ELIBOL v. TÜRKİYE and 84 other applications
Doc ref: 59648/16, 36806/17, 40605/17, 71077/17, 75370/17, 8610/18, 24694/18, 32618/18, 32859/18, 33576/18, 3... • ECHR ID: 001-223335
Document date: February 1, 2023
- Inbound citations: 4
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 11
Published on 20 February 2023
SECOND SECTION
Application no. 59648/16 Mert ELİBOL against Türkiye and 84 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 1 February 2023
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The applications mainly concern the arrest and pre-trial detention of the applicants, who were apparently all judges or prosecutors at the material time, on suspicion of membership of FETÖ/PDY (an organisation described by the Turkish authorities as “Fetullahist Terror Organisation / Parallel State Structure”), in the aftermath of the attempted coup d’état which took place on 15 July 2016.
Relying on Article 5 of the Convention, the applicants raise the following complaints (see the appended table for detailed information as to the specific complaints raised by each applicant):
- They were detained on remand in breach of the procedural guarantees provided in domestic law for judges and prosecutors;
- They were detained in the absence of any suspicion that they committed an offence;
- There were no relevant and sufficient reasons to justify their initial and/or continued pre-trial detention;
- The length of their pre-trial detention was excessive;
- The reviews of detention took place without a hearing and they were not notified of the opinion of the public prosecutor on those reviews;
- Their access to the investigation files was restricted;
- The objections to their detention or their requests for release were not examined or examined belatedly;
- The decisions extending their pre-trial detention were not notified to them, or were notified with a delay, which prevented them from appealing against those decisions;
- They did not benefit from effective legal assistance and facilities to challenge their detention, having particular regard to the fact that their communication with their lawyers was restricted and monitored by the prison authorities;
- The time taken by the Constitutional Court to conduct its examination on their individual applications was excessive.
Relying on Article 8 of the Convention, some of the applicants also complain that the searches conducted by the authorities in their homes and offices 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 procedure prescribed by law”, for the purposes of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention, in view of the procedural guarantees provided to judges and prosecutors by the domestic law (compare Baş v. Turkey , no. 66448/17, §§ 130-162, 3 March 2020)?
(b) Can the applicants be considered to have been detained on the basis of “a reasonable suspicion” that they had committed an offence, for the purposes of Article 5 § 1 (c) of the Convention (see, in particular, Fox, Campbell and Hartley v. the United Kingdom , 30 August 1990, § 32, Series A No. 182), taking into account, in particular, 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? Moreover, has the Constitutional Court based the existence of reasonable suspicion on evidence discovered after the decisions had been taken to detain the applicants (see, in particular, Baş , cited above, § 185)?
2. (a) Did the applicants exhaust the remedies available in domestic law in relation to their complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention? To the extent that the applicants’ complaints did not relate solely to the length of their pre-trial detention but also concerned the alleged failure of the domestic courts to provide relevant and sufficient reasons to justify their initial and continued pre-trial detention, can a compensation claim under Article 141 § 1(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure be regarded as an effective remedy in respect of those complaints (see Selahattin Demirtaş v. Turkey (no. 2) [GC], no. 14305/17, § 213, 22 December 2020)?
(b) Was the applicants’ pre-trial detention compatible with the requirements of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention? In particular:
(i) Did the judges, who ordered the applicants’ initial pre-trial detention and the prolongation of their detention, and who examined the objections lodged against those decisions, fulfil their obligation to provide relevant and sufficient grounds for the deprivation of liberty in question (see, in particular, Buzadji v. the Republic of Moldova [GC], no. 23755/07, § 102, ECHR 2016 (extracts))?
(ii) Was the length of the applicants’ pre-trial detention in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention?
3. 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:
(i) 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 (see, in particular, Baş , cited above, §§ 212-214, and Kocamış and Kurt v. Turkey , no. 227/13, §§ 34-35, 25 January 2022);
(ii) they had been unable to challenge their detention in an effective manner because of the restriction imposed on their access to the investigation file (see, inter alia , Ceviz v. Turkey , no. 8140/08, § 41, 17 July 2012);
(iii) their objections to their detention had not been examined or had been examined belatedly (see, for example, Shannon v. Latvia , no. 32214/03, §§ 67-74, 24 November 2009);
(iv) the decisions to extend their detention had not been notified to them or had been notified with a delay, which had prevented them from lodging objections against those decisions (compare, for example, Voskuil v. the Netherlands , no. 64752/01, § 83, 22 November 2007);
(v) they had had no effective legal assistance or facilities to challenge their detention, having particular regard to the fact that their communication with their lawyers had been restricted and monitored (see, mutatis mutandis , Černák v. Slovakia , no. 36997/08, § 78, 17 December 2013);
(vi) the time taken by the Constitutional Court to examine their individual applications had been excessive (compare for the relevant principles Kavala v. Turkey , no. 28749/18, §§ 181-184, 10 December 2019).
4. Did the compensation remedy provided under Article 141 of the Code of Criminal Procedure constitute an effective remedy, within the meaning of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention, in respect of complaints concerning (i) the absence of a reasonable suspicion regarding the commission of a criminal offence; (ii) the unlawfulness of the arrest and pre-trial detention; (iii) the lack of an oral hearing during the review of detention; (iv) the non‑notification or belated notification of the detention decision; (v) the lack of or delay in the examination of the objection against detention by the magistrates’ courts (compare, for example, Hebat Aslan and Firas Aslan v. Turkey , no. 15048/09, §§ 92-93, 28 October 2014)?
5. Taking into consideration the searches carried out by the authorities in the applicants’ homes and offices (applications nos. 36806/17, 52661/19, 25207/20, 44792/20, 44950/20, 29508/21, 32945/21 and 44825/21):
(a) Was there an interference with the applicants’ right to respect for their private life and home and was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article 8 of the Convention (compare, for example, Tercan v. Turkey , no. 6158/18, §§ 189-202, 29 June 2021)?
(b) Was the compensation remedy provided under Article 141 of the Code of Criminal Procedure an effective one in respect of the applicants’ complaints under Article 8 of the Convention?
The Government are invited to provide copies of decisions awarding compensation in cases raising similar issues.
APPENDIX
List of applications
No.
Application no. Case title
Date of Introduction
Complaints for each application
1.
59648/16 Elibol v. Türkiye
07/10/2016
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
2.
36806/17
Us v. Türkiye
16/01/2017
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Unlawful search of home and/or office
3.
75370/17
Altun v. Türkiye
03/10/2017
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
4.
40605/17 Yılmaz v. Türkiye
21/03/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
5.
71077/17 Akgün v. Türkiye
21/08/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
6.
8610/18 Turğut v. Türkiye
27/04/2017
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
7.
24694/18
Uğur v. Türkiye
16/05/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
Failure/delay in communicating decisions relating to detention
Lack/difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
8.
32618/18 Yılmaz v. Türkiye
26/06/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
Failure/delay in communicating decisions relating to detention
Lack/difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
9.
32859/18 Dalda v. Türkiye
16/05/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack/difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
10.
33576/18 Aslan v. Türkiye
03/07/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Lack/difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
11.
34975/18 Orhan v. Türkiye
06/07/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
12.
35752/18 Tokar v. Türkiye
11/07/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
Failure/delay in communicating decisions relating to detention
Lack/difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
13.
37004/18 Yavaş v. Türkiye
29/05/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/delay in communicating decisions relating to detention
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
14.
37361/18 Demir v. Türkiye
27/07/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Lack/difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
15.
49856/18 Taşlıtepe v. Türkiye
17/10/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
16.
53537/18 Başdaş v. Türkiye
08/11/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
17.
54861/18 Kazancı v. Türkiye
10/11/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
18.
55540/18
Kılınç v. Türkiye
24/11/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/delay in communicating decisions relating to detention
19.
2870/19 Açıkgöz v. Türkiye
02/01/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
20.
7027/19 Göçer v. Türkiye
22/01/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
21.
8405/19 Beyazıt v. Türkiye
18/12/2018
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
22.
9796/19 Girdi v. Türkiye
29/01/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
23.
16151/19 Zorlu v. Türkiye
08/03/2019
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
24.
19800/19 Güney v. Türkiye
05/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
25.
21440/19 Dinçer v. Türkiye
05/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
26.
21587/19 Acar v. Türkiye
01/04/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/delay in communicating decisions relating to detention
27.
30505/19 Özgür v. Türkiye
30/05/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
28.
33932/19 Bingöl v. Türkiye
21/06/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
29.
40542/19 Yılmaz v. Türkiye
27/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
30.
40999/19 Gökdemir v. Türkiye
29/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
31.
46485/19 Gok v. Türkiye
11/07/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
32.
50439/19 Görenez v. Türkiye
11/09/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
33.
52661/19
Coşkun v. Türkiye
25/09/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Unlawful search of home and/or office
34.
55086/19 Küçükbileci v. Türkiye
15/10/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
35.
58168/19 Arkuntaş v. Türkiye
04/09/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
36.
58363/19 Bulut v. Türkiye
30/10/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
37.
7115/20 Haydar v. Türkiye
29/01/2020
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
38.
8220/20 Erdem v. Türkiye
21/01/2020
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
39.
9458/20 Kuzgun v. Türkiye
20/08/2019
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/delay in communicating decisions relating to detention
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
40.
22796/20 Atalay v. Türkiye
29/05/2020
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
41.
23417/20 Yar v. Türkiye
21/05/2020
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
42.
23617/20 Karakoca v. Türkiye
14/05/2020
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
43.
25207/20
Berk v. Türkiye
05/06/2020
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Unlawful search of home and/or office
44.
27201/20 Kocagöz v. Türkiye
25/06/2020
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
45.
29081/20 Borazan v. Türkiye
06/07/2020
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
46.
30088/20 Akıncı v. Türkiye
13/06/2020
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
47.
30642/20 Alpertonga v. Türkiye
03/07/2020
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
48.
31910/20 Sülün v. Türkiye
22/05/2020
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
49.
32806/20 Doğan v. Türkiye
05/06/2020
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
50.
34097/20 Süzer v. Türkiye
08/06/2020
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack/difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
51.
36900/20
Akpınar v. Türkiye
05/08/2020
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
52.
44792/20
Güllü v. Türkiye
24/09/2020
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
Unlawful search of home and/or office
53.
44950/20
Özdemir v. Türkiye
29/09/2020
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Unlawful search of home and/or office
54.
48584/20 Köse v. Türkiye
21/10/2020
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
55.
52810/20
Demircan v. Türkiye
27/11/2020
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
56.
54964/20 Koçak v. Türkiye
27/11/2020
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
57.
8272/21 Deveci v. Türkiye
01/02/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
58.
11396/21 Sayıldı v. Türkiye
21/01/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
59.
11901/21
Baydilli v. Türkiye
05/02/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
Failure/delay in communicating decisions relating to detention
Lack/difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
60.
13390/21 Sarıkaya v. Türkiye
26/02/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
61.
15834/21 Onuk v. Türkiye
22/02/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
62.
18293/21 Avcı v. Türkiye
29/03/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
63.
18521/21 Ayral v. Türkiye
26/03/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
64.
22560/21 Akarsu v. Türkiye
07/04/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
65.
24054/21 Durmaz v. Türkiye
26/04/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
66.
24476/21 Akar v. Türkiye
14/04/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
67.
28487/21 Arslan v. Türkiye
18/05/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
Failure/delay in communicating decisions relating to detention
68.
28713/21 Erhan v. Türkiye
27/05/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Lack/difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
69.
29098/21 Tüfekçi v. Türkiye
19/02/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
70.
29508/21
Kılınç v. Türkiye
03/06/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Unlawful search of home and/or office
71.
32263/21
Keskin v. Türkiye
17/06/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/delay in communicating decisions relating to detention
72.
32945/21
Demir v. Türkiye
21/06/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Unlawful search of home and/or office
73.
36192/21 Durmuş v. Türkiye
06/07/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
Lack/difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
74.
36745/21 Mutlu v. Türkiye
16/06/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
75.
37172/21 Özdemir v. Türkiye
12/07/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
76.
41945/21 Zararsız v. Türkiye
16/08/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
77.
44825/21
Altındağ v. Türkiye
03/09/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/delay in communicating decisions relating to detention
Unlawful search of home and/or office
78.
48277/21 Çoğan v. Türkiye
23/09/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of hearing during the detention review
79.
48829/21 Kaya v. Türkiye
14/08/2020
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
80.
83/22 Erdinç v. Türkiye
15/12/2021
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
81.
4326/22 Uysal v. Türkiye
10/01/2022
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure/delay in examining requests for release/objection
Failure/delay in communicating decisions relating to detention
82.
6292/22 Durmuşoğlu v. Türkiye
14/01/2022
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
83.
9478/22 Özkan v. Türkiye
11/02/2022
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
84.
9483/22 Özkan v. Türkiye
11/02/2022
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention
85.
15081/22 Işık v. Türkiye
17/03/2022
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion