The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 30 November 2006 as a Chamber composed of: Mr B.M. ZUPANČIČ, President, Mr R. TÜRMEN, Mr C. BÎRSAN, Mr V. ZAGREBELSKY, Mrs A. GYULUMYAN, Mr DAVID THÓR BJÖRGVINSSON, Mrs I. ZIEMELE, judges, and Mr V. BERGER, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 10 February 2000, 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 observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Nezir Künkül, is a Turkish national who was born in 1949 and lives in Batman. He was represented before the Court by Mr M. Beştaş and Mrs M. Bektaş, lawyers practising in Diyarbakır. 2 KÜNKÜL v. TURKEY...
CONSEIL DE L’EUROPE COUNCIL OF EUROPE COUR EUROPÉENNE DES DROITS DE L’HOMME EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS THIRD SECTION DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 57177/00 by Nezir KÜNKÜL against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 30 November 2006 as a Chamber composed of: Mr B.M. ZUPANČIČ, President, Mr R. TÜRMEN, Mr C. BÎRSAN, Mr V. ZAGREBELSKY, Mrs A. GYULUMYAN, Mr DAVID THÓR BJÖRGVINSSON, Mrs I. ZIEMELE, judges, and Mr V. BERGER, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 10 February 2000, 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 observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Nezir Künkül, is a Turkish national who was born in 1949 and lives in Batman. He was represented before the Court by Mr M. Beştaş and Mrs M. Bektaş, lawyers practising in Diyarbakır.
2 KÜNKÜL v. TURKEY DECISION A. The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. The applicant was a driver working for the Turkish telecom at the time of the events. On 4 June 1998 the applicant was arrested by gendarmes at the Suçeken Gendarmes Station. The applicant claims that he had been beaten during his interrogation at the Suçeken Gendarmes Station. According to the medical report drafted and issued by a doctor at the Batman State Hospital on 5 June 1998, the applicant did not bear any physical signs of ill-treatment. On 5 June 1998 the applicant was transferred over to the Batman Gendarmes Station where he was held for three days. He alleges that during this time he was subjected to torture, insults and death threats. On 8 June 1998 the applicant was taken before a doctor at the Batman State Hospital for a medical examination. According to the medical report he did not bear any physical signs of ill-treatment. On the same day, the applicant was brought before the Batman public prosecutor where he denied the statements he had given to the gendarmes. He claimed that he had been forced to carry supplies to the PKK because Mr N.K. had threatened his life and that of his children. On the same day, the applicant appeared before the Batman Magistrates’ Court where he denied the statements he had given to the gendarmes and claimed to have signed his deposition under duress. The court ordered his release. The public prosecutor objected to this decision. The applicant claimed that despite the court’s order for release, he had been taken back to the Batman Gendarmes Station and was subjected to constant beatings. On 9 June 1998 the Batman Criminal Court of First Instance ordered the applicant’s remand in custody. According to the medical report of 9 June 1998 the applicant did not bear any physical ...