Communicated on 2 1 Septem ber 201 6

FOURTH SECTION

Application no. 10531/12 Bekir BALIK

against Poland l odged on 31 January 2012

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Bekir Balik , is a Polish and Turkish national who was born in 1977 and lives in Afyon , Turkey.

A. The circumstances of the case

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

The applicant was detained on remand in Cracow Detention Centre on 8 December 2011. On his arrival he informed the authorities that he was a Muslim, and asked to be served pork-free meals on account of his religious dietary requirements.

He submits that the authorities continued to serve him food which was inappropriate with regard to his religion, and that between 20 January 2012 and 31 January 2012 he was on a hunger strike.

On 27 January 2012 he complained to the Cracow Detention Centre authorities that his diet did not correspond to his religious requirements.

On 6 February 2012 the director of the Cracow Detention Centre replied that the complaint was unfounded. He stated that on 28 December 2011 the applicant had asked to be served a pork-free diet. His request had been granted on the same day, and as of 29 December 2011 he had been served meals which did not contain pork meat. In so far as the applicant alleged that he continued to receive a type of salami sausage in his meals, the director stressed that the detention centre did not serve this type of meat.

The director ’ s letter was written in Polish and was not translated for the applicant.

The applicant was released from detention on 26 April 2012.

B. Relevant domestic law and practice

The relevant domestic law and practice is set out in the case of Jakóbski v. Poland , no. 18429/06, § § 24, 25, 7 December 2010.

COMPLAINT

The applicant complains under Article 9 of the Convention that his right to manifest his religion and religious beliefs was violated during his detention in Cracow Detention Centre. He submits that, despite the fact that he informed the authorities about his religious requirements, they continued to serve him sausages ( parówki ), which, according to their label, contain 25% pork meat.

QUESTION

Did the State ’ s alleged failure to provide the applicant with special food in conformity with his faith constitute an “interference” with the applicant ’ s freedom of religion within the meaning of Article 9 of the Convention, or does it constitute a breach of its positive obligations under this provision (see Jakóbski v. Poland , no. 18429/06, 7 December 2010, and Vartic v. Romania (no. 2) , no. 14150/08 , 17 December 2013 )?