CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 4 septembre 2007

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s7EE1C8F0 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s88A92475 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sDD165512 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sBA8DCCFC { width:35.45pt; display:inline-block } .s3AC19521 { width:106.49pt; display:inline-block } .sC64DA75B { width:162.85pt; display:inline-block } SECOND SECTION FINAL DECISION Application no. 34499/03 by Cengiz BAYIR against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 18   March 2008 as a Chamber composed of:   Françoise Tulkens, President,   Ireneu Cabral Barreto,   Rıza Türmen,   Vladimiro Zagrebelsky,   Danutė Jočienė,   András Sajó,   Nona Tsotsoria, judges, and Françoise Elens-Passos Deputy Section Registrar Having regard to the above application lodged on 28 July 2003, 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 formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having regard to the partial decision of 4 September 2007, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Cengiz Bayır, is a Turkish national who was born in 1973 and lives in Istanbul. He was represented before the Court by Mr   Metin Filorinali, a lawyer practising in Istanbul. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) did not designate an agent for the purposes of the proceedings before the Court. The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. The applicant was arrested in Istanbul on 4 April 1996 by police officers from the anti-terrorism branch of the Istanbul Police Headquarters and was placed in custody. On 15 April 1996 he was brought before the judge at the Istanbul State Security Court, who ordered his detention on remand pending the initiation of criminal proceedings against him. The prosecutor at the Istanbul State Security Court filed an indictment on 6 May 1996, charging the applicant with the offence of, inter alia , membership of an illegal organisation. The criminal proceedings against the applicant are still pending. COMPLAINT The applicant complained that the criminal proceedings against him had not been concluded within a reasonable time within the meaning of Article   6   § 1 of the Convention. THE LAW The Court received the following declaration from the Government’s agent: “I declare that the Government of Turkey offer to pay Mr Cengiz Bayır the sum of 3,500 (three thousand five hundred) euros [that is 2,700 (two thousand seven hundred) euros in respect of non pecuniary damage and 800 (eight hundred) euros in respect of costs and expenses] with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights. This sum will be converted into new Turkish liras at the rate applicable on the date of payment and free of any taxes that may be applicable. It will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on it, from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.”         The Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant: “I note that the Government of Turkey are prepared to pay Mr Cengiz Bayır the sum of 3,500 (three thousand five hundred) euros [that is 2,700 (two thousand seven hundred) euros in respect of non pecuniary damage and 800 (eight hundred) euros in respect of costs and expenses] with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights. This sum will be converted into new Turkish liras at the rate applicable on the date of payment and free of any taxes that may be applicable. It will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. From the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Turkey in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.” The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no public policy reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article   37§1   in fine of the Convention). In view of the above, it is appropriate to discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 and to strike the case out of the list. For these reasons, the Court by a majority, Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Françoise Elens-Passos   Françoise Tulkens     Deputy Registrar   President