SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 40796/19
Ahmet AKKURT
against Türkiye
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 28 February 2023 as a Committee composed of:
Egidijus Kūris, President,
Pauliine Koskelo,
Frédéric Krenc, judges,
and Dorothee von Arnim, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to:
the application (no. 40796/19) against the Republic of Türkiye lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on 17 July 2019 by a Turkish national, Mr Ahmet Akkurt, who was born in 1973 and is detained in Giresun (“the applicant”);
the decision to give notice of the complaint concerning Article 8 of the Convention to the Turkish Government (“the Government”), represented by their Agent, Mr Hacı Ali Açıkgül, Head of the Department of Human Rights of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Türkiye, and to declare inadmissible the remainder of the application;
the parties’ observations;
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
1. The application concerns the penitentiary institution’s refusal to send a fax letter of the applicant.
2. At the material time, the applicant was detained in the Kayseri 2 nd F Type Penitentiary Institution.
3. On 26 October 2017 the Penitentiary Administration refused to send a fax letter of the applicant.
4. On 25 December 2017 the Execution Judge decided to dismiss the applicant’s objection to this decision. The applicant’s appeal against the Execution Judge’s decision was also rejected by the Kayseri 1st Assize Court on 5 January 2018.
5. On 6 February 2018 the applicant lodged an individual application with the Constitutional Court claiming a violation of Article 8 of the Convention. The Constitutional Court declared his application inadmissible. This decision was notified to the applicant on 19 December 2018.
THE COURT’S ASSESSMENT
6. The applicant complained under Article 8 of the Convention of the penitentiary institution’s refusal to send his letter.
7. The Government raised an objection based on non-compliance with the six-month rule, arguing that the applicant had been notified the Constitutional Court’s decision on 19 December 2018, whereas the application was lodged with the Court on 17 July 2019. The Government submitted a copy of the notification signed by the applicant on 19 December 2018 and a letter dated 20 December 2018 from the penitentiary institution to the Constitutional Court informing it that the judgment had been served on the applicant.
8. The applicant did not submit his observations in reply to the Government’s observations in time.
9. The Court observes that the deadline set by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention, which was six months before being reduced to four months as of 1 February 2022 in accordance with Protocol No. 15, began to run on the day following the notification of the decision on 19 December 2018, that is on 20 December 2018, and expired on 19 June 2019. The present application was lodged on 17 July 2019, that is after the expiry of the aforementioned period (see in general for the calculation of the time-limit under Article 35 § 1 of the Convention Sabri Güneş v. Turkey [GC], no. 27396/06, §§ 39 et seq., in particular § 60, 29 June 2012).
10. In the light of the foregoing, the Court holds that the application should be rejected for non-compliance with the six-month time-limit within the meaning of Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Declares the application inadmissible.
Done in English and notified in writing on 23 March 2023.
Dorothee von Arnim Egidijus Kūris
Deputy Registrar President