by Article 141 of the Code of Criminal Procedure considered an effective remedy for complaints concerning lack of an oral hearing, for failure to notify or belated notification of the detention decision and, lastly, lack of or delay in the examination by the magistrate ’ s court under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention? If so, the Government are requested to produce a copy of the court decisions awarding compensation, on the basis of those provisions, to a litigant in a situation similar to that of the applicants.
7. Did the applicants have, as required by Article 5 § 5 of the Convention, an effective and enforceable right in court to obtain compensation for their detention, which they consider to have been contrary to Article 5 §§ 1, 3 and 4?
8. Taking into consideration the searches carried out by the authorities in the applicants ’ homes (in applications nos. 24366/19, 25280/19, 26378/19, 27075/19) was the interference with the applicants ’ right to respect for their private life and home in accordance with law and necessary in terms of Article 8 of the Convention? In this regard, was the compensation remedy provided for by Article 141 of the Criminal Code of Procedure considered an effective remedy for the applicants ’ complaints? If so, the Government are invited to provide copies of decisions awarding compensation in cases raising similar issues.
APPENDIX
No.
Application no.
Case title
Date of introduction
Complaints
1
63634/16
Sevinç v. Turkey
27/10/2016
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
2
13853/17
Güney v. Turkey
03/01/2017
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file No effective remedy to compensation
3
14439/17
Özalp v. Turkey
12/01/2017
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file
4
14942/17
Ulak v. Turkey
05/01/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
5
14976/17
Altun v. Turkey
11/01/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack/Difficulties of le gal assistance/other facilities
6
34032/17
Sarı v. Turkey
10/03/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
7
40177/17
Bekri v. Turkey
16/01/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
8
41766/17
Çakır v. Turkey
12/05/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Lack of hearing during the detention review
9
41864/17
Üşümez v. Turkey
28/04/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file
10
43739/17
Acu v. Turkey
04/04/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
11
43741/17
Aydın v. Turkey
03/05/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Restriction of access to the investigation file
12
45034/17
Balık v. Turkey
05/05/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
13
48010/17
Çakmak v. Turkey
23/06/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Restriction of access to the investigation file
14
49244/17
Uslu v. Turkey
29/03/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Restriction of access to the investigation file
15
49867/17
Moral v. Turkey
28/04/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file
16
58673/17
Okur v. Turkey
20/07/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
17
61373/17
Duran v. Turkey
19/04/2017
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
18
61445/17
Selvi Kıllıbaş v. Turkey
01/06/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
19
62627/17
Karaduman v. Turkey
15/06/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion
20
62735/17
Dede v. Turkey
24/01/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
21
63197/17
Binici v. Turkey
26/05/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
22
63650/17
Kandemir v. Turkey
15/02/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
23
63805/17
Karaali v. Turkey
06/06/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention
24
66402/17
BabayiÄŸit v. Turkey
16/01/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of hearing during the detention review
25
67340/17
Ãœnal v. Turkey
17/08/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion
26
68205/17
Kayın v. Turkey
13/01/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
27
68692/17
Arslan v. Turkey
05/01/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
28
76280/17
Erkan v. Turkey
29/09/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Lack of hearing during the detention review Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
29
76424/17
Yıldırım v. Turkey
26/09/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
30
79642/17
Kartal v. Turkey
27/10/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file
31
79845/17
Köseoğlu v. Turkey
24/10/2017
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
32
80957/17
Åžen v. Turkey
06/11/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of hearing during the detention review
33
83999/17
Cengiz v. Turkey
16/11/2017
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
34
183/18
Demir v. Turkey
06/12/2017
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
35
6919/18
Çelik v. Turkey
19/01/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Lack of hearing during the detention review
36
10834/18
Sarıyer v. Turkey
06/12/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
37
16155/18
Özkan v. Turkey
14/03/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest No effective remedy to compensation Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
38
17915/18
Gözlüpınar v. Turkey
07/04/2018
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
39
21859/18
Åžahin v. Turkey
17/04/2018
Lack of hearing during the detention review Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion
40
23455/18
Demir v. Turkey
30/04/2018
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
41
24169 /18
Göker v. Turkey
08/05/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file
42
25201/18
Günal v. Turkey
26/05/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
43
29932/18
Yıldız v. Turkey
29/05/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Restriction of access to the investigation file
44
35634/18
Demir v. Turkey
13/07/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
45
43696/18
İ.Ö. v. Turkey
11/09/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
46
3933/19
Önay v. Turkey
04/12/2018
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
47
6970/19
Yıldızeli v. Turkey
18/01/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Lack of hearing during the detention review
48
7250/19
Åžahin v. Turkey
21/01/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file
49
9217/19
Gümüş v. Turkey
01/02/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
50
9498/19
Fırat v. Turkey
07/02/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
51
11767/19
Z.E. v. Turkey
21/02/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion
52
11854/19
BektaÅŸ v. Turkey
04/02/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file
53
13104/19
Cambolat v. Turkey
13/02/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
54
13646/19
YelesdaÄŸ v. Turkey
27/02/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
55
13857/19
Sayılgan v. Turkey
08/03/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Restriction of access to the investigation file
56
14274/19
Şayık v. Turkey
28/02/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file
57
15183/19
Çifçi v. Turkey
28/02/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file
58
15725/19
Sarı v. Turkey
08/03/2019
Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
59
15783/19
Aydın v. Turkey
27/02/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file
60
15881/19
Akbaba v. Turkey
07/03/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file
61
15883/19
PoyrazoÄŸlu v. Turkey
07/03/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
62
15900/19
Kara v. Turkey
11/03/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
63
15995/19
Uzun v. Turkey
03/01/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file
64
16113/19
Özyurt v. Turkey
11/03/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file
65
16213/19
Dağlı v. Turkey
21/11/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file
66
16418/19
Acar v. Turkey
01/03/2019
Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
67
16424/19
Yediyıldız v. Turkey
28/02/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file
68
17209 /19
Balkan v. Turkey
05/03/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file
69
17330/19
Turan v. Turkey
25/03/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
70
17479/19
Ãœre v. Turkey
26/03/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
71
17501/19
Benli v. Turkey
11/03/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
72
17524/19
ÅžaÅŸmaz v. Turkey
22/03/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention
73
17527/19
Altunbey v. Turkey
18/03/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
74
17548/19
Kesim v. Turkey
13/03/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
75
17780/19
Kaya v. Turkey
18/03/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
76
18428/19
Yakar v. Turkey
14/03/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
77
18777/19
DoÄŸanay v. Turkey
20/03/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
78
18787/19
CanoÄŸlu v. Turkey
19/03/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file
79
18886/19
Bedirhan v. Turkey
22/03/2019
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
80
19063/19
Çiftel v. Turkey
19/03/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention
81
19105/19
Çelebi v. Turkey
21/03/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file
82
19590/19
Çelik v. Turkey
27/03/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
83
19743/19
A.B. v. Turkey
29/03/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
84
19863/19
ErmiÅŸoÄŸlu v. Turkey
01/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
85
20067/19
Uzun v. Turkey
30/03/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
86
20084/19
Ä°kibaÅŸ v. Turkey
25/03/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/re levant and sufficient reasons
87
20276/19
Abay v. Turkey
01/04/2019
Lack of hearing during the detention review Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
88
20293/19
Acar v. Turkey
29/03/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
89
20713/19
Çınar v. Turkey
02/04/2019
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
90
20749/19
Dalkılıç v. Turkey
01/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Length of pre-trial detention Lack of hearing during the detention review Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
91
20995/19
Bıçakçıgil v. Turkey
03/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file
92
21017/19
Kaya v. Turkey
02/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Restriction of access to the investigation file
93
21193/19
Sahin v. Turkey
12/04/2019
Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
94
21226/19
Öz v. Turkey
26/03/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
95
21248/19
Gürpınar v. Turkey
05/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
96
21260/19
Kartal v. Turkey
12/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
97
21264/19
Bayburtlu v. Turkey
08/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
98
21593/19
KaraÅŸlar v. Turkey
10/04/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
99
21873/19
Gümüşsoy v. Turkey
05/04/2019
Length of pre-trial detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
100
21948/19
Bayar v. Turkey
03/04/2019
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
101
21968/19
Arı v. Turkey
19/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
102
22462/19
Ä°nce v. Turkey
17/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
103
22482/19
Pehlivan v. Turkey
12/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
104
22682/19
Çakmak v. Turkey
11/04/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
105
22727/19
Kalkan v. Turkey
19/04/2019
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
106
22731/19
Bulut v. Turkey
09/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
107
22734/19
Öztürk v. Turkey
17/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
108
22755/19
Karakaya v. Turkey
17/04/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
109
23438/19
Yıldırımer v. Turkey
26/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
110
23673/19
AyanoÄŸlu v. Turkey
24/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
111
23701/19
Çeken v. Turkey
10/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
112
23953/19
Arslan v. Turkey
24/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
113
24351/19
Ä°nci v. Turkey
16/04/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
114
24366/19
Aksakal v. Turkey
17/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lawfulness of search conducted by the authorities
115
24370/19
Samsa v. Turkey
16/04/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
116
24387 /19
Çavdar v. Turkey
24/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
117
24620/19
Öcal v. Turkey
24/04/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
118
24668/19
Yenitepe v. Turkey
29/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reason s
119
24753/19
Güngör v. Turkey
29/04/2019
Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
120
24755/19
Sırıklıgil v. Turkey
03/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
121
24760/19
Ovacıklı v. Turkey
29/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of hearing during the detention review Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
122
24780/19
Gökçeli v. Turkey
24/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
123
24859/19
Güngör v. Turkey
29/04/2019
Length of pre-trial detention Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
124
24939/19
Bayır v. Turkey
24/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
125
25151/19
Bayman v. Turkey
22/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
126
25250/19
Say v. Turkey
06/05/2019
Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
127
25280/19
Atça v. Turkey
25/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lawfulness of search conducted by the authorities
128
25296/19
Bilgili v. Turkey
07/05/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
129
25409/19
Kavak v. Turkey
03/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
130
25413/19
Çağatay v. Turkey
03/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
131
25578/19
Candemir v. Turkey
22/04/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
132
25595/19
Yavuz v. Turkey
29/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
133
25664/19
OkcanoÄŸlu v. Turkey
25/04/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
134
25701/19
Kılıç v. Turkey
30/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
135
25759/19
Varol v. Turkey
24/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
136
25777/19
Tekkoyun v. Turkey
02/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
137
25907/19
Özdemir v. Turkey
17/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
138
25912/19
Tombak v. Turkey
19/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
139
25975/19
Şengönül v. Turkey
25/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
140
26080/19
Öztürk v. Turkey
08/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
141
26282/19
Ayaz v. Turkey
30/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
142
26378/19
Bağırcı v. Turkey
14/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Restriction of access to the investigation file Lawfulness of search conducted by the authorities Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
143
26422/19
Çamlıbel v. Turkey
29/04/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
144
26525/19
Etöz v. Turkey
02/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
145
26715/19
CoÅŸar v. Turkey
06/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
146
26769/19
Özcan v. Turkey
20/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
147
26873/19
Gençler v. Turkey
30/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
148
27075/19
Yıldırım v. Turkey
30/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lawfulness of search conducted by the authorities Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
149
27132/19
Taşkın v. Turkey
25/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
150
27141/19
Öcal v. Turkey
09/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Lack of hearing during the detention review Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
151
27501/19
Çelik v. Turkey
15/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Lack of hearing during the detention review Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
152
27577/19
Kavak v. Turkey
26/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
153
27686/19
Arslan v. Turkey
29/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
154
27739/19
Özçelik v. Turkey
30/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
155
28238/19
Keskin v. Turkey
06/05/2019
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
156
28246/19
Özyiğit v. Turkey
07/05/2019
Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
157
28696/19
KiziroÄŸlu v. Turkey
03/05/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
158
28703/19
YetiÅŸgen v. Turkey
03/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
159
28935 /19
Toltar v. Turkey
07/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
160
28963/19
Åženses v. Turkey
15/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
161
29166/19
Çelik v. Turkey
13/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
162
29315/19
Yoncalık v. Turkey
10/05/2019
Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
163
29327/19
Sakmak v. Turkey
10/05/2019
Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
164
29438/19
Aydın v. Turkey
10/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
165
29813/19
Zencir v. Turkey
13/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
166
30232/19
Kahraman v. Turkey
14/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
167
30284/19
Gür v. Turkey
16/05/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
168
30285/19
Gümüş v. Turkey
22/05/2019
Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
169
30296/19
Kılıç v. Turkey
16/05/2019
Length of pre-trial detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
170
30415/19
Bayazan v. Turkey
20/05/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
171
30478/19
Oruç v. Turkey
27/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
172
30481/19
Önder v. Turkey
27/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
173
30485/19
Dal v. Turkey
10/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
174
30489/19
Kulaber v. Turkey
10/05/2019
Length of pre-trial detention Lack of hearing during the detention review Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
175
30865/19
Ocak v. Turkey
29/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of hearing during the detention review Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
176
31626/19
Uysal v. Turkey
20/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
177
32274/19
Türkel v. Turkey
28/05/2019
Lack of hearing during the detention review Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
178
32316/19
Bozkurt v. Turkey
10/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
179
32943/19
Aydın v. Turkey
29/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
180
33224/19
Acar v. Turkey
07/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
181
33290/19
YeÅŸilyurt v. Turkey
10/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
182
34160/19
Özen v. Turkey
17/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
183
34173/19
Yurt v. Turkey
17/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
184
34234/19
Sarı v. Turkey
17/06/2019
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
185
34595/19
Koçal v. Turkey
12/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Lack of hearing during the detention review Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
186
34904/19
Çelik v. Turkey
21/06/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
187
34922 /19
Hadimli v. Turkey
21/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
188
35008/19
Kayalar v. Turkey
02/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
189
35059/19
Aydın v. Turkey
02/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
190
35075/19
Yücel v. Turkey
02/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
191
35089/19
Arslan v. Turkey
14/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
192
35090/19
Karaağaç v. Turkey
28/06/2019
Length of pre-trial detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
193
35107/19
Devran v. Turkey
28/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
194
35366/19
BozoÄŸlu v. Turkey
17/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
195
35475/19
Çolak v. Turkey
17/06/2019
Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
196
35588/19
Alıcı v. Turkey
25/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
197
35824/19
Gemici v. Turkey
31/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
198
35885/19
Demir v. Turkey
18/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
199
35891/19
Özdemir v. Turkey
17/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
200
36055/19
Gökgöz v. Turkey
27/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
201
36192/19
Ertan v. Turkey
17/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
202
36208/19
DoÄŸan v. Turkey
21/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
203
36383/19
Yalçınkaya v. Turkey
27/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
204
36545/19
Güney v. Turkey
17/06/2019
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
205
36634/19
Kamış v. Turkey
19/06/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
206
36758/19
Aksoy v. Turkey
03/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
207
36783/19
Demirel v. Turkey
28/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
208
36808/19
AkdoÄŸan v. Turkey
02/07/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
209
36828/19
Aydın v. Turkey
01/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
210
36871/19
Ejder v. Turkey
01/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
211
37238/19
Aytaç v. Turkey
03/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
212
37749/19
Eröz v. Turkey
18/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
213
38054/19
Tansel v. Turkey
28/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
214
38392/19
Çatal v. Turkey
16/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
215
38449/19
Çabuk v. Turkey
05/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
216
38528/19
Ayan v. Turkey
04/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
217
38924/19
Karadeniz v. Turkey
11/07/2019
Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
218
38986/19
Demir v. Turkey
09/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
219
39084/19
Paker v. Turkey
16/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
220
39217/19
Tanrıöver v. Turkey
10/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
221
39485/19
Kara v. Turkey
12/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
222
39599/19
Yılmaz v. Turkey
09/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
223
39647/19
Taşkın v. Turkey
11/07/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
224
39722/19
HalitoÄŸlu v. Turkey
31/05/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
225
39778/19
DoÄŸan v. Turkey
19/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
226
40515/19
Sarıgedik v. Turkey
19/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
227
40593/19
Åžahin v. Turkey
25/07/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
228
40854/19
Duran v. Turkey
22/07/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
229
40949/19
Yavuz v. Turkey
17/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
230
41022/19
Varol v. Turkey
29/07/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
231
41060/19
Baki v. Turkey
20/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
232
41129/19
Gürsoy Fırat v. Turkey
22/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
233
41261/19
Kuvel v. Turkey
22/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
234
41361/19
Güzeltaş v. Turkey
26/07/2019
Length of pre-trial detention Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
235
41667/19
Gürel Aygün v. Turkey
29/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Lack of hearing during the detention review Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
236
41848/19
Tabakcı v. Turkey
29/07/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reason s
237
42065/19
R.M. v. Turkey
22/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Failure to communicate the prosecutor ’ s opinion Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
238
42468/19
Akgül v. Turkey
01/08/2019
Lack of hearing during the detention review Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
239
42479/19
Er v. Turkey
29/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
240
42704/19
Akyüz v. Turkey
01/08/2019
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
241
42713/19
Demir v. Turkey
02/08/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
242
42974/19
Şengül v. Turkey
29/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
243
43475/19
Sarıkaya v. Turkey
01/08/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Restriction of access to the investigation file
244
43617/19
Özçelik v. Turkey
01/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
245
44708/19
Akyol v. Turkey
09/08/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
246
46744/19
Güney v. Turkey
15/08/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
247
47050/19
Sarıkaya v. Turkey
28/08/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
248
48100/19
Nas v. Turkey
24/08/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Length of pre-trial detention Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of information on the reasons for arrest Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
249
51124/19
Tanrıkulu v. Turkey
06/09/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
250
51627/19
Åžahin v. Turkey
27/08/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
251
51678/19
Uslu v. Turkey
04/09/2019
Length of pre-trial detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
252
51686/19
Çivi v. Turkey
01/10/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection Lack of hearing during the detention review Restriction of access to the investigation file Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
253
54772/19
Kukul v. Turkey
01/10/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons