FIRST SECTION
PARTIAL DECISION
AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF
Application no. 35075/97
by Murat BABA
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 12 September 2000 as a Chamber composed of
MrsE. Palm, President,
MrL. Ferrari Bravo,
MrGaukur Jörundsson,
MrR. Türmen,
MrB. Zupančič,
MrT. Panţîru,
MrR. Maruste, judges,
andMrM. O’Boyle, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application introduced with the European Commission of Human Rights on 23 December 1996 and registered on 25 February 1997,
Having regard to Article 5 § 2 of Protocol No. 11 to the Convention, by which the competence to examine the application was transferred to the Court,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant is a Turkish national, born in 1935 and living in Ordu (Turkey). He is represented before the Court by Mr Vural Soytekin, a lawyer practising in İstanbul (Turkey).
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
The applicant, who is a wooden manufacturer, made an agreement with the Municipality of Kumru to construct wooden doors for a building that belonged to the municipality. When the applicant could not receive his fee from the municipality, he initiated civil proceedings in the Kumru Civil Court of General Jurisdiction on 30 November 1994. On 8 June 1995 the Court accepted the applicant’s requests and ordered the municipality to pay 37.460.000 Turkish Liras and an interest at the rate of 30 % per annum that would be calculated from 30 November 1994. On 3 August 1995 the applicant applied to the Fatsa Enforcement Office to have the execution of the court’s decision. The municipality further refused to pay its debt.
On 16 December 1996 the applicant filed a petition with the Kumru Public Prosecutor against the Mayor of Kumru for non-compliance with court decisions. On 4 March 1996 the public prosecutor refused to initiate criminal proceedings. The applicant appealed however on 26 September 1996 the Ordu Criminal Court refused the applicant’s claims.
By a letter of 24 March 2000 the applicant informed the Court that the Municipality of Kumru has not yet paid the due amount.
COMPLAINTS
1.The applicant complains under Article 4 of the Convention that he was forced to perform compulsory labour because he was not paid for his work.
2.The applicant further submits that the refusal of the Municipality of Kumru to pay its debt in spite of the domestic court’s decision constitutes a breach of Article 1 of Protocol 1 to the Convention.
THE LAW
1.The applicant complains that he was forced to perform compulsory labour in breach of Article 4 of the Convention, which reads:
“2. No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour.”
In the light of all the material in its possession, the Court finds that there is no appearance of a violation of Article 4 § 2 of the Convention and that this complaint must therefore be rejected as being manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
2.The applicant further complains that the refusal of the Municipality of Kumru to abide by the judgment of the domestic court ordering the payment of a certain amount of money to him constitutes a breach of Article 1 of Protocol 1 to the Convention, which in so far as relevant provides as follows:
“Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law.”
The Court considers that it cannot, on the basis of the file, determine the admissibility of this complaint and that it is therefore necessary, in accordance with Rule 54 § 3(b) of the Rules of procedure, to give notice of it to the respondent Government.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
DECIDES TO ADJOURN the examination of the applicant’s complaint under Article 1 of Protocol 1 to the Convention.
DECLARES INADMISSIBLE the remainder of the application.
Michael O’BoyleElisabeth Palm
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy