Communicated on 11 May 2020 Published on 2 June 2020

SECOND SECTION

Application no. 69750/12 Faysal YACAN against Turkey lodged on 28 September 2012

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The application mainly concerns the fairness of the criminal proceedings against the applicant owing to the use of the allegedly unlawfully obtained evidence, namely the flyers reportedly found on his person during his arrest and a document entitled “action report ( faaliyet raporudur ) ” found during a search carried out in the house of another co-defendant, İ.H.B.

It further relates to the existence of procedural safeguards as regards the admissibility and reliability of the above mentioned evidence and the domestic courts ’ examination of the manner of the execution of both the house search and the applicant ’ s personal search. Finally, it concerns the national courts ’ alleged failure to provide sufficient reasons in respect of the applicant ’ s defence submissions when convicting him.

The applicant alleges a violation of Article 6 of the Convention.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against him, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular:

( a) Did the national courts use every reasonable opportunity to examine the quality of the evidence, namely a one-page-long document entitled “activity report” ( faaliyet raporudur ) found during the search of İ.H.B. ’ s house, including whether the circumstances in which it was obtained cast doubt on its reliability or accuracy and to oppose its use (see, mutatis mutandis , Bykov v. Russia [GC], no. 4378/02, 10 March 2009; Lisica v. Croatia , no. 20100/06 , 25 February 2010; Horvatić v. Croatia , no. 36044/09 , 17 October 2013; and, Layijov v. Azerbaijan , no. 22062/07, 10 April 2014) ?

- Did the trial court conduct a proper examination of the applicant ’ s defence submissions and the depositions of the witnesses who gave evidence in relation to the house search of İ.H.B. and evaluate them in its reasoned judgment before using the above-mentioned evidence to convict the applicant?

( b) Did the national courts use every reasonable opportunity to examine the quality of the flyers found on the applicant during his arrest, including whether the circumstances in which they were obtained cast doubt on its reliability or accuracy (compare Kobiashvili v. Georgia , no. 36416/06, 14 March 2019)? In that connection, was the applicant ’ s submission that those flyers had not belonged to him addressed and examined by the national courts (see mutatis mutandis , Nikolay Genov v. Bulgaria , no. 7202/09 , § § 27 ‑ 35, 13 July 2017)? If so, what reasons were provided by the domestic courts vis-à-vis those submissions?

The Government are invited to submit copies of all the relevant documents concerning the applicant ’ s case, including but not limited to the minutes of all the hearings, the reasoned judgment of the trial court, documentary evidence against the applicant, video recordings of the searches and the written submissions of the applicant and his lawyer throughout the proceedings.