The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 27 May 2008 as a Chamber composed of: Josep Casadevall, President, Elisabet Fura-Sandström, Corneliu Bîrsan, Boštjan M. Zupančič, Alvina Gyulumyan, Egbert Myjer, Işıl Karakaş, judges, and Santiago Quesada, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 December 2001, 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 partial decision of 22 March 2007, 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, Mr Seyithan Alpar, is a Turkish national who was born in 1971 and lives in Midyat district of the province of Mardin. He was represented before the...
CONSEIL DE L’EUROPE COUNCIL OF EUROPE COUR EUROPÉENNE DES DROITS DE L’HOMME EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS THIRD SECTION FINAL DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 5684/02 by Seyithan ALPAR against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 27 May 2008 as a Chamber composed of: Josep Casadevall, President, Elisabet Fura-Sandström, Corneliu Bîrsan, Boštjan M. Zupančič, Alvina Gyulumyan, Egbert Myjer, Işıl Karakaş, judges, and Santiago Quesada, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 December 2001, 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 partial decision of 22 March 2007, 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, Mr Seyithan Alpar, is a Turkish national who was born in 1971 and lives in Midyat district of the province of Mardin. He was represented before the Court by Mr F. Gümüş, a lawyer practising in
2 ALPAR v. TURKEY DECISION Diyarbakır. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent. A. The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. On 22 December 1992 the applicant was taken into police custody by police officers from the Anti-Terrorist Branch of the Nusaybin Security Headquarters on suspicion of membership of the PKK (Workers’ Party of Kurdistan), an illegal organisation. On 18 January 1993 the Diyarbakır State Security Court remanded him in custody. The public prosecutor filed a bill of indictment with the Diyarbakır State Security Court charging the applicant, under Article 125 of the Criminal Code, with membership of a terrorist organisation and with having been engaged in acts aimed at the secession of a part of the territory of the State. On 26 April 1993 the State Security Court commenced proceedings against the applicant and thirteen other suspects. On 18 June 1999 Turkey’s Grand National Assembly amended Article 143 of the Constitution and excluded military members from State Security Courts. Following similar amendments made on 22 June 1999 to the Law on the State Security Courts, the military judge sitting on the Diyarbakır State Security Court hearing the applicant’s case was replaced by a civilian judge. At the hearing of 8 July 1999 the military judge sitting on the bench of the Diyarbakır State Security Court was replaced by a civilian judge. On 8 May 2000 the State Security Court found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The applicant appealed against the judgment. The applicant’s representative asked the appeal court to hold a hearing, which was granted. On 2 April 2001 the Court of Cassation, after hearing the applicant’s representative...