Resolution CM/ResDH(2010)73[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
İmret against Turkey
(Application No. 42572/98, judgment of 10/01/2006, final on 10/04/2006)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);
Having regard to the judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;
Recalling that the violations of the Convention found by the Court in this case concerns: the excessive length of detention of the applicant in police custody (for seven days before being brought before a judge: violation of Article 5, paragraph 3), and of his right to a fair trial by an independent and impartial court due to the presence of a military judge on the bench of the state security court which tried and convicted him (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1) (see details in Appendix);
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgment;
Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee’s Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having satisfied itself that, within the time-limit set, the respondent state paid the applicant the just satisfaction provided in the judgment (see details in Appendix),
Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded by the Court in its judgments, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate:
- of individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and
- of general measures preventing similar violations;
DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix), that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and
DECIDES to close the examination of this case.
Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2010)73
Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of
İmret against Turkey
Introductory case summary
The case concerns the excessive length of detention of the applicant in police custody, for seven days before being brought before a judge (violation of Article 5§3). The case also concerns the violation of the applicant’s right to a fair trial by an independent and impartial court due to the presence of a military judge on the bench of the state security court which tried and convicted him (violation of Article 6§1).
I.Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
-
EUR 3000
EUR 620
EUR 3620
Paid on 06/07/2006
b) Individual measures
The applicant was convicted in December 1998 to three years and nine months’ imprisonment. It appears that he was released in September 2002. Consequently, no other individual measure was considered necessary.
II.General measures
1) Violation of Article 5§3: The case presents similarities to that of Sakık and Others against Turkey (judgment of 26/11/1997) which was closed by Resolution ResDH(2002)110, following the adoption of general measures by the Turkish authorities.
2) Violation of Article 6§ 1: The case presents similarities to that of Çıraklar against Turkey (judgment of 28/10/1998) which was closed by a Final Resolution DH(99)555, following the legislative and constitutional amendments changing the composition of state security courts and ending the functions of military judges and military prosecutors in these courts. On 07/05/2004, Parliament approved a constitutional amendment abolishing state security courts.
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that no individual measure is required, apart from the payment of the just satisfaction, that the general measures adopted will prevent similar violations and that Turkey has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 3 June 2010 at the 1086th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy