Communicated on 25 September 2014
SECOND SECTION
Application no. 63681/12
Ömer Faruk AKYÜZ
against Turkey
lodged on 26 September 2012
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicant, Mr Ömer Faruk Akyüz, is a Turkish national, who was born in 1982 and lives in Batman. He is represented before the Court by Mr E. Şenses, a lawyer practising in Batman.
A. The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
On 29 September 2004 the applicant attended the Hasankeyf culture and art festival celebrations organised by the Batman Municipality.
On 3 October 2004 the applicant was arrested in Batman following an investigation initiated by the Batman Security Directorate. According to the arrest report, during the festival events a group of people started to disseminate propaganda in favour of PKK/Kongra-Gel, an armed illegal organisation. The applicant was seen amongst the demonstrators, who had been shouting a slogan (“Biji Serok Apo-Öcalan” - “Long Live President Apo-Öcalan”) and carrying posters in favour of the PKK/Kongra-Gel, and was arrested by police officers in the city centre.
On 4 October 2004 the applicant was brought before the Batman Public Prosecutor. He was released on the same day.
On 12 October 2004 the Batman Public Prosecutor issued an indictment, charging the applicant with disseminating propaganda of an illegal organisation, based on the slogans shouted and the posters and flags carried. The prosecution therefore called for the applicant to be sentenced pursuant to Article 28 of the Meetings and Demonstrations Act, Law no. 2911.
On an unspecified date, the Batman Criminal Court of First Instance convicted the applicant as charged. On 13 July 2006, the Court of Cassation quashed the judgment in order for the conviction to be reviewed in the light of recent amendments of the domestic law in favour of the applicant.
The first-instance court resumed the examination of the case following its remittal by the Court of Cassation. On 3 November 2006 the Batman Criminal Court of First Instance issued a decision of lack of jurisdiction (görevsizlik kararı), pursuant to Article 1 of Law no. 5190, which regulates the jurisdiction of the Assize Courts over terrorist offences. The case was thus referred to the Diyarbakır Assize Court.
On 7 July 2009, the Diyarbakır Assize Court, after having held ten hearings, found the applicant guilty under Section 7 (2) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (Law no. 3713) and sentenced him to six months’ imprisonment.
On 3 September 2009, the applicant appealed against the conviction. On 16 February 2011 the Court of Cassation upheld the judgment of 7 July 2009.
On 8 June 2012, the execution of the applicant’s sentence was ordered. However, the applicant did not surrender himself and fled.
On 5 July 2012, Law no. 6352, which abolished some of the articles of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, Law no. 3713, entered into force. Accordingly, on 9 July 2012, the Diyarbakır Assize Court ordered a stay of execution of the sentence pursuant to Article 105 of Law no. 6352.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complains under Article 10 of the Convention that his right to freedom of expression was breached. In this respect, he maintains that the criminal proceedings which concluded with his conviction for disseminating propaganda in favour of a terrorist organisation for having shouted slogans cannot be considered necessary in a democratic society.
QUESTION TO THE PARTIES
Did the conviction of the applicant for shouting a slogan during the Hasankeyf Culture and Art Festival in 2004 constitute an interference with his freedom of expression within the meaning of Article 10 § 1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference necessary in terms of Article 10 § 2 of the Convention?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy