THIRD SECTION
PARTIAL DECISION
Application no. 38128/02
by Tekin TANGÜN and Others
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 1 June 2006 as a Chamber composed of:
MrB.M. Zupančič, President,
MrJ. Hedigan,
MrL. Caflisch,
MrR. Türmen,
MrV. Zagrebelsky,
MrsA. Gyulumyan,
MrE. Myjer, judges,
and Mr V. Berger, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 October 2001,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants, Mr Tekin Tangün, Mr Metin Yavuz, Mr Ali Ercan Gökoğlu, Mr Egemen Seyfettin Kuşçu, Ms Hatice Ruken Kılıç, Ms Naciye Barbaros, Ms Duygu Eygi, Ms Yeter Gönül, Mr İsmail Özmen, Mr Murat Bargu, Mr Feridun Yücel Batu and Mr İbrahim Akın, are Turkish nationals and live in Istanbul. They are represented before the Court by Mr B. Aşçı, Mr M. Narin, Ms S. Yılmaz, Ms S. Özer, Mr Ö.M. Gider, Mr Z. Rüzgar, Mr S Şensoy, Mr A.G. Sevimli and Mr H.İ. Türkyılmaz, lawyers practising in Istanbul.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.
On 7 August 2001 Tekin Tangün was arrested by police officers from the anti-terror branch of the Istanbul Security Directorate on suspicion of having aided and abetted an illegal organisation.
On 8 August 2001 Metin Yavuz, Ali Ercan Gökoğlu, Egemen Seyfettin Kuşçu, Hatice Ruken Kılıç, Naciye Barbaros, Duygu Eygi, Yeter Gönül, Mr İsmail Özmen, Murat Bargu, Feridun Yücel Batu and İbrahim Akın were taken into custody by police officers from the anti-terror branch of the Istanbul Security Directorate upon a search order given by the Istanbul State Security Court.
On 9 August 2001 the director of the anti-terror branch of the Istanbul Security Directorate requested the public prosecutor at the Istanbul State Security Court to extend the applicants’ custody period for four days.
On the same day, the public prosecutor granted the requested extension.
On 11 August 2001 the Diyarbakır Security Directorate requested the Diyarbakır State Security Court to extend the custody period for a further three days. The single judge of the State Security Court decided to extend the custody period for three days starting from 11 August 2001.
On 13 August 2001 the applicant were brought before the Istanbul State Security Court. The court ordered that Tekin Tangün, Metin Yavuz, and Ali Ercan Gökoğlu be detained on remand and that the other applicants be released.
By a letter dated 24 October 2002 the Registry requested the applicants’ representative to submit a power of attorney signed by one of the applicants, İbrahim Akın.
On 8 April 2005 the applicants’ representatives informed the Court they had not been able to contact İbrahim Akın and that they wished to withdraw the application in respect of this applicant.
COMPLAINT
The applicants complain under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention that they were held in police custody for an excessive length of time without being brought before a judge or other officer authorised by law to exercise judicial power.
THE LAW
A. As regards the applicant İbrahim Akın
The Court notes that the applicants’ representative notified the Court that they wished to withdraw the application in so far as it was brought by Mr İbrahim Akın.
The Court therefore concludes that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application brought by Mr İbrahim Akın within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. Furthermore, the Court finds no reasons of a general character, as defined in Article 37 § 1 in fine, which would require the examination of this part of the application by virtue of that Article. It therefore decides to strike the application in respect of Mr İbrahim Akın out of its list of cases.
B. As regards the applicants Tekin Tangün, Metin Yavuz, Ali Ercan Gökoğlu, Egemen Seyfettin Kuşçu, Hatice Ruken Kılıç, Naciye Barbaros, Duygu Eygi, Yeter Gönül, İsmail Özmen, Murat Bargu and Feridun Yücel Batu
The Court considers that it cannot, on the basis of the case file, determine the admissibility of the application in respect of Tekin Tangün, Metin Yavuz, Ali Ercan Gökoğlu, Egemen Seyfettin Kuşçu, Hatice Ruken Kılıç, Naciye Barbaros, Duygu Eygi, Yeter Gönül, İsmail Özmen, Murat Bargu and Feridun Yücel Batu and that it is therefore necessary, in accordance with Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court, to give notice of this part of the application to the respondent Government.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to adjourn the examination of the complaints brought by the applicants Tekin Tangün, Metin Yavuz, Ali Ercan Gökoğlu, Egemen Seyfettin Kuşçu, Hatice Ruken Kılıç, Naciye Barbaros, Duygu Eygi, Yeter Gönül, İsmail Özmen, Murat Bargu and Feridun Yücel Batu;
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in respect of the applicant İbrahim Akın.
Vincent BergerBoštjan M. Zupančič
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy