RESOLUTION DH (98) 89
CONCERNING THE JUDGMENT OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
OF 25 MARCH 1996
IN THE CASE OF MITAP AND MÜFTÜOGLU AGAINST TURKEY
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 22 April 1998
at the 626th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),
Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case delivered on 25 March 1996 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;
Recalling that the case originated in two applications (Nos. 15530/89 and 15531/89) against Turkey, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 14 September 1989 under Article 25 of the Convention by Mr Mitap and Mr Müftüoglu, two Turkish nationals, and that the Commission declared admissible the complaints relating to the excessive length of detention pending trial, the excessive length of criminal proceedings, the lawfulness, independence and impartiality of the Martial Law Court and the fairness of the proceedings before it;
Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission on 23 January 1995 ;
Whereas in its judgment of 25 March 1996 the Court unanimously:
_ held that, not having jurisdiction ratione temporis, it could not deal with
a) the applicants' complaints relating to the length of their detention pending trial; the lawfulness, independence and impartiality of the Martial Law Court; and the fairness of the proceedings before it;
b)
b) the objections raised on these points by the Government;
c)
_ held that there has been a breach of article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention, on account of the length of the criminal proceedings;
d)
_ held that the respondent state was to pay each applicant, within three months, 80 000 French francs in respect of non-pecuniary damage and both applicants jointly 15 179 French francs in respect of costs and expenses, and that simple interest at an annual rate of 6.65% should be payable on these sums from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement;
e)
- dismissed the remainder of the claim for just satisfaction.
f)
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 of the Convention;
Having invited the Government of Turkey to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 25 March 1996, having regard to Turkey's obligation under Article 53 of the Convention to abide by it;
Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of Turkey gave the Committee information about the measures taken in consequence of the judgment; this information appears in the appendix to this resolution;
Having satisfied itself that on 24 June 1996, within the time-limit set, the Government of Turkey paid the applicants the sums provided for in the judgment of 25 March 1996;
Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of Turkey, that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 of the Convention in this case.
Appendix to Resolution DH (98) 89
Information provided by the Government of Turkey
during the examination of the case of Mitap and Müftüoglu
by the Committee of Ministers
The Government of Turkey indicated that in order to avoid the repetition of the violation found, the Court's judgment had been translated and circulated by the Ministry of Justice to the jurisdictions concerned and in particular to the Cour de cassation.
In addition, a translation of the Court's judgment, made by the University of Istanbul, has been published in the law journal "Ankara Barosu Dergisi".
In the light of the above, the Government considers that Turkey has complied with its obligations under Article 53 of the Convention.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy