The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 28 January 2014 as a Committee composed of: Dragoljub Popović, President, Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque, Helen Keller, judges, and Stephen Phillips, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 13 February 2009, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Veysi Karaatay, is a Turkish national, who was born in 1982 and lives in Istanbul. He was represented before the Court by Mr M. Erbil, a lawyer practising in Istanbul. A. The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. On 10 December 2000 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of aiding and abetting an illegal organisation, namely the PKK (the Workers’ Party of Kurdistan). He was released on 13 December 2000. On 7 February 2001 the Public...
SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 13350/09 Veysi KARAATAY against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 28 January 2014 as a Committee composed of: Dragoljub Popović, President, Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque, Helen Keller, judges, and Stephen Phillips, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 13 February 2009, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Veysi Karaatay, is a Turkish national, who was born in 1982 and lives in Istanbul. He was represented before the Court by Mr M. Erbil, a lawyer practising in Istanbul. A. The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. On 10 December 2000 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of aiding and abetting an illegal organisation, namely the PKK (the Workers’ Party of Kurdistan). He was released on 13 December 2000. On 7 February 2001 the Public Prosecutor at the Istanbul State Security filed an indictment with that court. Subsequently during the hearings, no military judge participated in the applicant’s trial. In 2004, following a constitutional amendment, State Security Courts were abolished and the applicant’s case was transferred to the Istanbul Assize Court. On 2 November 2007 the Istanbul Assize Court
2 KARAATAY v. TURKEY DECISION sentenced him to one year and eight months’ imprisonment. The case is still pending before the Court of Cassation. B. Relevant domestic law A description of the relevant domestic law may be found in Müdür Turgut and Others ((dec.), no. 4860/09, §§ 19-26, 26 March 2013). COMPLAINTS The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the proceedings before the national court were not concluded within a reasonable time. The applicant also maintains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the State Security Court and Assize Court, which took over the case following the abolition of the former, lacked independence and impartiality. The applicant alleges violation of Article 13 of the Convention that there was no effective remedy under Turkish law. The applicant complains under Article 17 of the Convention that his rights were abused by the contracting party. The applicant submits that the respondent State is seeking to restrict the exercise of his rights and freedoms, beyond the extent permitted by Article 18 of the Convention. THE LAW I. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE LENGTH OF THE PROCEEDINGS The applicant complained that the length of the proceedings had been incompatible with the principle of the “reasonable time” requirement, laid down in Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ..., everyone is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time by a ... tribunal...” The Court observes that a new domestic remedy has been established in Turkey after the application of the pilot judgment procedur...