Published on 30 October 2023
SECOND SECTION
Application no. 58539/21
Şahismail AKPOLAT
against Türkiye
lodged on 19 November 2021
communicated on 11 October 2023
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns the dismissal, by the Higher Education Council (Yükseköğretim Kurulu – “the YÖK”), of the applicant’s request for a certificate of equivalence in respect of his foreign diploma.
The applicant obtained a foreign bachelor’s degree after completing his undergraduate studies consecutively at two universities abroad. The domestic authorities rejected his request for recognition of his foreign diploma on the ground that that he had completed more than half of his credits at a university which had not been recognised by the YÖK. Pursuant to regulation 7(6)(a) of the Regulations on Recognition and Equivalence of Foreign Higher Education Diplomas, he was required to complete at least 70% of the requisite credits at an accredited university in order for his request to be considered by the YÖK.
The applicant complains under Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention about the dismissal of his request, alleging that at the time when he started his studies, the university in question had been an institution recognised by the YÖK.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
Has there been a breach of the applicant’s right under Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention on account of the dismissal of his request for a certificate of equivalence in respect of his foreign university diploma (see, for the general principles, Catan and Others v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia [GC], nos. 43370/04 and 2 others, §§ 136-140, ECHR 2012 (extracts))? In particular:
(a) Was the university in question recognised by the YÖK in respect of its higher education programmes at the time when the applicant started his undergraduate studies at that university? If so, when was such an accreditation revoked?
(b) Was the dismissal of the applicant’s request, allegedly as a result of the revocation of the university’s accreditation by the YÖK, foreseeable for him? Furthermore, was the alleged revocation decision accompanied by any transitional measures for students who had already begun their studies at that university (see, mutatis mutandis, Altınay v. Turkey, no. 37222/04, §§ 56-61, 9 July 2013)?
The parties are requested to indicate all the relevant dates and provide copies of all documents relating to (i) the alleged recognition of the university in question by the YÖK, (ii) the alleged revocation decision and (iii) the period during which the applicant pursued his studies at that university.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy