SECOND SECTION
CASE OF GÜLMEZ AND OTHERS v. TÜRKİYE
(Applications nos. 27499/20 and 6 others – see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
16 January 2025
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Gülmez and Others v. Türkiye,
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Davor Derenčinović, President,
Gediminas Sagatys,
Stéphane Pisani, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 5 December 2024,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in applications against Türkiye lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.
2. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications.
THE FACTS
3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.
4. The applicants complained of the seizure of manuscripts by prison administration.
THE LAW
JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.
ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 10 § 1 of the Convention6. The applicants complained of the seizure of manuscripts by prison administration. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 10 of the Convention.
7. The Court considers that the seizure of the applicants’ manuscript constituted an interference with the right to freedom of expression (see Sarıgül v. Turkey, no. 28691/05, § 43, 23 May 2017, and Günana and Others v. Turkey, nos. 70934/10 and 4 others, §§ 60-61, 20 November 2018).
8. The Court reiterates that it has already found that there was no legal basis in Turkish domestic law for the seizure of a detainee’s manuscript under any circumstances (see Günana and Others, cited above, § 67, and also Murat Türk v. Turkey [Committee], no. 20686/19, § 14, 5 April 2022) and found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case (Günana and Others, cited above, §§ 68-69 and Murat Türk, cited above, §§ 15-16).
9. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the disputed interference was not “prescribed by law” within the meaning of Article 10 § 2 of the Convention.
10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 10 of the Convention.
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION11. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Murat Türk, cited above), the Court considers that the finding of a violation is sufficient just satisfaction in respect of the non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicants and it further finds it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table to some of the applicants in respect of the costs and expenses incurred.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,
Decides to join the applications;Declares the applications admissible;Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 10 of the Convention concerning the seizure of manuscripts by prison administration;Holds that the finding of the violation constitutes in itself sufficient compensation for any non-pecuniary damage suffered by the applicants; Holds(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants in applications nos. 9243/21 and 16615/21, within three months, the amounts for costs and expenses indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 16 January 2025, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Davor Derenčinović
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 10 § 1 of the Convention
(seizure of manuscripts by prison administration)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Representative’s name and location
Name of prison
Date and reference of prison administration’s decision
Nature and content of the seized manuscript
Legal basis invoked
Circumstances of the seizure
Reasons given for seizure
Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application
(in euros)[1]
27499/20
16/06/2020
Abdurrezak GÜLMEZ
1977
Bolu F Type High Security Prison
08/06/2018
No. 2018/425
Turkish Constitutional Court (TCC) decision: 06/04/2020
work of fiction
Article 68/3 of Law no. 5275 and Article 91/3 of the Regulation governing the management of prisons and the enforcement of sentences
sending manuscript to family member for review
The seized content causes members of terrorist and profit‑driven criminal organisations to communicate with organisational intent and praises the terror organisation.
-
9243/21
01/02/2021
Nizamettin ÖZTÜRK
1952
Mehmet Erbil
Istanbul
Balikesir L Type Prison
15/08/2016
No. 2016/1239
TCC: 01/07/2020, notified on 19/08/2020
work of fiction
Article 68/3 of Law no. 5275, Article 91/3 of the Regulation governing the management of prisons and the enforcement of sentences
sending manuscript to family member for review
communication between illegal organisation members
250
15810/21
09/03/2021
Hayrettin ADAK
1983
Burhaniye T Type Prison
30/05/2019
No. 2019/52
TCC: 09/10/2020
work of fiction
Article 44/3-1 of Law no. 5275, Article 68/3 of Law no. 5275, Article 62/3 of Law no. 5275
ordinary room search
showcasing the activities of an illegal organisation, use of the manuscript for training of members of illegal organisation, communication between inmates
-
16615/21
19/03/2021
Şerafettin DEMİR
1991
Mahmut Kaçan
Van
Van High Security Prison
10/05/2019
No. 2019/155 and 05/08/2019
No. 2019/218
TCC: 14/01/2021
personal diary
Article 44/3-1 of Law no. 5275, Article 62/3 of Law no. 5275, Article 11 (b) of the Directive on Libraries and Bookcases of Penitentiary Institutions
ordinary room search
passages from banned books included in the manuscript
250
37503/22
06/07/2022
Turan GÜNANA
1981
Kocaeli F Type No. 2 Prison
24/01/2018
2018/94
TCC: 24/05/2022
seizure of the applicant’s handwritten notebooks in prison, which was written in Kurdish and included the word "Kurdistan" multiple times
Article 44/3-1 of Law no. 5275, Article 62/3 of Law no. 5275,
Article 35 of Law no. 5275, Article 8 of the Regulation on Materials and Items which may be kept by convicts in the room and annexes, Articles 11 and 12 of the Directive on Libraries and Bookcases of Penitentiary Institutions
ordinary room search
showcasing the activities of an illegal organisation, content glorifying and supporting an illegal organisation and containing passages from unknown sources (may include passages from banned books)
-
37526/22
28/06/2022
Gökhan GÜÇLÜ
1990
Bahar Güçlü
Ankara
Bolu F Type Prison
27/04/2018
No. 2018/313
TCC: 18/03/2022
work of fiction concerning a political story (including a fictional coup attempt against a king) set in Türkiye in 2066
Article 68/3 of Law no. 5275
sending manuscript to family member for review
inappropriate content that might lead to propaganda in favour of terrorist organisations
-
38129/22
20/07/2022
Mehmet Emin SIRÇA
1976
Tekirdag Type F Prison
08/06/2018 No. 2018/1199
TCC: 23/02/2022, notified on 30/03/2022
poetry book
Article 68/3 of Law no. 5275
sending manuscript to another prisoner for editorial control
inappropriate content that might lead to propaganda in favour of terrorist organisations
-
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.