Published on 2 October 2023

SECOND SECTION

Application no. 15591/17 Mehmet YILDIZ against Türkiye lodged on 20 January 2017 communicated on 13 September 2023

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The application concerns the pre-trial detention of the applicant on suspicion of aiding and abetting an illegal organisation.

On 19 April 2011 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of membership of an illegal organisation, namely the PKK (the Kurdistan Workers’ Party). On 4 May 2011 the Assize Court remanded the applicant in detention. The objections filed by the applicant to the detention order and decisions to extend the detention, as well as applications for release, were rejected by the competent courts on the basis of the nature of the alleged offence, the strong suspicion that he had committed the offence in question, the severity of the potential sentence and the seriousness of the offences in question, which were offences listed in Article 100 § 3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

On 17 June 2011 the Diyarbakır Public Prosecutor issued an indictment, accusing the applicant of aiding and abetting an illegal organisation. The applicant was released on 23 May 2014. On 27 May 2014 the Diyarbakır Assize Court found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced him to four years, eight months and seven days’ imprisonment. At the time of introduction of the application the criminal proceedings were still pending before the Court of Cassation.

On 12 June 2016 the Constitutional Court declared the applicant’s individual application inadmissible. It concluded that

- the state of the evidence showing the strong suspicion that the applicant had committed the offence in question, the fact that the offence in question is among the catalogue offences and the lower and upper limits of the penalties indicated in the law for the offences the applicant was charged with, raising the suspicion of flight – were sufficient reasons for ordering and extending the applicant’s pre-trial detention;

- in view of the number of defendants, the extent and nature of the offence he was charged with and the lack of negligence attributable to the courts, the length of the applicant’s pre-trial detention (3 years and 23 days) was not excessive.

The decision of the Constitutional Court was notified to the applicant on 22 November 2016.

The applicant mainly complains about the lack of relevant and sufficient reasons to justify his continued pre-trial detention and the length of his pre-trial detention.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

Was the applicant’s pre-trial detention compatible with the requirements of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention? In particular:

(a) Did the judges who ordered the applicant’s initial pre-trial detention and the prolongation of his 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, 5 July 2016)?

(b) Was the length of the applicant’s pre-trial detention in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention?

The parties are invited to provide copies of all documents relating to the decisions extending the applicant’s detention, including all petitions against those decisions and all petitions requesting the applicant’s release.