SEVINÇ v. TURKEY and 252 other applications

Communicated on 16 October 2020

Published on 2 November 2020

SECOND SECTION

Application no. 63634/16
Şamil SEVİNÇ against Turkey
and 252 other applications
(see list appended)

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1.  A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix.The circumstances of the case

2.  The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.Background of the cases

3.  During the night of 15 to 16 July 2016 a group of members of the Turkish armed forces calling themselves the “Peace at Home Council” attempted to carry out a military coup aimed at overthrowing the democratically installed parliament, government and President of Turkey.

4.  During the attempted coup, soldiers under the instigators’ control bombarded several strategic State buildings, including the parliament building and the presidential compound, attacked the hotel where the President was staying, and held the Chief of General Staff hostage. They also attacked television channels and fired shots at demonstrators. During the night of violence, more than 250 people were killed and more than 2,500 were injured.

5.  The day after the attempted military coup, the national authorities blamed the network linked to Fetullah Gülen, a Turkish citizen living in Pennsylvania (United States of America) and considered to be the leader of an organisation known as FETÖ/PDY (“Gülenist Terror Organisation/Parallel State Structure”). Several criminal investigations were subsequently initiated by the appropriate prosecuting authorities in respect of suspected members of that organisation.

6.  On 16 July 2016, the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (Hakimler ve Savcılar Kurulu – hereinafter “HSK”) suspended from office 2,735 judges and prosecutors, including some of the applicants, for a period of three months, pursuant to Article 77 § 1 and Article 81 § 1 of Law no. 2802. The HSK held that there were strong suspicions that the judges were members of the terrorist organisation that had undertaken the attempted coup d’état and that their remaining in office would undermine the proper conduct of the investigation and the authority and reputation of the judiciary. In doing so, HSK relied on information and documents contained in investigation files transmitted to it before the attempted coup d’état, as well as on information obtained as a result of investigations carried out by the intelligence services.

7.  On 20 July 2016 the Government declared a state of emergency for a period of three months as from 21 July 2016; the state of emergency was subsequently extended for further periods of three months by the Council of Ministers, chaired by the President.

8.  On 21 July 2016 the Turkish authorities gave notice to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe of derogation from the Convention under Article 15.

9.  During the state of emergency, the Council of Ministers chaired by the President passed thirty-seven legislative decrees (nos. 667-703) under Article 121 of the Constitution. One of them, Legislative Decree no. 667, published in the Official Gazette on 23 July 2016, provided in particular, under its Article 3, that the HSK was authorised to dismiss any of its members who were considered to belong to or be affiliated with or linked to terrorist organisations or organisations, structures or groups found by the National Security Council to have engaged in activities that were harmful to national security. The legislative decrees also placed significant restrictions on the procedural safeguards laid down in domestic law for anyone held in police custody or pre-trial detention (for example, extension of the period in which people could be held in police custody, and restrictions on access to case files and on the examination of objections against detention orders).

10.  On 10 August 2016, HSK further suspended 648 magistrates from their posts for a period of three months, including some of the applicants, on the grounds that they belonged to, or were affiliated with or linked to the FETÖ/PDY.

11.  By a decision of 24 August 2016, pursuant to Article 3 of Legislative Decree no. 667, the HSK, meeting in plenary session, dismissed 2,847 judges, all of whom were considered to be members of, affiliated with or linked to the FETÖ/PDY. Then, by a decision of 31 August 2016, it dismissed 543 other judges for the same reason. The applicants were thus dismissed from their functions.

12.  On 18 July 2018, the state of emergency was lifted.Personal situation of the applicants

(a)   The applicants’ arrests and pre-trial detention

13.  On 16 July 2016, the office for offences undermining the constitutional order of the Ankara prosecutor’s office opened a criminal investigation and notified all regional and departmental prosecutors. Acting within the framework of that investigation, the prosecutors initiated criminal investigations into the involvement, during or after the attempted coup d’état, of persons linked with the FETÖ/PDY and of those not directly involved but having links with that organisation, including some members of the judiciary.

14.  The applicants were taken into police custody on various dates in the course of those investigations. At the end of their detention in police custody, they were brought before the magistrate’s courts, which ordered their detention on remand. The magistrate’s courts relied essentially on the fact that the applicants had been suspended from their functions by the HSK on the grounds that they were members of the organisation that had undertaken the coup d’état, and that the Ankara public prosecutor’s office had requested that an investigation be initiated into their involvement. The judges took into consideration the nature of the offence with which the applicants were charged, the evidence adduced and the potential penalty. They also noted that the investigations into the attempted coup d’état were being conducted nationwide, that statements had not been collected from all suspects, and that the offence with which they were charged was among the “catalogued” offences listed in Article 100 § 3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the “CCP”). The judges concluded that the applicants’ pre-trial detention appeared, at that stage, to be a proportionate measure.

15.  Objections lodged by the applicants against the detention decisions were dismissed by other magistrate’s courts, in similar terms to the first decisions.

(b)   Decisions on the continuation of the applicants’ pre-trial detention and the dismissal of their objections

16.  The applicants’ continued pre-trial detention was reviewed automatically pursuant to Article 108 of the CCP, which provides for a review every thirty days. The judges ruled on the applicants’ requests for release at the same time as the detention reviews, pursuant to Article 3, paragraph 1 (ç), of Legislative Decree no. 668.

17.  In most cases, the magistrate’s courts ordered the continued pre-trial detention of the applicants, along with several other suspects. In their decisions, they essentially repeated the reasons given in the original detention decisions. They noted that a large proportion of those suspected of being members of FETÖ/PDY had fled and were still wanted. Taking into account the resources available to that organisation and its characteristics, the judges considered that there was a risk that the applicants might abscond, tamper with evidence and reoffend. The judges also stressed the seriousness of the offence with which the applicants were charged and the fact that not all the evidence had yet been collected. They concluded that the decisions to continue detention were in accordance with the information, documents and evidence contained in the investigation files. They added that given that there was still a clear and imminent danger associated with the attempted coup d’état, continued detention appeared to be a proportionate measure. They specified that since the suspects were former magistrates, there was a risk that they would try to influence or put pressure on the magistrates in office.

18.  In subsequent decisions on continued pre-trial detention, the magistrate’s courts also relied on the use of the ByLock encrypted messaging system by the persons concerned, and on witness statements.

19.  Objections lodged by the applicants were rejected by the magistrate’s courts, which relied on grounds similar to those indicated in their previous decisions.

20.  At the investigation stage, both applications for extension of the detention and objections to decisions to continue detention were examined on the basis of the case files, pursuant to Article 6, paragraph 1, subparagraph 1, of Legislative Decree no. 667.

21.  On various dates, the first-instance courts convicted some of the applicants of membership of a terrorist organisation. The criminal proceedings against some of the applicants are still pending before the local courts.

22.  During the trial, the trial courts, ruling either at the end of the hearings or during reviews carried out between the hearings, ordered the applicants’ continued detention. Appeals lodged against those decisions were dismissed.

(c)   Individual applications to the Constitutional Court

23.  The applicants each lodged one or more individual applications before the Constitutional Court. On different dates, the Constitutional Court declared the applications inadmissible. As can be seen from those decisions, the various complaints submitted by the applicants were declared inadmissible on the following grounds:

24.  With regard to the lawfulness of the applicants’ detention, the Constitutional Court noted that, according to the indictments and/or the investigation files, the applicants were users of ByLock. It considered that, given the characteristics of that application, its use or its downloading for use could be considered by the investigating authorities as evidence of a link with FETÖ/PDY. In this connection, it referred to its judgment in the case of Aydın Yavuz, delivered on 20 June 2017. The use of encryption by the applicants had been considered, depending on the circumstances of the case, as “strong evidence” that they had committed the offence of membership of FETÖ/PDY. Consequently, it could not be concluded that the investigating authorities or the courts that had decided on detention had taken an unfounded and arbitrary approach. In addition, taking into account the reasons given in the decisions on detention and the dismissal of objections, the Constitutional Court held that there were grounds for detention and that the measure was proportionate. It also considered the applicants’ grievances to be manifestly unfounded. As concerns some of the applicants, the Constitutional Court noted that the indictments and/or investigation files contained witness statements indicating that the applicants were members of FETÖ/PDY. They had therefore been detained on the basis of “reasonable grounds to suspect” that they had committed an offence.

25.  As regards the complaints that the magistrate’s courts were not independent and impartial, and that the examination of the appeals by the same judges had deprived the applicants of an effective remedy against the deprivation of liberty, the Constitutional Court noted that it had already examined those complaints in several cases. Having taken into consideration the structural characteristics of the magistrate’s courts, it had concluded that the complaints were manifestly ill-founded. The Constitutional Court held that there was no reason to reach a different conclusion in the applicants’ cases. It also declared inadmissible the applicants’ complaints that magistrates lacked knowledge of certain procedural guarantees, as well as their complaints that the justice of the peace had lacked jurisdiction to decide on detention, as manifestly ill-founded. Given the nature of the offence with which the applicants were charged and the manner in which it had been committed, the Constitutional Court considered that it was appropriate to accept the ruling of the magistrate’s courts which had ordered the applicants’ detention, and found no error of assessment or arbitrariness.

26.  With regard to the absence of a hearing during the review of the detention decision, the Constitutional Court considered that there was no reason to depart from its landmark decision in the case of Aydın Yavuz, in which it had considered that the absence of a hearing during the review of the detention decision, lasting approximately nine months, had not violated the right to liberty and security. It therefore considered that those complaints were manifestly ill-founded.

27.  With regard to the restriction on access to the investigation file, the Constitutional Court considered, after examining the transcripts of the hearing, the decisions relating to the applicants’ detention, the objections against those decisions lodged by the applicants or their lawyers, and the documents and information contained in the investigation file, that the applicants had been informed of the elements that constituted the main grounds for detention, that they had had sufficient knowledge of their content and that they had been given the opportunity to challenge the decisions on their detention. It also found those grievances to be manifestly ill-founded.

28.  With regard to the applicants’ complaints regarding the lawfulness and length of their police custody, based on its well-established case-law on the subject, the Constitutional Court declared those complaints inadmissible for failure to exhaust the compensation remedy provided for in Article 141 of the CCP.

29.  The Constitutional Court dismissed the complaints lodged by some of the applicants concerning the lack of an oral hearing, non-notification or belated notification of the detention decision, lack of or delay in the examination of the case by the magistrate’s courts, and the lawfulness of the searches conducted by the authorities on the grounds that they had failed to use the compensation remedy provided for by Article 141 of the CCP.

30.  The Constitutional Court also dismissed the remaining complaints on the grounds that the applicants had not used the appropriate remedies.Relevant domestic law and practice

31.  The relevant domestic law and practice are set out in Alparslan Altan v. Turkey (no. 12778/17, §§ 46-64, 16 April 2019) and Baş v. Turkey, (no. 66448/18, §§ 52-104, 3 March 2020).

COMPLAINTS

32.  The applicants complained of a violation of Article 5 of the Convention for the following reasons:

-  Some of the applicants claim that they were detained on remand in breach of the procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law for prosecutors and judges.

-  Some of the applicants complain that they were held in detention in the absence of any suspicion that they had committed an offence and without relevant and sufficient grounds.

-  Some of the applicants complain that they were not informed of the reasons for their arrest and any charge against them.

-  Some of the applicants claim that the length of their pre-trial detention was excessive.

-  Some of the applicants complain that the domestic courts did not hold a hearing when reviewing their pre-trial detention, that they were not notified of the opinion of the public prosecutor on those reviews and that their access to the investigation file was restricted.

-  Some of the applicants complain that their release requests and objections were not examined or were examined belatedly.

-  Some of the applicants complain that the decisions to extend their detention were not notified to them or were notified belatedly, and that therefore they were unable to appeal against those decisions.

-  Some of the applicants complain that they did not receive effective legal assistance and facilities to challenge their detention; in particular, their communication with their lawyers was monitored by the prison authorities.

-  Some of the applicants complain that the time taken by the Constitutional Court to conduct its examination of the case was excessive.

-  Some applicants allege that there was no remedy available to them to obtain compensation.

The specific complaints in respect of each applicant can be found in the appended table.

33.  Lastly, relying on Article 8 of the Convention, some of the applicants (in applications nos. 24366/19, 25280/19, 26378/19, 27075/19) complain that the searches conducted by the authorities in their homes were unlawful.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

On the basis of the complaints communicated in accordance
with the list in the Appendix

1.  (a)  Did the applicants’ pre-trial detention take place “in accordance with the law”, in view of the procedural guarantees provided to the judges and prosecutors by domestic law?

(b)  Can the applicants be considered to have been detained on the basis of “a reasonable suspicion” that they had committed an offence (see, in particular, Fox, Campbell and Hartley v. the United Kingdom, 30 August 1990, § 32, Series A No. 182)?

In particular, the parties are invited to answer this question taking into account,

-  on the one hand, Article 100 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which requires “concrete evidence demonstrating the existence of strong suspicions” as to the commission of the offence, and

-  on the other hand, the fact that the Constitutional Court based the existence of reasonable suspicion on evidence discovered after the decisions had been taken to detain the applicants.

2.  Was the applicants informed promptly of the reasons for their arrest and of any charge against them, as required by Article 5 § 2 of the Convention?

3.  Did the judges, who ordered the applicants’ pre‑trial detention and examined the objections lodged against that measure, fulfil their obligations to provide relevant and sufficient grounds in support of the deprivation of liberty in question (see, in particular, Buzadji v. Republic of Moldova [GC], no. 23755/07, § 102, ECHR 2016 (extracts))?

4.  Was the length of the applicants’ pre-trial detention in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention?

5.  Did the applicants have at their disposal a remedy by which they could challenge the lawfulness of their deprivation of liberty, as required by Article 5 § 4 of the Convention? In particular, the Government are invited to respond to the following complaints made by the applicants:

-  that the principle of equality of arms had not been respected, as the decisions to extend their detention and their objections to those decisions had been examined without a hearing and the prosecutors’ opinions had not been communicated to them;

-  because of the restriction imposed on their access to the case file, they had been unable to challenge effectively their detention;

-  that their objections had not been examined or had been examined belatedly;

-  that the decisions to extend their detention had not been notified to them or had been notified belatedly, so they had been unable to lodge objections against them;

-  that they had had no effective legal assistance or facilities to challenge their detention; in particular, that their communication with their lawyers had been monitored;

-  and lastly, that the time taken by the Constitutional Court to examine their individual applications had been protracted.

6.  Was the compensation remedy provided for by Article 141 of the Code of Criminal Procedure considered an effective remedy for complaints concerning lack of an oral hearing, for failure to notify or belated notification of the detention decision and, lastly, lack of or delay in the examination by the magistrate’s court under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention? If so, the Government are requested to produce a copy of the court decisions awarding compensation, on the basis of those provisions, to a litigant in a situation similar to that of the applicants.

7.  Did the applicants have, as required by Article 5 § 5 of the Convention, an effective and enforceable right in court to obtain compensation for their detention, which they consider to have been contrary to Article 5 §§ 1, 3 and 4?

8.  Taking into consideration the searches carried out by the authorities in the applicants’ homes (in applications nos. 24366/19, 25280/19, 26378/19, 27075/19) was the interference with the applicants’ right to respect for their private life and home in accordance with law and necessary in terms of Article 8 of the Convention? In this regard, was the compensation remedy provided for by Article 141 of the Criminal Code of Procedure considered an effective remedy for the applicants’ complaints? If so, the Government are invited to provide copies of decisions awarding compensation in cases raising similar issues.

APPENDIX

No.

Application no.

Case title

Date of introduction

Complaints

1

63634/16

Sevinç v. Turkey

27/10/2016

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities

2

13853/17

Güney v. Turkey

03/01/2017

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
No effective remedy to compensation

3

14439/17

Özalp v. Turkey

12/01/2017

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file

4

14942/17

Ulak v. Turkey

05/01/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest

5

14976/17

Altun v. Turkey

11/01/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities

6

34032/17

Sarı v. Turkey

10/03/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities

7

40177/17

Bekri v. Turkey

16/01/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities

8

41766/17

Çakır v. Turkey

12/05/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review 

9

41864/17

Üşümez v. Turkey

28/04/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file 

10

43739/17

Acu v. Turkey

04/04/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities

11

43741/17

Aydın v. Turkey

03/05/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Restriction of access to the investigation file  

12

45034/17

Balık v. Turkey

05/05/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities

13

48010/17

Çakmak v. Turkey

23/06/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Restriction of access to the investigation file

14

49244/17

Uslu v. Turkey

29/03/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file 

15

49867/17

Moral v. Turkey

28/04/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file

16

58673/17

Okur v. Turkey

20/07/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest

17

61373/17

Duran v. Turkey

19/04/2017

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection  

18

61445/17

Selvi Kıllıbaş v. Turkey

01/06/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention

19

62627/17

Karaduman v. Turkey

15/06/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion

20

62735/17

Dede v. Turkey

24/01/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities

21

63197/17

Binici v. Turkey

26/05/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law

22

63650/17

Kandemir v. Turkey

15/02/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention

23

63805/17

Karaali v. Turkey

06/06/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention 

24

66402/17

Babayiğit v. Turkey

16/01/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of hearing during the detention review

25

67340/17

Ünal v. Turkey

17/08/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion

26

68205/17

Kayın v. Turkey

13/01/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities

27

68692/17

Arslan v. Turkey

05/01/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities

28

76280/17

Erkan v. Turkey

29/09/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities

29

76424/17

Yıldırım v. Turkey

26/09/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest

30

79642/17

Kartal v. Turkey

27/10/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file

31

79845/17

Köseoğlu v. Turkey

24/10/2017

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court  

32

80957/17

Şen v. Turkey

06/11/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of hearing during the detention review

33

83999/17

Cengiz v. Turkey

16/11/2017

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest

34

183/18

Demir v. Turkey

06/12/2017

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest

35

6919/18

Çelik v. Turkey

19/01/2018

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review

36

10834/18

Sarıyer v. Turkey

06/12/2017

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest

37

16155/18

Özkan v. Turkey

14/03/2018

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
No effective remedy to compensation
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities

38

17915/18

Gözlüpınar v. Turkey

07/04/2018

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention

39

21859/18

Şahin v. Turkey

17/04/2018

Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion

40

23455/18

Demir v. Turkey

30/04/2018

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law

41

24169/18

Göker v. Turkey

08/05/2018

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file

42

25201/18

Günal v. Turkey

26/05/2018

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

43

29932/18

Yıldız v. Turkey

29/05/2018

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Restriction of access to the investigation file

44

35634/18

Demir v. Turkey

13/07/2018

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection

45

43696/18

İ.Ö. v. Turkey

11/09/2018

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

46

3933/19

Önay v. Turkey

04/12/2018

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention

47

6970/19

Yıldızeli v. Turkey

18/01/2018

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Lack of hearing during the detention review

48

7250/19

Şahin v. Turkey

21/01/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file

49

9217/19

Gümüş v. Turkey

01/02/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention

50

9498/19

Fırat v. Turkey

07/02/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

51

11767/19

Z.E. v. Turkey

21/02/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion

52

11854/19

Bektaş v. Turkey

04/02/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file

53

13104/19

Cambolat v. Turkey

13/02/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

54

13646/19

Yelesdağ v. Turkey

27/02/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

55

13857/19

Sayılgan v. Turkey

08/03/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file

56

14274/19

Şayık v. Turkey

28/02/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file

57

15183/19

Çifçi v. Turkey

28/02/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file  

58

15725/19

Sarı v. Turkey

08/03/2019

Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

59

15783/19

Aydın v. Turkey

27/02/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file

60

15881/19

Akbaba v. Turkey

07/03/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file

61

15883/19

Poyrazoğlu v. Turkey

07/03/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

62

15900/19

Kara v. Turkey

11/03/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court

63

15995/19

Uzun v. Turkey

03/01/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file

64

16113/19

Özyurt v. Turkey

11/03/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file

65

16213/19

Dağlı v. Turkey

21/11/2018

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file 

66

16418/19

Acar v. Turkey

01/03/2019

Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

67

16424/19

Yediyıldız v. Turkey

28/02/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file 

68

17209/19

Balkan v. Turkey

05/03/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file  

69

17330/19

Turan v. Turkey

25/03/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons 

70

17479/19

Üre v. Turkey

26/03/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

71

17501/19

Benli v. Turkey

11/03/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

72

17524/19

Şaşmaz v. Turkey

22/03/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention

73

17527/19

Altunbey v. Turkey

18/03/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

74

17548/19

Kesim v. Turkey

13/03/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

75

17780/19

Kaya v. Turkey

18/03/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

76

18428/19

Yakar v. Turkey

14/03/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

77

18777/19

Doğanay v. Turkey

20/03/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

78

18787/19

Canoğlu v. Turkey

19/03/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file

79

18886/19

Bedirhan v. Turkey

22/03/2019

Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

80

19063/19

Çiftel v. Turkey

19/03/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention

81

19105/19

Çelebi v. Turkey

21/03/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file

82

19590/19

Çelik v. Turkey

27/03/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

83

19743/19

A.B. v. Turkey

29/03/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

84

19863/19

Ermişoğlu v. Turkey

01/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention

85

20067/19

Uzun v. Turkey

30/03/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

86

20084/19

İkibaş v. Turkey

25/03/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

87

20276/19

Abay v. Turkey

01/04/2019

Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention

88

20293/19

Acar v. Turkey

29/03/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

89

20713/19

Çınar v. Turkey

02/04/2019

Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

90

20749/19

Dalkılıç v. Turkey

01/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

91

20995/19

Bıçakçıgil v. Turkey

03/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file

92

21017/19

Kaya v. Turkey

02/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Restriction of access to the investigation file

93

21193/19

Sahin v. Turkey

12/04/2019

Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

94

21226/19

Öz v. Turkey

26/03/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

95

21248/19

Gürpınar v. Turkey

05/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law

96

21260/19

Kartal v. Turkey

12/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

97

21264/19

Bayburtlu v. Turkey

08/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

98

21593/19

Karaşlar v. Turkey

10/04/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

99

21873/19

Gümüşsoy v. Turkey

05/04/2019

Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

100

21948/19

Bayar v. Turkey

03/04/2019

Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

101

21968/19

Arı v. Turkey

19/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

102

22462/19

İnce v. Turkey

17/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

103

22482/19

Pehlivan v. Turkey

12/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

104

22682/19

Çakmak v. Turkey

11/04/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

105

22727/19

Kalkan v. Turkey

19/04/2019

Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

106

22731/19

Bulut v. Turkey

09/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court

107

22734/19

Öztürk v. Turkey

17/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

108

22755/19

Karakaya v. Turkey

17/04/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

109

23438/19

Yıldırımer v. Turkey

26/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

110

23673/19

Ayanoğlu v. Turkey

24/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

111

23701/19

Çeken v. Turkey

10/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

112

23953/19

Arslan v. Turkey

24/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

113

24351/19

İnci v. Turkey

16/04/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

114

24366/19

Aksakal v. Turkey

17/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lawfulness of search conducted by the authorities

115

24370/19

Samsa v. Turkey

16/04/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

116

24387/19

Çavdar v. Turkey

24/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

117

24620/19

Öcal v. Turkey

24/04/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

118

24668/19

Yenitepe v. Turkey

29/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

119

24753/19

Güngör v. Turkey

29/04/2019

Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

120

24755/19

Sırıklıgil v. Turkey

03/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

121

24760/19

Ovacıklı v. Turkey

29/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

122

24780/19

Gökçeli v. Turkey

24/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

123

24859/19

Güngör v. Turkey

29/04/2019

Length of pre-trial detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

124

24939/19

Bayır v. Turkey

24/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

125

25151/19

Bayman v. Turkey

22/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

126

25250/19

Say v. Turkey

06/05/2019

Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

127

25280/19

Atça v. Turkey

25/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lawfulness of search conducted by the authorities

128

25296/19

Bilgili v. Turkey

07/05/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

129

25409/19

Kavak v. Turkey

03/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

130

25413/19

Çağatay v. Turkey

03/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

131

25578/19

Candemir v. Turkey

22/04/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

132

25595/19

Yavuz v. Turkey

29/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

133

25664/19

Okcanoğlu v. Turkey

25/04/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

134

25701/19

Kılıç v. Turkey

30/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

135

25759/19

Varol v. Turkey

24/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

136

25777/19

Tekkoyun v. Turkey

02/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

137

25907/19

Özdemir v. Turkey

17/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

138

25912/19

Tombak v. Turkey

19/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

139

25975/19

Şengönül v. Turkey

25/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

140

26080/19

Öztürk v. Turkey

08/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

141

26282/19

Ayaz v. Turkey

30/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

142

26378/19

Bağırcı v. Turkey

14/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lawfulness of search conducted by the authorities
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

143

26422/19

Çamlıbel v. Turkey

29/04/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

144

26525/19

Etöz v. Turkey

02/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

145

26715/19

Coşar v. Turkey

06/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

146

26769/19

Özcan v. Turkey

20/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

147

26873/19

Gençler v. Turkey

30/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

148

27075/19

Yıldırım v. Turkey

30/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lawfulness of search conducted by the authorities
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

149

27132/19

Taşkın v. Turkey

25/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

150

27141/19

Öcal v. Turkey

09/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

151

27501/19

Çelik v. Turkey

15/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

152

27577/19

Kavak v. Turkey

26/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

153

27686/19

Arslan v. Turkey

29/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

154

27739/19

Özçelik v. Turkey

30/04/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

155

28238/19

Keskin v. Turkey

06/05/2019

Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

156

28246/19

Özyiğit v. Turkey

07/05/2019

Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

157

28696/19

Kiziroğlu v. Turkey

03/05/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

158

28703/19

Yetişgen v. Turkey

03/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

159

28935/19

Toltar v. Turkey

07/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

160

28963/19

Şenses v. Turkey

15/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

161

29166/19

Çelik v. Turkey

13/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

162

29315/19

Yoncalık v. Turkey

10/05/2019

Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

163

29327/19

Sakmak v. Turkey

10/05/2019

Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

164

29438/19

Aydın v. Turkey

10/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

165

29813/19

Zencir v. Turkey

13/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

166

30232/19

Kahraman v. Turkey

14/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

167

30284/19

Gür v. Turkey

16/05/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

168

30285/19

Gümüş v. Turkey

22/05/2019

Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

169

30296/19

Kılıç v. Turkey

16/05/2019

Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

170

30415/19

Bayazan v. Turkey

20/05/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

171

30478/19

Oruç v. Turkey

27/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

172

30481/19

Önder v. Turkey

27/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

173

30485/19

Dal v. Turkey

10/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

174

30489/19

Kulaber v. Turkey

10/05/2019

Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

175

30865/19

Ocak v. Turkey

29/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

176

31626/19

Uysal v. Turkey

20/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

177

32274/19

Türkel v. Turkey

28/05/2019

Lack of hearing during the detention review
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

178

32316/19

Bozkurt v. Turkey

10/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

179

32943/19

Aydın v. Turkey

29/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

180

33224/19

Acar v. Turkey

07/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

181

33290/19

Yeşilyurt v. Turkey

10/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

182

34160/19

Özen v. Turkey

17/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

183

34173/19

Yurt v. Turkey

17/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

184

34234/19

Sarı v. Turkey

17/06/2019

Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

185

34595/19

Koçal v. Turkey

12/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

186

34904/19

Çelik v. Turkey

21/06/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

187

34922/19

Hadimli v. Turkey

21/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

188

35008/19

Kayalar v. Turkey

02/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law

189

35059/19

Aydın v. Turkey

02/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

190

35075/19

Yücel v. Turkey

02/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

191

35089/19

Arslan v. Turkey

14/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

192

35090/19

Karaağaç v. Turkey

28/06/2019

Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

193

35107/19

Devran v. Turkey

28/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

194

35366/19

Bozoğlu v. Turkey

17/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

195

35475/19

Çolak v. Turkey

17/06/2019

Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

196

35588/19

Alıcı v. Turkey

25/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

197

35824/19

Gemici v. Turkey

31/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

198

35885/19

Demir v. Turkey

18/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

199

35891/19

Özdemir v. Turkey

17/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

200

36055/19

Gökgöz v. Turkey

27/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law 

201

36192/19

Ertan v. Turkey

17/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

202

36208/19

Doğan v. Turkey

21/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

203

36383/19

Yalçınkaya v. Turkey

27/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

204

36545/19

Güney v. Turkey

17/06/2019

Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

205

36634/19

Kamış v. Turkey

19/06/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

206

36758/19

Aksoy v. Turkey

03/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

207

36783/19

Demirel v. Turkey

28/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

208

36808/19

Akdoğan v. Turkey

02/07/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

209

36828/19

Aydın v. Turkey

01/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

210

36871/19

Ejder v. Turkey

01/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

211

37238/19

Aytaç v. Turkey

03/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

212

37749/19

Eröz v. Turkey

18/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

213

38054/19

Tansel v. Turkey

28/06/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

214

38392/19

Çatal v. Turkey

16/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

215

38449/19

Çabuk v. Turkey

05/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

216

38528/19

Ayan v. Turkey

04/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

217

38924/19

Karadeniz v. Turkey

11/07/2019

Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

218

38986/19

Demir v. Turkey

09/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

219

39084/19

Paker v. Turkey

16/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

220

39217/19

Tanrıöver v. Turkey

10/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

221

39485/19

Kara v. Turkey

12/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

222

39599/19

Yılmaz v. Turkey

09/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

223

39647/19

Taşkın v. Turkey

11/07/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

224

39722/19

Halitoğlu v. Turkey

31/05/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

225

39778/19

Doğan v. Turkey

19/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

226

40515/19

Sarıgedik v. Turkey

19/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

227

40593/19

Şahin v. Turkey

25/07/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

228

40854/19

Duran v. Turkey

22/07/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

229

40949/19

Yavuz v. Turkey

17/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

230

41022/19

Varol v. Turkey

29/07/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

231

41060/19

Baki v. Turkey

20/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

232

41129/19

Gürsoy Fırat v. Turkey

22/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities

233

41261/19

Kuvel v. Turkey

22/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

234

41361/19

Güzeltaş v. Turkey

26/07/2019

Length of pre-trial detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack/Difficulties of legal assistance/other facilities

235

41667/19

Gürel Aygün v. Turkey

29/05/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

236

41848/19

Tabakcı v. Turkey

29/07/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

237

42065/19

R.M. v. Turkey

22/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Failure to communicate the prosecutor’s opinion
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

238

42468/19

Akgül v. Turkey

01/08/2019

Lack of hearing during the detention review
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

239

42479/19

Er v. Turkey

29/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

240

42704/19

Akyüz v. Turkey

01/08/2019

Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

241

42713/19

Demir v. Turkey

02/08/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

242

42974/19

Şengül v. Turkey

29/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

243

43475/19

Sarıkaya v. Turkey

01/08/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Restriction of access to the investigation file  

244

43617/19

Özçelik v. Turkey

01/07/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

245

44708/19

Akyol v. Turkey

09/08/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

246

46744/19

Güney v. Turkey

15/08/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

247

47050/19

Sarıkaya v. Turkey

28/08/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

248

48100/19

Nas v. Turkey

24/08/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Length of pre-trial detention
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of information on the reasons for arrest
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

249

51124/19

Tanrıkulu v. Turkey

06/09/2019

Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

250

51627/19

Şahin v. Turkey

27/08/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

251

51678/19

Uslu v. Turkey

04/09/2019

Length of pre-trial detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

252

51686/19

Çivi v. Turkey

01/10/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Delay in examination by the Constitutional Court
Failure/Delay in examining requests for enlargement/objection
Lack of hearing during the detention review
Restriction of access to the investigation file
Failure/Delay to communicate decisions relating to detention
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

253

54772/19

Kukul v. Turkey

01/10/2019

Failure to comply with procedural guarantees provided for in domestic law
Lack of reasonable suspicion/relevant and sufficient reasons

 

Full & Egal Universal Law Academy