The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 4 September 2007 as a Chamber composed of: Mrs F. TULKENS, President, Mr A.B. BAKA, Mr I. CABRAL BARRETO, Mr R. TÜRMEN, Mr M. UGREKHELIDZE, Mr V. ZAGREBELSKY, Mr D. POPOVIĆ, judges, and Mrs F. ELENS-PASSOS, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 4 June 2002, Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together. Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case. Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicants, Ms Makbule Kabul, Mr Naim Kabul, Mr İdris Kabul, Mr Mehmet Kabul, Mr Ramazan Kabul, Mr Feysel Kabul and Ms Aysel Kabul are Turkish nationals who were born in 1961, 1979, 1984, 1987, 1989, 1990, and 1994, respectively, and live in Şırnak. They...
CONSEIL DE L’EUROPE COUNCIL OF EUROPE COUR EUROPÉENNE DES DROITS DE L’HOMME EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 24873/02 by Makbule KABUL and Others against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 4 September 2007 as a Chamber composed of: Mrs F. TULKENS, President, Mr A.B. BAKA, Mr I. CABRAL BARRETO, Mr R. TÜRMEN, Mr M. UGREKHELIDZE, Mr V. ZAGREBELSKY, Mr D. POPOVIĆ, judges, and Mrs F. ELENS-PASSOS, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 4 June 2002, Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together. Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case. Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicants, Ms Makbule Kabul, Mr Naim Kabul, Mr İdris Kabul, Mr Mehmet Kabul, Mr Ramazan Kabul, Mr Feysel Kabul and Ms Aysel Kabul are Turkish nationals who were born in 1961, 1979, 1984, 1987, 1989, 1990, and 1994, respectively, and live in Şırnak. They were represented before the Court by Ms A. Demirtaş, a lawyer practising in Diyarbakır. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) did not designate an Agent for the purposes of the proceedings before the Court.
2 KABUL AND OTHERS v. TURKEY DECISION The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. On 26 June 1995, at about 6 a.m., Ahmet Kabul went to the forest in Cevizdüzü precinct in the district of Şırnak, to cut some wood in order to sell it. He was accompanied by Guri Kazan, Mahmut Birlik, Mahmut Ergin and Mehmet Salih Ergin. At about 8 a.m., the security forces carried out an operation in the hills surrounding the village of Cevizdüzü, located on the slopes of Cudi Mountain in Şırnak, to capture PKK1 members who had attacked their battalion a few days before. Ahmet Kabul was shot during this operation and died on the way to hospital. A post mortem examination of the body was carried out by a doctor in the presence of the public prosecutor at Şırnak State Hospital. In his report, the doctor concluded that death was clearly the result of a rupture of the main arteries by bullet wounds, and that there was thus no need to conduct a classical autopsy. On 31 July 1995 the first applicant petitioned the public prosecutor in Şırnak. In her petition, she stated that her husband had gone to the Cevizdüzü precinct to cut some wood as they were selling it for a living, a fact which could be verified by the testimonies of Guri Kazan, Mahmut Ergin and Mehmet Salih Ergin. She alleged that her husband was killed by the security forces, as was proven by the traces of the G-3 bullet wounds recorded in the autopsy report. She requested that the perpetrators be brought to justice. On 2 October 1996 the Şırnak public prosecutor decided that he lacked jurisdiction to pursue the investigation since the case involved the prosecution of...