EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Applications No 16311/90, No 16312/90 and No 16313/90
Nesrin HAZAR, Gür HAZAR, Rüstü AÇIK
against
TURKEY
REPORT OF THE COMMISSION
(adopted on 10 December 1992)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
PART I: STATEMENT OF THE FACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
PART II: SOLUTION REACHED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
INTRODUCTION
1. This Report relates to the applications introduced under
Article 25 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by Nesrin HAZAR, Gür HAZAR and
Rüstü AÇIK against Turkey on 9 November 1989. They were registered on
16 March 1990 under files No. 16311/90, No. 16312/90 and No. 16313/90.
The applicants were represented by Mrs. Sibel Bilge USLU and
Mr. H. ibrahim USLU, lawyers practising in izmir.
The Government of Turkey were represented by their Acting Agent,
Mr. Münci Özmen, legal adviser at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The applications were joined on 28 May 1991.
2. On 11 October 1991 the Commission declared the applications
partly admissible, partly inadmissible. It then proceeded to carry out
its task under Article 28 para. 1 of the Convention which provides as
follows:
"In the event of the Commission accepting a petition referred to
it:
a. it shall, with a view to ascertaining the facts, undertake
together with the representatives of the parties an
examination of the petition and, if need be, an
investigation, for the effective conduct of which the
States concerned shall furnish all necessary facilities,
after an exchange of views with the Commission;
b. it shall at the same time place itself at the disposal of
the parties concerned with a view to securing a friendly
settlement of the matter on the basis of respect for Human
Rights as defined in this Convention."
3. The Commission found that the parties had reached a friendly
settlement of the case and on 10 December 1992 it adopted this Report,
which, in accordance with Article 28 para. 2 of the Convention, is
confined to a brief statement of the facts and of the solution reached.
The following members were present when the Report was adopted:
MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President
S. TRECHSEL
F. ERMACORA
G. SPERDUTI
E. BUSUTTIL
G. JÖRUNDSSON
A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK
A. WEITZEL
J.C. SOYER
H.G. SCHERMERS
H. DANELIUS
Mme G.H. THUNE
Sir Basil HALL
MM. F. MARTINEZ
C.L. ROZAKIS
Mme J. LIDDY
MM. L. LOUCAIDES
J.C. GEUS
M.P. PELLONPÄÄ
B. MARXER
PART I
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS
4. The first applicant, Nesrin Hazar, born in 1953, is a doctor. The
second applicant, Gür Hazar, born in 1954, is the first applicant's
husband and is a journalist. The third applicant, Rüstü Açik, born in
1947, is an accountant. All applicants live in Izmir.
On 7 September 1987 the applicants were taken into custody at the
izmir Security Department by the izmir police. They were accused of
being members of the Communist Party of Turkey.
The applicants were held incommunicado and were questioned by the
police until 20 September 1987.
On 21 September 1987 they were taken before a judge for the first
time, charged and remanded in custody.
In an indictment dated 28 September 1987, the Public Prosecutor
at the izmir Security Court charged the applicants with being members
of an association aiming at the domination of a particular social
class. He requested a sentence of between five and eight years'
imprisonment under Article 141 para. 5 of the Turkish Criminal Code.
In a judgment dated 29 November 1988 the izmir State Security
Court sentenced the applicants to four years and two months'
imprisonment.
On 10 May 1989 the Court of Cassation upheld this judgment.
The applicants were conditionally released on 29 November
(R. Açik) and 7 December 1989 (Nesrin and Gür Hazar) respectively.
On 12 April 1991 Article 141 of the Turkish Penal Code, under
which they had been convicted, was abrogated.
5. The applicants complained to the Commission under Article 3 of
the Convention that they were subject to ill-treatment by the police
during their police custody. They also complained that they were
convicted for their political opinions and alleged violations of
Articles 9, 10 and 11 of the Convention. Finally, they alleged that the
court proceedings before the State Security Court which convicted them
did not afford them the guarantees of Article 6 paras. 1 and 3 of the
Convention.
PART II
SOLUTION REACHED
6. Following the decision on the admissibility of the applications,
the Commission placed itself at the disposal of the parties with a view
to securing a friendly settlement in accordance with
Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention and invited the parties to
submit any proposals they wished to make.
7. In accordance with the usual practice, the Secretary, acting on
the Commission's instructions, contacted the parties to explore the
possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement.
8. Between December 1991 and November 1992 there were negotiations
between the parties concerning a friendly settlement of the case.
Following these negotiations the parties agreed to a friendly
settlement embodied in the terms set out below.
On 2 November 1992 the applicants' representative,
Mrs. Sibel Bilge Uslu, informed the Commission that a friendly
settlement had been reached in the following terms:
"In its decision of 11 October 1991 the European Commission of Human Rights declared applications Nos 16311/90, 16312/90 and 16313/90 introduced by Nesrin Hazar, Gür Hazar and Rüstü Açik admissible. For the purpose of a friendly settlement of the mentioned applications and on the basis of respect for human rights as defined in the Convention, the Government and the applicants have reached the following agreement: a) the Government will pay to each of the applicants the equivalent of 115.000 FF, a sum amounting to 173.765.000 Turkish Liras (1FF being the equivalent of 1511 Turkish Liras under the exchange rate of the Central Bank on 23 October 1992). The total amount to be paid is 521.295.000 Turkish Liras; b) the applicants waive any further claims against the Government. Ankara - 2 November 1992". 9. By letter of 23 November 1992 the Government confirmed this friendly settlement. 10. At its session on 10 December 1992 the Commission noted that the parties had reached an agreement regarding the terms of a settlement. It further observed that on 12 April 1991 Article 141 of the Turkish Penal Code under which the applicants had been convicted was abrogated. The Commission therefore considered, having regard to Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention, that the friendly settlement of the case had been secured on the basis of respect for Human Rights as defined in the Convention. 11. For these reasons, the Commission adopted this Report. Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission (H.C. KRÜGER) (C.A. NØRGAARD)
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy