This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision. 2 YALGIN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY JUDGMENT In the case of Arap Yalgın and Others v. Turkey, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of: Mrs E. PALM, President, Mr L. FERRARI BRAVO, Mr GAUKUR JÖRUNDSSON, Mr B. ZUPANČIČ, Mr T. PANŢÎRU, Mr R. MARUSTE, judges, Mr F. GÖLCÜKLÜ, ad hoc judge, and Mr M. O’BOYLE, Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 11 January 2000 and on 4 September 2001, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on the last-mentioned date: PROCEDURE 1. The case originated in an application (no. 33370/96) against the Republic of Turkey lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights (“the Commission”) under former Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of...
CONSEIL DE L’EUROPE COUNCIL OF EUROPE COUR EUROPÉENNE DES DROITS DE L’HOMME EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST SECTION CASE OF ARAP YALGIN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY (Application no. 33370/96) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG 25 September 2001 FINAL 25/12/2001 This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.
2 YALGIN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY JUDGMENT In the case of Arap Yalgın and Others v. Turkey, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of: Mrs E. PALM, President, Mr L. FERRARI BRAVO, Mr GAUKUR JÖRUNDSSON, Mr B. ZUPANČIČ, Mr T. PANŢÎRU, Mr R. MARUSTE, judges, Mr F. GÖLCÜKLÜ, ad hoc judge, and Mr M. O’BOYLE, Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 11 January 2000 and on 4 September 2001, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on the last-mentioned date: PROCEDURE 1. The case originated in an application (no. 33370/96) against the Republic of Turkey lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights (“the Commission”) under former Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by three Turkish nationals, Mr Arap Yalgın, Mr Mehmet Murat Öner and Mr Muhtat Karakoca (“the applicants”), on 17 June 1996. 2. The applicants were represented by Mrs Oya Ersoy Ataman, a lawyer practising in Ankara (Turkey). The Turkish Government did not designate an Agent for the purposes of the proceedings before the Court. 3. The applicants alleged, in particular, that the criminal proceedings brought against them had not been concluded within a “reasonable time”. The applicants Arap Yalgın and Muhtat Karakoca further submitted that their right to a fair hearing had been breached on account of their conviction by the Ankara Martial Law Court which lacked independence and impartiality. The applicants also maintained that they had been convicted on the basis of the statements they had made to the police under duress. 4. The application was transmitted to the Court on 1 November 1998, when Protocol No. 11 to the Convention came into force (Article 5 § 2 of Protocol No. 11). 5. The application was allocated to the First Section of the Court (Rule 52 § 1 of the Rules of Court). Within that Section, the Chamber that would consider the case (Article 27 § 1 of the Convention) was constituted as provided in Rule 26 § 1 of the Rules of Court. Mr Rıza Türmen, the
ARAP YALGIN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY JUDGMENT 3 judge elected in respect of Turkey, withdrew from sitting in the case (Rule 28). The Government accordingly appointed Mr Feyyaz Gölcüklü to sit as an ad hoc judge, in his place (Article 27 § 2 of the Convention and Rule 29 § 1). 6. By a decision of 11 January 2000, the Chamber retained the applicants’ complaints concerning their right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal and declared the remainde...