The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 8 July 2014 as a Chamber composed of: Guido Raimondi, President, Işıl Karakaş, Nebojša Vučinić, Helen Keller, Paul Lemmens, Egidijus Kūris, Robert Spano, judges, and Stanley Naismith, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 9 January 2012, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS 1. The applicant, Mr Ali Keskin, is a Turkish national, who was born in 1969 and lives in Erzurum. He was represented before the Court by Mr B. Bedirhanoğlu, a lawyer practising in Istanbul. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent. 2. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 3. On 21 August 2006 the...
SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 12923/12 Ali KESKİN against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 8 July 2014 as a Chamber composed of: Guido Raimondi, President, Işıl Karakaş, Nebojša Vučinić, Helen Keller, Paul Lemmens, Egidijus Kūris, Robert Spano, judges, and Stanley Naismith, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 9 January 2012, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS 1. The applicant, Mr Ali Keskin, is a Turkish national, who was born in 1969 and lives in Erzurum. He was represented before the Court by Mr B. Bedirhanoğlu, a lawyer practising in Istanbul. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent. 2. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 3. On 21 August 2006 the applicant found his seven-year-old son, A.K., injured. 4. On 14 August 2008 the Oltu public prosecutor filed an indictment with the Oltu Assize Court, accusing N.K., the applicant’s former wife, of
2 KESKİN v. TURKEY DECISION assaulting A.K. and murdering the couple’s first child, M.K. The applicant joined the criminal proceedings against N.K. as a civil party. 5. On 4 March 2010, after evaluating the medical reports, witness statements and the public prosecutor’s written opinion, the Oltu Assize Court acquitted N.K. of the charges against her. 6. On 25 May 2011 the Court of Cassation upheld the judgment of the Assize Court. This decision was deposited with the registry of the Assize Court on 21 June 2011. The president of the court noted on the judgment that the intervening party should be notified. According to the information in the case file, the judgment was not served on the applicant. On 6 January 2012 he obtained a copy from the registry of the first-instance court. COMPLAINTS 7. The applicant complained that the domestic authorities had not conducted an effective investigation into his allegations that his son, who was seven years old at the time of the events, had been seriously injured by his mother. In this connection, he argued that the Oltu public prosecutor had failed to act promptly in arranging the child’s medical examination, that the criminal proceedings against the child’s mother had lasted too long and that the domestic court had failed to examine the evidence diligently. The application was communicated under Article 3 of the Convention. THE LAW 8. The applicant alleged that the manner in which the criminal-law mechanisms had been applied in the present case by the domestic authorities was in breach of Article 3 of the Convention. 9. The Government maintained that the application should be rejected for non-compliance with the six-month time-limit. In this connection, they stated that the final decision of the Court of Cassation had been deposi...