CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 20 mai 1998

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }                          AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF                         Application No. 39553/98                       by Harun ABiLOGLU and 96 others                       against Bulgaria         The European Commission of Human Rights (Second Chamber) sitting in private on 20 May 1998, the following members being present:              MM     J.-C. GEUS, President                  M.A. NOWICKI                  G. JÖRUNDSSON                  J.-C. SOYER                  H. DANELIUS            Mrs    G.H. THUNE            MM     F. MARTINEZ                  I. CABRAL BARRETO                  J. MUCHA                  D. SVÁBY                  P. LORENZEN                  E. BIELIUNAS                  E.A. ALKEMA                  A. ARABADJIEV              Ms     M.-T. SCHOEPFER, Secretary to the Chamber         Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;         Having regard to the application introduced on 27 August 1996 and 15 January 1998 by Harun Abiloglu and 96 others against Bulgaria and registered on 28 January 1998 under file No. 39553/98;         Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission;           Having deliberated;         Decides as follows:   THE FACTS         The applicants, who are of Turkish ethnic origin, were born and lived in Bulgaria and were Bulgarian nationals at least until 1989. They are currently Turkish citizens, residing in Turkey, most of them apparently having also preserved or restored their Bulgarian citizenship.   Before the Commission the applicants are represented by Mr Resit Sasihüseyinoglu, a lawyer practising in Istanbul.         The facts of the case as submitted by the applicants may be summarised as follows.   A.     Particular circumstances of the case   Background of the case         In 1984 the Bulgarian communist regime embarked on a campaign aiming at the assimilation of persons of Turkish origin.   It appears that in 1984 - 1985 several hundred thousand persons were forced to change their Turkish names into Bulgarian-sounding names.   This was done with the help of the army and of the police, who often resorted to arbitrary detention and internments of those who refused to change their names.   During clashes with the authorities, several persons were killed.         In May 1989 the Bulgarian communist regime allowed all persons of Turkish origin to leave the country and to travel to Turkey. Although the authorities at the time attempted to present the mass exodus which followed as a voluntary "trip", it has widely been seen as a forced emigration.   Persons of Turkish origin had apparently been under pressure, direct or indirect, to leave the country.   Repressions against the applicants         Each of the applicants has been subjected to repressions between 1984 and 1989.         Mr Abiloglu was forcefully kept between 13 January and 17 February 1985 in a village where the Turks from the region were brought.   The village was surrounded by soldiers.   On an unspecified date in February 1985 all persons kept in the village were called to choose a Bulgarian name from a pre-prepared list.   They did as requested under the threat of ill-treatment.   Following his return to his home, Mr Abiloglu, who was a teacher, was arrested in April 1985 and kept in detention incommunicado for about 30 - 40 days, and then sent to prison, from where he returned in November 1985.   In 1989 he was forced to leave Bulgaria.         Another applicant alleges that her husband was shot and killed in December 1984 when he was participating in a demonstration in protest against the forceful change of the Turkish names.   Allegedly on the instruction of the secret police, the death certificate marked only that her husband had died from a haemorrhage in the lungs, without any mention that he had been shot.         Those of the applicants who were convicted in 1985 or later on charges of anti-state activities and requested, after 1989, a revision of their judgments, were successful and their convictions were quashed.         The applicants have not explained whether they applied to the rehabilitation commissions set up under the 1991 Rehabilitation Law (see below) or whether they received compensation.         The property   of some of the applicants was confiscated or they were compelled to sell it at low prices or to abandon it when they had to leave Bulgaria during the forced exodus in the summer of 1989. After 1990 some of them were apparently able to recover their property.         In 1997 the applicants' lawyer wrote to the Chief Public Prosecutor demanding the punishment of those responsible for the repressions but allegedly did not receive a response.   B.     Relevant domestic law and practice   a.     On 30 March 1990 the Parliament adopted a Decision on Political and Civil Rehabilitation of Convicted Persons and Victims of Repressions (reshenie za politicheska i grazhdanska reabilitatzia na osudeni i represirani litza, D.V. br. 30/1990), which provided for procedures for rehabilitation of victims of repressions.         The Decision was superseded in 1991 by more comprehensive legislation, the Law on Political and Civil Rehabilitation of Victims of Repressions (Zakon za politicheska i grazhdanska reabilitatzia na represirani litza, D.V. br. 50/1991) (the Rehabilitation Law).         Under this law persons who have been unlawfully detained, convicted, or subjected to other repressions, inter alia, based on their origin, or during the campaign for the forceful change of the names of the Bulgarian Turks, obtain rehabilitation (Section 1).         Those of them who were convicted for anti-State and other particular crimes, who were detained in camps or interned are entitled to a lump-sum compensation (Section 2).   The time spent in prison, in detention or internment is recognised as time spent in employment for a state retirement pension or for other purposes (Section 7).         A lump-sum compensation is also payable to the heirs of those who have been killed in clashes during the forceful change of names (Section 3 para. 2).   In addition, these heirs, as well as the heirs of those who committed suicide or disappeared during the forceful change of names, are entitled to a pension (Section 8).         The Rehabilitation Law set up regional commissions and a central commission for political rehabilitation, which could be seized within a three years' time-limit from the date of the law's entry into force in 1991.   The regional commissions were examining the requests submitted to them and deciding whether an applicant had or had not been a victim of repressions within the meaning of the Rehabilitation Law. Their decisions were subject to appeal to the central commission.   b.     Another law, adopted in 1991, aims at correcting injustices caused by the forced exodus of the Bulgarian Turks in the summer of 1989.   This is the Law on Restitution of Real Property of Bulgarian Citizens of Turkish Origin Who Sought to Travel to Turkey or to Other Countries in the Period May - September 1989 (Zakon za vazstanoviavane na sobstvenostta varhu nedvizhimi imoti na balgarski grazhdani ot turski proizhod, napravili postapki za zaminavane v Republika Turtzia i drugi strani prez perioda mai - septemvri 1989).         Restitution of property which had been sold at unreasonably low prices, under duress, is also possible under Section 27 of the Law on Obligations and Contracts.         In all cases the courts are competent to examine restitution claims in ordinary civil proceedings.     COMPLAINTS         The applicants complain of the repressions in 1984 - 1989 and seek compensation therefor.         They also complain that the Bulgarian authorities currently refuse to prosecute those responsible for the repressions.         Some of the applicants further state that they currently cannot recover property taken from them in or before 1989.     THE LAW   1.     The applicants complain of the killings, unlawful detention, forced change of their names and other repressions to which they were subjected between 1984 and 1989.   They seek compensation for their suffering.         However, the Commission recalls that the Convention only governs, for each Contracting Party, facts subsequent to its entry into force with respect to that Party.   Bulgaria ratified the Convention and recognised the right to individual petition as of 7 September 1992. It follows that all complaints about repression by the communist regime in the years 1984 - 1989 and the alleged lack of sufficient compensation therefor are outside the Commission's competence ratione temporis and that, therefore, these complaints have to be rejected as being incompatible with the provisions of the Convention within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2).   2.     Insofar as some of the applicants may be understood as claiming that they have been refused their right to a lump-sum compensation, to a pension, or to other payments provided for under the Rehabilitation Law, assuming that this complaint may fall to be examined under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (P1-1) to the Convention, the Commission notes that the applicants have not submitted any information indicating whether or not they applied for rehabilitation and compensation.         The Commission finds, therefore, that the applicants have not exhausted the domestic remedies available to them under Bulgarian law as required by Article 26 (Art. 26) of the Convention.         It follows that this part of the application must be rejected under Article 27 para. 3 (Art. 27-3) of the Convention.   3.     The applicants further complain that those responsible for the repression have not been punished.         However, the Commission observes that the Convention does not guarantee a right to institute criminal proceedings against third persons (see, inter alia, No. 7116/75, D.R. 7, p. 91).         It follows that this part of the application has to be rejected as being incompatible ratione materiae with the provisions of the Convention within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2).   4.     Insofar as certain applicants may be understood as complaining that they currently cannot recover property unlawfully taken from them during the years 1984 - 1989, the Commission is not required to decide whether or not the facts submitted by the applicants disclose any appearance of a violation of the Convention as they failed to bring civil actions before the Bulgarian courts and have not, therefore, in accordance with Article 26 (Art. 26) of the Convention, exhausted the remedies available under Bulgarian law. It follows that the remainder of the application must be rejected under Article 27 para. 3 (Art. 27-3) of the Convention.         For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,         DECLARES THE APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE.      M.-T. SCHOEPFER                               J.-C. GEUS       Secretary                                   President to the Second Chamber                       of the Second Chamber                                      ANNEX                             LIST OF APPLICANTS     Harun ABiLOGLU Hüseyin ADALI Mücettin AKBASÇAVUS Seydali AKGÜN Mustafa ARABACI ibrahim ATASOY Selahattin ATASOY Turgay ATASOY Necibe AZIS Ismet BALKANLI Yunaus BAYRAMOGLU Mümin BERKEM Gülgün BiLEN Saddettin BiLEN Cemil BiRTANE Mümin ÇAKIR Adil ÇAVUS Hasan ÇAVUS Hasan ÇETIN Seyitahmet CENK Eyüp CESUR Hazan DÖNMEZ isa ERCAN Ömer Osman ERENDORUK Saban ERGÜL O.G. Ali GÖL Muhammet GÖLCÜKLÜ Halil GÜLiSTAN Ömer GÜNES Halil ibrahim GÜVEN Enver HATiPOGLU ismail HÜSEYINOGLU Necmettin iNANÇ Sabri iSKENDER Mehmet KAHRAMAN Mustafa KARAALi Mehmet KARAALi Ahmet KARABEKiR Gülnaz KARABEKiR Ahmet KARACA Fehim KARADUMAN Fikret KARAGÖZ Gültekin KARAMAN Nesibe KARAMAN Bedri KASAP Hasan KAVONOZOGLU Halil ibrahim KAYA ibrahim Mustafov KELESOV Ahmet KiTAPÇI Celil KORKMAZ Alvan KÖYBASI ismail KURTULDU Osman KURTULDU Riovan KURTULMUS Ali MUTLU Mustafa NURiOGLU Hasan OCAKLI Ali ÖNDER Sefer ORAL Ali ORMANLI Hüseyin OSMANOGLU ismail ÖZGÜR Niyazi ÖZGÜR Enver ÖZKAN Ali ÖZTÜRK Hayrettin ÖZTÜRK Mustafa ÖZTÜRK Remzi ÖZTÜRK Hasan ÖZYiGiT Zehra SAFETOGLU Yusuf SALINOGLU Cemal SARAÇOGLU Sevket SENYÜZ Sezgin TARAKÇI Basri TATA Kazim TATA Hüseyin TEPiK ismail ULUBEY Mehmet VATANSEVER Alis YANAR ismail YANGIN Sadullah YENiDOGN Zeynel YIKILMAZ Ali YILDIZ Cumaziye YILDIZ Turgut YILDIZ Ahmet YILMAZ Hüsnü YILMAZ Ahmet YÜCETÜRK Feyzullah YÜCETÜRK Tensile YÜCETÜRK Zülbiye YÜCETÜRK Mehmet ZAFER Ibrahim ZAFER Hanife ZAFER Zeynep ZAFER