THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 14152/02
by Maşuk GÜLER
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 11 October 2007 as a Chamber composed of:
MrB.M. Zupančič, President,
MrC. Bîrsan,
MrsE. Fura-Sandström[1],
MrsA. Gyulumyan,
MrE. Myjer,
MrDavid Thór Björgvinsson,
MrsI. Berro-Lefèvre, judges,
and Mr S. Naismith, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 4 September 1999,
Having regard to the partial decision of 28 September 2006,
Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Maşuk Güler, is a Turkish national who was born in 1961 and lives in Gaziantep. He was represented before the Court by Mr M. Vefa, a lawyer practising in Diyarbakır. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) did not designate an Agent for the purposes of the proceedings before the Court.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
On 7 January 1994 the applicant was taken into police custody in Tatvan on suspicion of being a member of an illegal organisation, namely the PKK (the Kurdistan Workers’ Party).
On 31 January 1994 the public prosecutor at the Diyarbakır State Security Court filed a bill of indictment against the applicant, along with forty-two persons. The applicant was charged with membership of the PKK under Article 168 of the Criminal Code.
On 18 December 1997 the Diyarbakır State Security Court, which was composed of three judges including a military judge, convicted the applicant as charged and sentenced him to twelve years and six months’ imprisonment.
On 2 March 1999 the Court of Cassation upheld the judgment of the first-instance court.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention that he had not received a fair trial by an independent and impartial tribunal due to the presence of a military judge on the bench of the Diyarbakır State Security Court.
THE LAW
On 3 May 2007 the Court received the following declaration from the applicant:
“I note that the Government of Turkey are prepared to pay ex gratia to the applicant an all-inclusive amount of EUR 1,500 (one thousand and five hundred euros) with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned application pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as legal costs and expenses connected with the case, shall be paid in euros, to be converted into New Turkish liras at the rate applicable at the date of payment, to a bank account named by me. It shall be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision delivered by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three month period, the Government undertake to pay, until settlement, simple interest on the amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Turkey in respect of the facts of this application. I declare that this constitutes a final settlement of the case.
This declaration is made in the context of a friendly settlement which the Government and I have reached.”
On 24 July 2007 the Court received the following declaration signed by the Government:
“I declare that the Government of Turkey offer to pay ex gratia to the applicant an all-inclusive amount of EUR 1,500 (one thousand and five hundred euros) with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned application pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum, which also covers legal expenses connected with the case, shall be free of any tax that may be applicable and be paid in euros, to be converted into New Turkish liras at the rate applicable at the date of payment, to a bank account named by the applicant and/or his duly authorised representative. It shall be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision delivered by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This payment will constitute the final settlement of the case. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three month period, the Government undertake to pay, until settlement, simple interest on the amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.”
The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no public policy reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the remainder of the application out of its list of cases.
Stanley NaismithBoštjan M. Zupančič
Deputy RegistrarPresident
[1] Mrs E. Fura-Sandström was designated to sit as national judge in respect of Turkey in accordance with Rule 29 of the Rules of Court.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy