SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 25666/02
by Lokman LAÇİN and İskender ELTER
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 9 December 2008 as a Chamber composed of:
Françoise Tulkens, President,
Ireneu Cabral Barreto,
Vladimiro Zagrebelsky,
Danutė Jočienė,
Dragoljub Popović,
Nona Tsotsoria,
Işıl Karakaş, judges,
and Sally Dollé, Section Registrar.
Having regard to the above application lodged on 6 April 2001,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants, Mr Lokman Laçin and Mr İskender Elter, are Turkish nationals who were born in 1971 and 1966 respectively and live in Diyarbakır. They were represented before the Court by Mr M. Vefa, a lawyer practising in Diyarbakır. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
On 25 September 1993 and 15 September 1993 respectively the first and second applicants were arrested and taken into custody on suspicion of their affiliation to an illegal organisation, namely the PKK (the Kurdistan Workers' Party).
On 3 October 1993 the Van Magistrates' Court remanded them in custody.
On 10 November 1993 the public prosecutor at the Diyarbakır State Security Court filed a bill of indictment against the applicants, accusing the first applicant of carrying out activities for the purpose of bringing about the secession of part of the national territory (Article 125 of the now defunct Criminal Code) and the second applicant of membership of the PKK (Article 168 § 2 of the aforementioned Criminal Code and section 5 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, Law no. 3713).
On 3 November 1997 the Diyarbakır State Security Court found the applicants guilty as charged and sentenced the first applicant to death and the second applicant to twelve years and six months' imprisonment. The death sentence of the first applicant was immediately commuted to life imprisonment.
On 3 November 1997 the Court of Cassation quashed the judgment of the State Security Court for procedural errors.
On 1 February 2001 the Diyarbakır State Security Court delivered a new judgment in which it maintained the applicants' previous convictions and sentences.
On 8 October 2001 the Court of Cassation upheld the judgment of the Diyarbakır State Security Court.
On 7 December 2001 the decision of the Court of Cassation was returned to the registry of the Diyarbakır State Security Court.
COMPLAINTS
The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that they had been denied a fair hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal within a reasonable time. They also invoked Articles 3, 5 and 13 of the Convention.
THE LAW
The Court received the following declaration from the Government:
“I declare that the Government of Turkey offer to pay ex gratia 2,000 (two thousand) euros to each of the applicants with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be converted into new Turkish liras at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and free of any taxes that may be applicable. It will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken 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 simple interest on it, from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.”
The Court received the following declaration signed by the applicants' representative:
“I note that the Government of Turkey are prepared to pay ex gratia the sum of 2,000 (two thousand) euros to each of the applicants with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be converted into new Turkish liras at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and free of any taxes that may be applicable. It will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. From the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
We accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Turkey in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. We declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.”
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 the continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Sally DolléFrançoise Tulkens
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy