30 November 2017 Thursday

B.T. [Plenary], no. 2014/15769, 30 November 2017

Unlawfulness of placement under administrative detention; inhuman and degrading nature of the detention conditions; non-existence of an effective remedy to challenge detention

The Court declared the application inadmissible for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies on the grounds that the administrative judicial authorities were in a better position than the Constitutional Court to make an assessment as to physical conditions of detention rooms and removal centres where foreigners are detained; that making an assessment as to the physical conditions of foreigners’ removal centres primarily by administrative judicial authorities was not only an approach compatible with the subsidiarity principle but also would be advantageous to the applicant; and that in the light of Article 2 of Law no. 2577, it was concluded that it would be incompatible with the “subsidiarity nature” of the individual application mechanism to examine this application lodged without the exhaustion of the remedy of “action for compensation”.

30 November 2017 Thursday

Dilan Ögüz Canan [Plenary], no. 2014/20411, 30 November 2017

Alleged violation of the right to hold meetings and demonstration marches due to suspension of the prosecution within the scope of a criminal case

A fair balance had not been struck between the measures deemed necessary for achievement of the legitimate aims provided in Article 34 § 2 of the Constitution and the applicant’s rights enshrined in Article 34 § 1. Dispersing the demonstration by the use of police force, taking the applicant into custody, and placing the applicant under a three-year probation period by suspending the prosecution against her was not necessary for achieving the legitimate aim of maintaining the public order envisaged in Article 34 § 2 of the Constitution. Consequently, the Court found a violation of the right to hold meetings and demonstration marches safeguarded by Article 34 of the Constitution.

09 November 2017 Thursday

Seyfulah Turan and Others, no. 2014/1982, 9 November 2017

Alleged violation of the right to life due to the authorities’ failure to conduct an effective investigation in spite of the fatal injuries sustained as a result of the use of force by police officers

The effectiveness of the investigation was impaired by preventing the applicant’s participation in the case by transferring it which was considered to pose a danger to the public security if carried out in Hakkari– to Isparta, about 1,500 kilometers away from Hakkari, without any justification. Consequently, the Court found a violation of the procedural aspect of the right to life concerning the obligation to conduct an effective investigation.

08 November 2017 Wednesday

Abdulvahap Can and Others, no. 2014/3793, 8 November 2017

Alleged violation of the right to union due to imposition of administrative fine for hanging banners within the scope of labour union activities

Imposition of an administrative fine without relevant and sufficient reasons in the absence of an assessment that the banners, which did not include any criminal element, deteriorated the public order or posed a danger in this respect, was not necessary in a democratic society. In this respect, the administrative fine imposed on the applicants might create a deterrent factor in terms of carrying out labour union activities. Consequently, the Constitutional Court found a violation of the right to union safeguarded by Article 51 of the Constitution.

26 October 2017 Thursday

Ali Kıdık, no. 2014/5552, 26 October 2017

Alleged violation of the freedom of expression and the press due to blocking of access to online news articles

The Court found violations of the freedoms of expression and the press on the grounds that the interference with the freedoms of expression and the press did not correspond to a more pressing social need; that the impugned blocking of access decision was not necessary in a democratic society; that the pieces of news and articles at issue seemed to have been blocked for an indefinite duration; and that therefore, even if it was argued that the disputed restriction concerned certain specific articles and had limited effects, the significance of the interference was not any less; and that it could not be considered as proportionate under the circumstances of the instant case that a decision taken as a measure without establishing relevant and sufficient grounds would stay in effect indefinitely.

26 October 2017 Thursday

İrfan Sancı, no. 2014/20168, 26 October 2017

Alleged violation of the freedoms of expression and the press due to suspension of prosecution and imposing a three-year-long probation

The Court found violations of the freedoms of expression, the arts and the press on the grounds that in disputes regarding works in which obscene elements were found, the authorities exercising public power and then the inferior courts must determine whether the impugned works had any scientific, artistic or literary value; that if these works were deemed to have such qualifications, it must be then considered whether the measures for the protection of minors were taken during the presentation, publication, dissemination, and handing over of artistic and literary works, and if taken, whether these measures were proportionate; that the grounds relied on by the relevant courts were not relevant and sufficient.

25 October 2017 Wednesday

Furkan Omurtag, no. 2014/18179, 25 October 2017

Alleged violation of the right to personal liberty and security due to the detention of the applicant, who is a minor

The Court found a violation of the right to personal liberty and security safeguarded by Article 19 § 3 of the Constitution on the grounds that the detention order against the applicant did not involve an assessment revealing that his status as a minor had been taken into consideration; that considering the fact that minors may be detained only in exceptional cases of very serious offences, the court ordering the applicant’s detention failed to demonstrate to what extent the offence of attempted theft was serious in the specific circumstances of the present case; that the offence imputed to the applicant cannot be considered to be serious in view of the penalty to be imposed; and that consequently, the applicant’s detention cannot be considered proportionate as to the seriousness of the offence and severity of the judicial fine imposed on the applicant.

18 October 2017 Wednesday

Bizim FM Radyo Yayıncılığı ve Reklamcılık A.Ş. [Plenary], no. 2014/11028, 18 October 2017

Alleged violations of the freedoms of expression and the press due to rejection of the request of the applicant, who had voluntarily suspended its broadcast, to start broadcasting again

The State failed to fulfil its obligation to carry out the necessary legal and administrative regulations in order to ensure effective pluralism in the media and to secure the freedoms of the press and of disseminating information, besides its obligation to enforce the existing legislation effectively. The channels and frequencies with a limited number must be allocated fairly in a manner allowing the companies that meet the conditions to broadcast. In the event that the territorial radio broadcasting is not organized and the frequencies in this respect are not allocated on an equitable basis in spite of the relevant constitutional provisions, the existing structural problem will continue. Consequently, the Court found violations of the freedoms of expression and the press.

13 September 2017 Wednesday

Gürkan Kaçar and Others, no. 2014/11855, 13 September 2017

Alleged violation of the right to life due to dismissal of the action for compensation that was brought on the ground that a mentally disabled child had sustained severe injuries having been exposed to electric shock upon touching the cables on the railway

During the VII proceedings which lasted approximately nine years, due regard was not paid to the fact that the administration failed to take the necessary measures for the people in need of protection, and that the supervision failure of the applicant’s family did not eliminate the responsibility of the administration to do so, and therefore the applicant was found to be at complete fault due to his careless conduct. Such a conclusion did not comply with the principle of providing an effective judicial protection against a real risk to the life. Consequently, the Court found a violation of the right to life safeguarded by Article 17 of the Constitution.

05 July 2017 Wednesday

Hakan Yiğit, no. 2015/3378, 5 July 2017

Alleged violation of the freedoms of expression and the press due to the news director’s conviction as a video in his news breached the privacy of communication

The Court found violations of the freedoms of expression and the press on the ground that the inferior courts’ intent to protect the complainant’s freedom of communication was not sufficient for justifying the restrictions imposed on the applicant’s freedoms of expression and the press. The inferior courts failed to strike a fair balance between the protection of freedom of the press and the freedom of communication, which is an aspect of the private life. Even if not being convicted of a new offence during the probation period, the applicant was under the risk, due to this effect, of abstaining from expressing his ideas or conducting press-related activities in future.

20 June 2017 Tuesday

Aydın Yavuz and Others [Plenary], no. 2016/22169, 20 June 2017

As regards the alleged unlawfulness of detention

The Court found the complaint inadmissible for being manifestly ill-founded on the grounds that the applicants were users of the “ByLock” application (app), which was the digital platform of the FETÖ/ PDY members for secure communication; that the competent authorities’ assessment that the use of ByLock constituted a strong indication of having committed an offence could not be considered as unfounded or arbitrary; and that the legal grounds for the applicants’ detention, the risk of tampering with evidence and suspicion of fleeing, had sufficient factual basis.

As regards the alleged judicial review of detention without a hearing

The Court found no violation of the right to personal liberty and security on the ground that the applicants’ continued detention for 8 months and 18 days through judicial reviews over the casefile without a hearing was proportionate based on the exigency of the state of emergency considering the severe workload of judiciary after the coup attempt.

25 May 2017 Thursday

Eğitim ve Bilim Emekçileri Sendikası and Others [Plenary], no. 2014/920, 25 May 2017

Alleged violation of the right to union due to the administrative fine imposed on the union and its members for the press statements made by the union

The Court found a violation of the right to union on the grounds that public authorities must tolerate, to a certain extent, the actions falling within the ambit of the right to hold meetings and demonstration marches, and a peaceful demonstration or press statement; that in cases where this right was restricted it must be shown that the interferences were necessary for maintenance of public order; that a fair balance could not be struck between the measures deemed necessary for attaining the legitimate aims specified in Article 51 § 2 of the Constitution and the rights afforded under the same provision to the applicant union; and that the administrative fine imposed on the applicant was not necessary.