Subsequently he was remanded in pre-trial detention. 4.

THE COURT’S ASSESSMENT TRIAL IN THE APPLICANT’S ABSENCE Admissibility 7.

It does not appear that the trial judge decided on this request.

    The application concerns the alleged unlawfulness and the length of the applicant’s pre-trial detention and the trial court’s failure to properly examine his requests for release, in breach

This charge against him was thus dismissed by the trial court.

    The re-trial recommenced on 22 February 1994.

within a reasonable time or to release pending trial.

The trial court heard the applicant’s and the prosecutor’s submissions as to whether the applicant should be committed for trial.

    On 5 October 1998 he was returned for trial. The trial was due to commence in February 1999 but it was adjourned (the applicant’s request) due to publicity surrounding the trial.

The trial spanned around thirty hearings.

The decision of the Court of Cassation was returned to the trial court on 26   March 2002.

Trial court’s judgment 40.

General provisions on pre-trial detention Article 122 “(1) As soon as the grounds for pre-trial detention cease to exist, the detention shall be lifted and the detainee released. (2) When deciding on pre-trial

Conclusion of the pre-trial investigation and the pre-trial conference 13.     On 4 May 2012 the pre-trial investigation was concluded.

who had filed numerous requests challenging the trial court.

She denied having given her pre-trial statements under pressure. In view of Ku.’s change of testimony her pre-trial statements were read out during the trial.

The 1 st Chamber of the Istanbul State Security Court took over the trial. 12.

The trial court rejected that request. 20.

One of the patients, ST, died before the trial, but had made a statement to the police prior to her death which was read to the jury.