Published on 4 March 2024
FIFTH SECTION
Application no. 48908/20
F.R. against Türkiye
lodged on 26 October 2020
communicated on 12 February 2024
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The applicant is an Iranian national who entered Türkiye on 27 June 2008. He was apprehended in connection with an anti-terror operation on 30 August 2008. He was convicted in 2010 by the domestic courts for membership of the PKK (Workers’ Party of Kurdistan). On 11 January 2016 a deportation order was issued against the applicant before the termination of the execution of his sentence. Upon his release on 28 February 2016, the applicant was put in administrative detention with a view to deportation in Erzurum, İzmir and Aydın Foreigners’ Removal Centres, respectively. On 10 February 2017 the applicant was deported to Iran.
The application concerns the applicant’s complaints regarding the material conditions of detention at the above-mentioned removal centres pending the expulsion proceedings. It further concerns the alleged unlawfulness of the applicant’s deprivation of liberty and the lack of an effective remedy to challenge the lawfulness of his detention at the Aydın Foreigners’ Removal Centre.
The applicant mainly relies on Articles 3, 5 § 1 and 4 of the Convention.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Did the applicant duly exhaust the remedies available in domestic law in respect of his complaints under Articles 3 and 5, as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention? In this connection, is the action for a full remedy (tam yargı davası) before administrative courts capable of providing redress in respect of the applicant’s complaints under Articles 3 and 5 of the Convention?
2. Were the conditions of the applicant’s detention at the Erzurum, İzmir and Aydın Foreigners’ Removal Centres compatible with Article 3 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Yarashonen v. Turkey, no. 72710/11, §§ 51-91, 24 June 2014; Erkenov v. Turkey, no. 18152/11, §§ 26-42, 6 September 2016; G.B. and Others v. Turkey, no. 4633/15, §§ 99-117, 17 October 2019)?
Regarding the applicant’s administrative detention at the Aydın Foreigners’ Removal Centre:
3. Did the applicant’s detention comply with the requirements of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, A. and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 3455/05, § 164, ECHR 2009, and the cases cited therein)?
4. Did the applicant have at his disposal a remedy by which he could challenge the lawfulness of his deprivation of liberty, as required by Article 5 § 4 of the Convention (see, for example, A.M. v. France, no. 56324/13, §§ 40-41, 12 July 2016, and G.B. and Others v. Turkey, no. 4633/15, §§ 163-69, 17 October 2019)?
The Government are invited to submit information and supporting documents on the conditions of detention at the Erzurum, İzmir and Aydın Foreigners’ Removal Centres, in particular as relevant to the applicant’s following allegations: (i) the solitary confinement of the applicant for a prolonged duration, (ii) the restrictions imposed on exercise and recreational activities, (iii) the conditions in which the applicant was transferred between the above-mentioned removal centres and (iv) the failure to provide the applicant with the medical care necessary for his health condition during his detention.
The Government are also invited to submit all documents relating to the applicant’s detention.
The parties are requested to submit, within the same time-limit, reports or information documents regarding the conditions of detention at the Erzurum, İzmir and Aydın Foreigners’ Removal Centres from reliable sources.