The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 4 November 2014 as a Chamber composed of: Guido Raimondi, President, Işıl Karakaş, Nebojša Vučinić, Helen Keller, Paul Lemmens, Egidijus Kūris, Robert Spano, judges, and Abel Campos, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 27 December 2010, Having regard to the decision of 11 December 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 Hacı İnan, is a Turkish national, who was born in 1959 and is serving a prison sentence in Bolu F-type prison. He is represented before the Court by Mr N. Özdemir, a lawyer practising in Diyarbakır. 2. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) are represented by their Agent. 2 İNAN v. TURKEY...
SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 14129/11 Hacı İNAN against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 4 November 2014 as a Chamber composed of: Guido Raimondi, President, Işıl Karakaş, Nebojša Vučinić, Helen Keller, Paul Lemmens, Egidijus Kūris, Robert Spano, judges, and Abel Campos, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 27 December 2010, Having regard to the decision of 11 December 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 Hacı İnan, is a Turkish national, who was born in 1959 and is serving a prison sentence in Bolu F-type prison. He is represented before the Court by Mr N. Özdemir, a lawyer practising in Diyarbakır. 2. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) are represented by their Agent.
2 İNAN v. TURKEY DECISION A. The circumstances of the case 3. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 4. According to the applicant’s submissions, he was arrested at gunpoint by police officers from the anti-terrorist branch of the Istanbul Security Directorate on 18 May 2000. The arrest and custody report drafted by the police indicate that he was taken into custody on 21 May 2000. According to this report, during the arrest, officers used force as the applicant attempted to flee. 5. Between 24 and 26 May 2000 the applicant made statements to the police. He was questioned, in particular, about his alleged links to Hizbullah, an illegal organisation, and complicity in a homicide. 6. On 27 May 2000 the applicant was referred to a doctor at the end of his detention in police custody. According to the medical report issued in respect of the applicant, he had sustained injuries to the right and left sides of his back and his left elbow. The doctor concluded that these injuries rendered the applicant unfit to carry out daily activities for three days. 7. On the same day the applicant was brought before a public prosecutor and then before the duty judge at the Istanbul State Security Court. He denied his statements taken in police custody, alleging that he had been tortured. The judge ordered the applicant’s detention on remand on suspicion of membership of Hizbullah and committing offences on its behalf. 8. On 8 June 2000 the public prosecutor filed a bill of indictment against the applicant, along with a number of other persons, with the Istanbul State Security Court. The applicant was charged with attempting to undermine the constitutional order, an offence proscribed under Article 146 § 1 of the former Criminal Code. 9. In 2001 the case against the applicant and his co-accused was joined with another case brought against a number of other persons who had been charged with membership of Hizbullah. 10. State Security Courts were abolished by La...