CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 12 novembre 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .sDECD9755 { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.78pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sDA7B489D { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:3.45pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s5C5C410E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:0.11pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sD11CFAB7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s51DFF5CF { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify } .sE5BF05B1 { width:2.33pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .sB6A7F5BF { width:17.54pt; display:inline-block } .s6E24AFEB { width:129.08pt; display:inline-block } .s5D826FD4 { width:25.88pt; display:inline-block } .s1B61D60 { width:156.43pt; display:inline-block } .sD00444C6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s2F3EB0E4 { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sE1A7A04C { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .sBAADFE8C { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sE2D594D1 { margin-left:33.01pt; padding-left:2.99pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt } .s1536B7BA { margin-left:36pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt } .sB0BD18D7 { margin-left:36pt; text-indent:-18pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside } .sE4CB1DB5 { width:25.64pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block }     SECOND SECTION CASE OF TANYAŞ AND OTHERS v. TÜRKİYE (Applications nos. 36167/18 and 239 others)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 12 November 2024           This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.   In the case of Tanyaş and Others v. Türkiye, The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Pauliine Koskelo , President ,   Lorraine Schembri Orland,   Frédéric Krenc , judges , and Dorothee von Arnim, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to: the applications against the Republic of Türkiye lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by the applicants listed in the appended table (“the applicants”), on the various dates indicated therein; the decision to give notice of the complaints under Article 5 of the Convention concerning the alleged lack of reasonable suspicion regarding the commission of an offence, the alleged lack of relevant and sufficient reasons when ordering and extending the pre-trial detention, the length of pre-trial detention, the ineffectiveness of the judicial review of the lawfulness of detention and the absence of a remedy to obtain compensation to the Turkish Government (“the Government”), represented by their then Agent, Mr   Hacı Ali Açıkgül, former Head of the Department of Human Rights of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Türkiye, and to declare inadmissible the remainder of the applications; the parties’ observations; the decision to reject the Government’s objection to the examination of the applications by a Committee; Having deliberated in private on 15 October 2024, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE 1.     The present applications mainly concern the arrest and pre-trial detention of the applicants in the aftermath of the coup attempt of 15   July 2016, on suspicion of their membership of an organisation described by the Turkish authorities as the “Fetullahist Terror Organisation / Parallel State Structure” ( Fetullahçı Terör Örgütü / Paralel Devlet Yapılanması , hereinafter referred to as “FETÖ/PDY”), which was considered by the authorities to be behind the coup attempt (for further background information see Akgün v. Turkey , no. 19699/18, §§ 3-9 and §§ 106-07, 20 July 2021). 2 .     On various dates, the applicants were arrested and placed in pre-trial detention, mainly on suspicion of membership of the FETÖ/PDY, an offence punishable under Article 314 of the Criminal Code (see Baş v. Turkey , no.   66448/17, § 58, 3 March 2020 ). The detention orders relied principally on the nature of the alleged offence, the state of the evidence and the potential sentence. It was also noted that investigations into the coup attempt were being conducted across the country, that statements had not yet been taken from all the suspects and that the alleged offence was among the “catalogue” offences listed in Article   100 §   3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP) (for the text of Article 100 of the CCP, as relevant, see Baş , cited above, §   61). It appears from the initial detention orders and the documents available in the case files that the majority of the applicants were identified as users of the ByLock messaging system. Moreover, some of the applicants were suspected of being affiliated with the FETÖ/PDY based on witness statements, or of financing the FETÖ/PDY in view of their use of accounts in Bank Asya –   a bank allegedly linked to FETÖ/PDY   –, possession of pro-FETÖ/PDY publications and/or United States one-dollar bills with an “F” serial number (denoting the initial of the forename “Fetullah”), and/or their employment by and/or memberships in FETÖ/PDY-affiliated institutions and organisations. It further appears from the Government’s submissions that the detention orders of some applicants were based on their suspension or removal from their positions as judges or prosecutors by the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors ( Hakimler ve Savcılar Yüksek Kurulu – “the HSYK”) due to their suspected membership of the FETÖ/PDY. The challenges brought by the applicants against their detention, including by reason of the alleged lack of reasonable suspicion of having committed the offence imputed to them, were dismissed, including by the Constitutional Court. 3.     According to the latest information provided by the parties, most of the applicants were convicted of membership of a terrorist organisation by the first instance courts. It appears that, in some of the applications, the criminal proceedings are still pending before appeal courts or the Constitutional Court. THE COURT’S ASSESSMENT JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 4.     Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 5.     The applicants complained that there had been no specific evidence giving rise to a reasonable suspicion, within the meaning of Article   5 §   1   (c) of the Convention, that they had committed a criminal offence necessitating, in particular, their initial pre-trial detention. 6.     The Government urged the Court to declare this complaint inadmissible in respect of the applicants who had not made use of the compensatory remedy under Article 141 of the CCP, or whose compensation claims were still pending. They further asked the Court to declare the applications inadmissible for abuse of the right of application to the extent that the applicants had not informed the Court of the developments in their cases following the lodging of their applications. 7.     The Court notes that similar objections have already been dismissed in other cases against Türkiye (see, for instance, Baş v. Turkey , no.   66448/17, §§   118-21, 3 March 2020, and Turan and Others v. Turkey , nos.   75805/16 and 426 others, §§   57-64, 23   November 2021), and sees no reason to depart from those findings in the present case. The Court therefore considers that this complaint is not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article   35 §   3   (a) of the Convention or inadmissible on any other grounds. It must therefore be declared admissible. 8.     The Court notes that, when ordering the applicants’ initial pre-trial detention, the magistrate’s courts sought to justify their decisions by making a general reference to Article 100 of the CCP and the potential sentence, as well as to “the evidence in the file”. However, in doing so, they simply cited the wording of the provision in question, without actually specifying what the evidence in question entailed and why it constituted a reasonable suspicion that the applicant had committed the offence in question. The Court refers in this connection to its findings in the judgment of Baş (cited above, §§   190 ‑ 95), according to which the vague and general references to the wording of Article 100 of the CCP and to the evidence in the file cannot be regarded as sufficient to justify the “reasonableness” of the suspicion on which the applicants’ detention was supposed to have been based, in the absence either of a specific assessment of the individual items of evidence in the file, or of any information available in the file at the material time that could have justified the suspicion against the applicants, or of any other kinds of verifiable material or facts. 9.     The Court further notes that the applicants’ initial pre-trial detention orders were mainly based on information indicating their use of the ByLock messaging system, banking activities considered as financing the FETÖ/PDY, subscriptions to certain pro-FETÖ/PDY publications, having in their possessions United States one ‑ dollar bills with an “F” serial number, and/or their employment by and/or memberships in FETÖ/PDY-affiliated institutions and organisations. To the extent that the detention orders have taken into account the applicants’ alleged use of the ByLock messaging system, the Court notes that it has already found that the use of ByLock alone was not of a nature to constitute “reasonable suspicion” within the meaning of Article   5 §   1   (c) in respect of the offence attributed to the applicants (see Akgün v. Turkey , no.   19699/18, §§ 151-85, 20   July 2021, and Taner Kılıç v.   Turkey (no. 2) , no. 208/18, §§ 102-03 and 106-09, 31 May 2022 ). The Court also notes that as regards some of the applicants, the Government have referred to the existence of witness statements justifying the measures in question. It observes, however, that there are no statements in the case files referring to concrete and specific facts that may have given rise to a reasonable suspicion against the applicants concerned at the material time. The Court further considers, as relevant, that the other acts imputed to the applicants (see paragraph 2 above) were merely circumstantial elements which, in the absence of any other information capable of justifying the suspicions in question, benefited from the presumption of legality and cannot reasonably be regarded as constituting a body of evidence demonstrating the applicants’ membership of a terrorist organisation (compare Taner Kılıç , cited above, §§ 104-05 and the cases cited therein). 10.     The Court also observes from the information in the case files that some of the applicants’ initial pre-trial detention was based on the decisions taken by the HSYK to suspend or remove them from office. The Court has already found that such decisions were not of a nature to constitute “reasonable suspicion” within the meaning of Article 5 § 1 (c) in respect of the offence attributed to them (see Baş , cited above, §§   170-195). 11.     Since the Government have not provided any other indications, “facts” or “information” capable of satisfying it that the applicants were “reasonably suspected”, at the time of their initial detention, of having committed the alleged offence, the Court finds that the requirements of Article   5 § 1 (c) regarding the “reasonableness” of a suspicion justifying detention have not been satisfied (see Baş , cited above, § 195, and Taner Kılıç , cited above, §§ 114-16). It finally considers that while the applicants were detained a short time after the coup attempt – that is, the event that prompted the declaration of the state of emergency and the notice of derogation by Türkiye –, which is undoubtedly a contextual factor that should be fully taken into account in interpreting and applying Article 5 of the Convention in the present case, the measure at issue cannot be said to have been strictly required by the exigencies of the situation (compare Baş , cited above, §§   115-16 and §§   196 ‑ 201). It therefore concludes that there has been a violation of Article   5 § 1 of the Convention. OTHER COMPLAINTS 12.     As regards any remaining complaints under Article 5 §§ 1, 3, 4 and 5 of the Convention, the Court decides not to examine them, in view of its findings under Article 5 § 1 above and its considerations in the case of Turan and Others (cited above, § 98). APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 13.     The applicants, except for the applicants in applications nos.   38532/19, 42022/19, 44066/19, 47075/19, 53060/19 and 53333/19, requested compensation in varying amounts in respect of non‑pecuniary damage within the time-limit allotted. Most of the applicants in question also claimed pecuniary damage, as well as the legal costs and expenses incurred before the domestic courts and the Court. 14.     The Government contested the applicants’ claims as being unsubstantiated and excessive. 15.     For the reasons put forth in Turan and Others (cited above, §§   102 ‑ 07), the Court rejects any claims for pecuniary damage and awards each of the applicants, save for the applicants in applications nos.   38532/19, 42022/19, 44066/19, 47075/19, 53060/19 and 53333/19, a lump sum of 5,000   euros   (EUR), covering non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses, plus any tax that may be chargeable on that amount. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, Decides to join the applications; Declares the complaint under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention, concerning the alleged lack of reasonable suspicion, at the time of the applicants’ initial pre-trial detention, that they had committed an offence, admissible; Holds that there has been a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention on account of the lack of reasonable suspicion, at the time of the applicants’ initial pre-trial detention, that they had committed an offence; Holds that there is no need to examine the admissibility and merits of the applicants’ remaining complaints under Article 5 of the Convention; Holds (a)   that the respondent State is to pay each of the applicants, save for the applicants in applications nos. 38532/19, 42022/19, 44066/19, 47075/19, 53060/19 and 53333/19, within three months, EUR   5,000 (five thousand euros) in respect of non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses, plus any tax that may be chargeable on this amount, which is to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement; (b)   that 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; Dismisses the remainder of the applicants’ claims for just satisfaction. Done in English, and notified in writing on 12 November 2024, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.     Dorothee von Arnim   Pauliine Koskelo   Deputy Registrar   President     APPENDIX List of cases: No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by   36167/18 Tanyaş v. Türkiye 25/07/2018 Levent TANYAŞ 1975 Turkish Adem UZAK   36646/18 Deveci v. Türkiye 13/07/2018 Uçar DEVECİ 1970 Kırıkkale Turkish Adem KAPLAN   36651/18 Ünsal v. Türkiye 13/07/2018 Samet ÜNSAL 1970 Ankara Turkish Adem KAPLAN   36652/18 Daylan v. Türkiye 13/07/2018 Erkan DAYLAN 1993 Balıkesir Turkish Adem KAPLAN   36653/18 Şahin v. Türkiye 13/07/2018 Servet ŞAHİN 1965 Aksaray Turkish Adem KAPLAN   36654/18 Çakmak v. Türkiye 13/07/2018 Numan ÇAKMAK 1990 Erzurum Turkish Adem KAPLAN   36655/18 Karaca v. Türkiye 13/07/2018 Sefa KARACA 1983 Burdur Turkish Adem KAPLAN   6158/19 Aksu v. Türkiye 17/12/2018 Tahsin AKSU 1972 Ankara Turkish Adem KAPLAN   14259/19 Kıldan v. Türkiye 04/03/2019 Abdullah Oğuzhan KILDAN Kastamonu Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ   16020/19 Ercan v. Türkiye 01/03/2019 Hakan ERCAN 1974 Konya Turkish Adem KAPLAN   16036/19 Aygün v. Türkiye 01/03/2019 Ramazan AYGÜN 1972 Ankara Turkish Adem KAPLAN   16043/19 Bolat v. Türkiye 01/03/2019 Bahadır BOLAT 1989 Bitlis Turkish Adem KAPLAN   16583/19 Karapınar v. Türkiye 20/03/2019 Nurullah KARAPINAR 1989 Sakarya Turkish Adem UZAK   18485/19 Boz v. Türkiye 22/03/2019 Bülent BOZ 1989 Kahramanmaraş Turkish Adem KAPLAN   18933/19 Bıyık v. Türkiye 22/03/2019 Özay BIYIK 1984 Ankara Turkish Adem KAPLAN   19536/19 Cebeci v. Türkiye 20/03/2019 Şenol CEBECİ 1975 Istanbul Turkish Adem UZAK   22457/19 Topal v. Türkiye 12/04/2019 Gazi TOPAL 1982 Ankara Turkish Adem KAPLAN   22459/19 Buldu v. Türkiye 12/04/2019 Ahmet BULDU 1989 Bitlis Turkish Adem KAPLAN   23366/19 Kılıç v. Türkiye 12/04/2019 Yavuz KILIÇ 1986 Ankara Turkish Adem KAPLAN   27176/19 Yiğit v. Türkiye 03/05/2019 Songül YİĞİT 1974 Zonguldak Turkish Adem KAPLAN   27186/19 Yıldırım v. Türkiye 03/05/2019 Mehmet YILDIRIM 1974 Çankırı Turkish Adem KAPLAN   33902/19 Sezer v. Türkiye 28/05/2019 Nuri SEZER 1983 Ardahan Turkish Adem KAPLAN   33907/19 Akarsu v. Türkiye 28/05/2019 Cevdet AKARSU 1975 Ankara Turkish Adem KAPLAN   33910/19 Çiçek v. Türkiye 28/05/2019 Ramazan ÇİÇEK 1977 Ankara Turkish Adem KAPLAN   33918/19 Bozkurt v. Türkiye 23/05/2019 Ahmet BOZKURT 1971 Ankara Turkish Adem KAPLAN   33922/19 Akgül v. Türkiye 23/05/2019 Turgay AKGÜL 1979 Bitlis Turkish Adem KAPLAN   33925/19 Bıyık v. Türkiye 22/05/2019 Yavuz BIYIK 1974 Ankara Turkish Adem KAPLAN   35951/19 Akyüz v. Türkiye 25/06/2019 İsa AKYÜZ 1979 Kocaeli Turkish     36034/19 Adanur v. Türkiye 20/06/2019 Salim ADANUR 1978 Trabzon Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK   36036/19 Dokumacı v. Türkiye 25/06/2019 Fikret DOKUMACI 1959 Trabzon Turkish     36193/19 Zeriğ v. Türkiye 13/06/2019 Ahmet ZERİĞ 1960 İzmir Turkish Seçkin KESKİN   36250/19 Kurtulmuş v. Türkiye 12/06/2019 Necati KURTULMUŞ 1982 Manisa Turkish Arife YÜKSEKDAĞ ALTUNAY   36280/19 Büyükyavuz v. Türkiye 21/06/2019 Ahmet Hulusi BÜYÜKYAVUZ 1986 Konya Turkish Halil İbrahim KEBEŞOĞLU   36436/19 Yıldız v. Türkiye 24/06/2019 Şehadet YILDIZ 1976 Sakarya Turkish Agit FİDAN   36527/19 Çakıcı v. Türkiye 18/06/2019 Durmuş ÇAKICI 1982 Bursa Turkish Kamile KILDAN   36565/19 Doğan v. Türkiye 25/06/2019 Bünyamin DOĞAN 1974 Kayseri Turkish Halime DOĞAN   36720/19 Çizmeci v. Türkiye 03/07/2019 Ersan ÇİZMECİ 1987 Manisa Turkish Mehmet MİRZA   37057/19 Dızman v. Türkiye 21/06/2019 Gökhan DIZMAN 1982 Aydın Turkish     37244/19 Yılmaz v. Türkiye 28/06/2019 Kenan YILMAZ 1981 Sakarya Turkish     37274/19 Aymaz v. Türkiye 04/07/2019 Muhammet Bekir AYMAZ 1990 Afyonkarahisar Turkish Hilal Tuğçe ŞAHİN   37369/19 Özcan v. Türkiye 05/07/2019 Ömer ÖZCAN 1978 Ankara Turkish     37970/19 Özkaya v. Türkiye 19/06/2019 Ahmet ÖZKAYA 1991 Eskişehir Turkish Ulviye Özge CAZ ÖZKAYA   38326/19 Özer v. Türkiye 11/07/2019 Barış ÖZER 1974 Elazığ Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK   38530/19 Aygün v. Türkiye 04/07/2019 İmdat AYGÜN 1980 Antalya Turkish Ebubekir RENK   38532/19 Arslan v. Türkiye 12/07/2019 Levent ARSLAN 1976 Ankara Turkish     38548/19 But v. Türkiye 08/07/2019 Halit BUT 1974 Istanbul Turkish Ercan KARACA   38674/19 Sağbaş v. Türkiye 08/07/2019 Emrah SAĞBAŞ 1987 Istanbul Turkish Esra Nur AKYOL   39000/19 Güneş v. Türkiye 08/07/2019 Ökkeş GÜNEŞ 1994 Kahramanmaraş Turkish     39010/19 Kocagöz v. Türkiye 10/07/2019 Avni KOCAGÖZ 1969 Aydın Turkish Esra Nur AKYOL   39320/19 Gülmez v. Türkiye 12/07/2019 Ramazan GÜLMEZ 1974 Samsun Turkish Recep ALTUN   39674/19 Sağlam v. Türkiye 19/06/2019 Musa SAĞLAM 1972 Ankara Turkish Melike Büşra URAL   39730/19 Öztürk v. Türkiye 30/05/2019 Osman ÖZTÜRK 1982 Istanbul Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK   40121/19 Alp v. Türkiye 19/07/2019 Ali ALP 1977 İzmir Turkish     40196/19 Şen v. Türkiye 11/07/2019 Murat ŞEN 1968 Kayseri Turkish Serra ŞEN   40269/19 Dönmez v. Türkiye 18/07/2019 Oktay DÖNMEZ 1986 Balıkesir Turkish     40891/19 Sert v. Türkiye 17/07/2019 Metin SERT 1986 Mersin Turkish Mehmet ÜNLÜ   40937/19 Karka v. Türkiye 22/07/2019 İlhan KARKA 1979 Ankara Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ   41070/19 Pulgak v. Türkiye 24/07/2019 Abdullah PULGAK 1990 See REP address Turkish Adem UZAK   41107/19 Eken v. Türkiye 23/07/2019 Eyüp EKEN 1984 Konya Turkish Muhammed Talha YILMAZ   41330/19 Ulukuş v. Türkiye 23/07/2019 Kanuni Süleyman ULUKUŞ 1976 Ankara Turkish     41420/19 Akdemir v. Türkiye 24/07/2019 İdris AKDEMİR 1985 Muş Turkish     41790/19 Barlık v. Türkiye 26/07/2019 Şahin BARLIK 1991 Manisa Turkish Arife YÜKSEKDAĞ ALTUNAY   41819/19 Gider v. Türkiye 02/08/2019 Özgür GİDER 1974 Samsun Turkish Serap ÇAKIR   41823/19 Kanbur v. Türkiye 26/07/2019 Sami KANBUR 1959 Düzce Turkish Mehmet YALÇIN   41838/19 Demir v. Türkiye 30/07/2019 Ali DEMİR 1975 Ordu Turkish     42006/19 Şaştı v. Türkiye 29/07/2019 Bünyamin ŞAŞTI 1976 Sakarya Turkish Enes Malik KILIÇ   42022/19 Hacıoğlu v. Türkiye 05/07/2019 Osman HACIOĞLU 1973 Rize Turkish     42027/19 Suna v. Türkiye 27/06/2019 İsmail SUNA 1986 Denizli Turkish     42101/19 Yıldız v. Türkiye 30/07/2019 Veysel YILDIZ 1977 Ankara Turkish Cengiz YILMAZ   42535/19 Karaduman v. Türkiye 01/08/2019 Ümit KARADUMAN 1987 Tekirdağ Turkish Zeynep Rana EKİNCİ KOÇ   42537/19 Yücel v. Türkiye 31/07/2019 Mustafa YÜCEL 1983 Ankara Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK   42601/19 Bal v. Türkiye 01/08/2019 Halil BAL 1969 İzmir Turkish Memduh Remzi BAL   43027/19 İpek v. Türkiye 01/08/2019 Cihat İPEK 1989 Trabzon Turkish Bilal İPEK   43166/19 Andıç v. Türkiye 05/08/2019 Mehmet Ali ANDIÇ 1985 Hatay Turkish     43248/19 Cengiz v. Türkiye 07/08/2019 Filiz CENGİZ 1982 Istanbul Turkish Adem UZAK   43293/19 Günaydın v. Türkiye 02/08/2019 Ahmet GÜNAYDIN 1968 Samsun Turkish Büşra POLAT DURAN   44066/19 Şen v. Türkiye 07/08/2019 Mustafa Emre ŞEN 1988 İzmir Turkish     44070/19 Dönmez v. Türkiye 07/08/2019 Murat DÖNMEZ 1975 Yozgat Turkish Üsame İNAN   44082/19 Kızıltoprak v. Türkiye 09/08/2019 Yusuf KIZILTOPRAK 1990 Düzce Turkish Bekir DÖNMEZ   44124/19 Vardal v. Türkiye 07/08/2019 Fahri VARDAL 1974 İzmir Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK   44297/19 Sevilmiş v. Türkiye 07/08/2019 Halit SEVİLMİŞ 1983 Istanbul Turkish Mücahit AYDIN   44318/19 Aydın v. Türkiye 06/08/2019 Şerif AYDIN 1981 Şanlıurfa Turkish Mehmet AY   44335/19 Şahin v. Türkiye 09/08/2019 Mustafa ŞAHİN 1991 Gaziantep Turkish     44407/19 Polat v. Türkiye 07/08/2019 Selçuk POLAT 1982 Afyonkarahisar Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK   44468/19 Çora v. Türkiye 21/08/2019 Yüksel ÇORA 1977 Istanbul Turkish Fatma ÇORA   44525/19 Şentürk v. Türkiye 06/08/2019 Şahin ŞENTÜRK 1976 Çorum Turkish Ayşe ŞENTÜRK   44702/19 Köse v. Türkiye 08/08/2019 Emin KÖSE 1968 Afyonkarahisar Turkish Ayşe Dudu KÖSE   45538/19 Damarseçkin v. Türkiye 27/08/2019 Müjdat DAMARSEÇKİN 1988 Istanbul Turkish Adem UZAK   45675/19 Vardi v. Türkiye 15/08/2019 Ömer VARDİ 1984 Istanbul Turkish Şeyma ALKAN   45678/19 Mercan v. Türkiye 15/08/2019 Bayram Ali MERCAN 1988 Adana Turkish Mücahit AYDIN   45838/19 Fesli v. Türkiye 15/08/2019 Muhammed Hamza FESLİ 1992 Mersin Turkish Mehmet Fatih ARSLAN   46370/19 Köken v. Türkiye 06/08/2019 Reşit KÖKEN 1973 Afyonkarahisar Turkish     46765/19 Birlik v. Türkiye 22/08/2019 Eshat BİRLİK 1982 Bursa Turkish Cihad KAVUT   46791/19 Dursun v. Türkiye 22/08/2019 Zekeriya DURSUN 1975 Karabük Turkish Lale KARADAŞ   47003/19 Aksoy v. Türkiye 23/08/2019 Sinan AKSOY 1978 Amasya Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK   47018/19 Akdemir v. Türkiye 22/08/2019 Ahmet AKDEMİR 1981 Istanbul Turkish     47066/19 Tek v. Türkiye 21/08/2019 Davut TEK 1983 Kayseri Turkish Melek AYDIN İSLAMOĞLU   47075/19 Özgür v. Türkiye 26/08/2019 Veysel ÖZGÜR 1967 Ankara Turkish     47276/19 Alkan v. Türkiye 20/08/2019 Osman ALKAN 1976 Aksaray Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK                     47281/19 Avcı v. Türkiye 26/08/2019 Ali AVCI 1983 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     47689/19 Mıhçı v. Türkiye 23/08/2019 Özgür MIHÇI 1975 İzmir Turkish Burcu HAS                     47854/19 Solak v. Türkiye 20/08/2019 Ahmet SOLAK 1990 Osmaniye Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK                     47861/19 Göyce v. Türkiye 01/07/2019 Mustafa GÖYCE 1983 Hatay Turkish Dudu ERTUNÇ                     49038/19 Dede v. Türkiye 06/09/2019 Salih DEDE 1973 Manisa Turkish Havva ALAN ÖZCEL                     49412/19 Boğaz v. Türkiye 10/09/2019 Hasan BOĞAZ 1987 Karaman Turkish Nurhan ÖZDURAN                     49487/19 Keklik v. Türkiye 05/09/2019 Adem KEKLİK 1988 Adıyaman Turkish                       50066/19 Uzkut v. Türkiye 10/09/2019 Mehmet UZKUT 1966 İzmir Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK                     50227/19 İslam v. Türkiye 11/09/2019 Ahmet İSLAM 1984 Aksaray Turkish                       50698/19 Ölçer v. Türkiye 05/09/2019 Nihat ÖLÇER 1982 Haarlem Turkish Ebubekir RENK                     50753/19 Acemli v. Türkiye 02/09/2019 Ali ACEMLİ 1963 Kocaeli Turkish Şerif FİDAN                     50809/19 Odabaşı v. Türkiye 05/09/2019 Mehmet ODABAŞI 1973 Karabük Turkish                       51084/19 Şahin v. Türkiye 02/09/2019 Hakan ŞAHİN 1988 Manisa Turkish Eyyüp SAĞIR                     51121/19 Ulaş v. Türkiye 12/09/2019 Hilal ULAŞ 1993 Kocaeli Turkish Adem UZAK                     51142/19 Önemli v. Türkiye 11/09/2019 Cihan ÖNEMLİ 1983 Manisa Turkish Arife YÜKSEKDAĞ ALTUNAY                     51151/19 Cesur v. Türkiye 05/09/2019 Ramazan CESUR 1985 Karabük Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK                     51305/19 Kızmaz v. Türkiye 04/09/2019 Ümit KIZMAZ 1987 Konya Turkish                       51398/19 Çay v. Türkiye 13/09/2019 Hasan ÇAY 1971 Konya Turkish Emre ÇAY                     51483/19 Telli v. Türkiye 06/09/2019 İrfan TELLİ 1969 Çorum Turkish Ebubekir RENK                     51499/19 Göğüş v. Türkiye 20/09/2019 Ferudun GÖĞÜŞ 1988 Istanbul Turkish                       51582/19 Ekici v. Türkiye 15/10/2019 Erhan EKİCİ 1987 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet Ertuğrul TÜTÜNCÜ                     51646/19 Köprülü v. Türkiye 10/09/2019 Onur Murat KÖPRÜLÜ 1978 Karabük Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK                     51676/19 Karabulut v. Türkiye 19/09/2019 Samet KARABULUT 1989 Kayseri Turkish Filiz KARABULUT                     51818/19 Kızılırmak v. Türkiye 12/09/2019 Yüksel KIZILIRMAK 1989 Osmaniye Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK                     52225/19 Yıldız v. Türkiye 16/09/2019 Mehmet Fatih YILDIZ 1986 Nevşehir Turkish Özcan AKINCI                     52470/19 Yeşil v. Türkiye 27/09/2019 Yaşar YEŞİL 1968 Afyonkarahisar Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK                     52475/19 Ağraş v. Türkiye 23/09/2019 Ahmet AĞRAŞ 1988 İzmir Turkish                       52553/19 Özbey v. Türkiye 24/09/2019 Rahmi ÖZBEY 1957 Ankara Turkish Büşra DEMİRCİ                     52601/19 Tuner v. Türkiye 20/09/2019 Bünyamin TUNER 1976 Ankara Turkish Ahu TUNER                     52612/19 Aytunç v. Türkiye 23/09/2019 Ömer Faruk AYTUNÇ 1988 Istanbul Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     52699/19 Cingöz v. Türkiye 22/08/2019 Seyit CİNGÖZ 1974 Trabzon Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK                     53053/19 Eylek v. Türkiye 01/10/2019 Halil İbrahim EYLEK 1995 Adana Turkish                       53060/19 Köse v. Türkiye 24/09/2019 Mehmet Ali KÖSE 1976 Isparta Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK                     53103/19 Erdoğmuş v. Türkiye 01/10/2019 Harun ERDOĞMUŞ 1986 Çorum Turkish Ebubekir RENK                     53308/19 Korkmaz v. Türkiye 20/09/2019 Barış KORKMAZ 1988 Konya Turkish Leyla MESUTOĞLU                     53333/19 Güvercin v. Türkiye 11/09/2019 Hafit GÜVERCİN 1987 Elazığ Turkish İsmail GÜVERCİN                     53351/19 Türkmen v. Türkiye 19/09/2019 Mustafa TÜRKMEN 1975 Karabük Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK                     53369/19 Soy v. Türkiye 17/09/2019 Enes İbrahim SOY 1991 Bartın Turkish Ebubekir RENK                     53524/19 Koçak v. Türkiye 23/09/2019 Nadir KOÇAK 1975 Istanbul Turkish                       53764/19 Tuncel v. Türkiye 23/09/2019 Tuğrul TUNCEL 1970 Niğde Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     54386/19 Akgün v. Türkiye 26/09/2019 İbrahim AKGÜN 1973 İzmir Turkish                       54501/19 Demir v. Türkiye 03/10/2019 İmdat DEMİR 1984 Istanbul Turkish Kadir ÖZTÜRK                     54525/19 Kurt v. Türkiye 04/10/2019 Numan KURT 1991 Malatya Turkish Erdal ÇELİK                     54885/19 Alparslan v. Türkiye 27/08/2019 Ali ALPARSLAN 1988 Konya Turkish Nurhan ÖZDURAN                     55590/19 Zorlu v. Türkiye 05/09/2019 Turgut ZORLU 1983 Giresun Turkish                       55778/19 Öndem v. Türkiye 25/09/2019 Aliaddin ÖNDEM 1966 İzmir Turkish Hatice ATMAZ DERİNCE                     55822/19 Kurt v. Türkiye 03/09/2019 Ali KURT 1984 Isparta Turkish Zülal BÜKER                     55875/19 Yılmaz v. Türkiye 11/10/2019 Kerem YILMAZ 1987 Kocaeli Turkish Esma YILMAZ                     55949/19 Duran v. Türkiye 09/10/2019 Abdullah DURAN 1979 Istanbul Turkish                       55953/19 Kıpçak v. Türkiye 08/10/2019 Barış KIPÇAK 1981 Konya Turkish Sultan KIPÇAK                     56055/19 Tuz v. Türkiye 09/10/2019 Alpaslan TUZ 1977 Denizli Turkish Nurten TUZ                     56063/19 Başer v. Türkiye 10/10/2019 Cemil BAŞER 1988 Afyonkarahisar Turkish Hamide Nur ALKAÇ                     56071/19 Sağlam v. Türkiye 09/10/2019 Abdullah SAĞLAM 1984 Bolu Turkish Şeyma ALKAN                     56253/19 Arslan v. Türkiye 24/10/2019 Abdullah ARSLAN 1991 İstanbul Turkish Adem UZAK                     56261/19 Deliktaş v. Türkiye 23/10/2019 Ramazan DELİKTAŞ 1974 Karabük Turkish Adem UZAK                     57778/19 Kara v. Türkiye 04/11/2019 Mehmet KARA 1987 Istanbul Turkish Adem UZAK                     59158/19 Erol v. Türkiye 11/11/2019 Hasan EROL 1979 Karabük Turkish Adem UZAK                     59162/19 Akar v. Türkiye 11/11/2019 Avni AKAR 1982 Kahramanmaraş Turkish Adem UZAK                     59165/19 Beyazdağ v. Türkiye 11/11/2019 Yakup BEYAZDAĞ 1991 Istanbul Turkish Adem UZAK                     60006/19 Yalçın v. Türkiye 09/09/2019 Abdusamet YALÇIN 1985 Tekirdağ Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     62825/19 Kanbur v. Türkiye 22/11/2019 İlhami KANBUR 1983 Ankara Turkish Emine Pınar TEKİNŞEN                     63004/19 Erkan v. Türkiye 18/11/2019 Suna ERKAN 1982 Kırklareli Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     97/20 Çağlı v. Türkiye 09/12/2019 Abdullah Çağatay ÇAĞLI 1981 Ankara Turkish Adem KAPLAN                     276/20 Beygo v. Türkiye 19/12/2019 Hasan Ergün BEYGO 1981 Balıkesir Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     514/20 Bayçöl v. Türkiye 10/12/2019 Figen BAYÇÖL 1972 Bolu Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     1135/20 Oğuz v. Türkiye 12/12/2019 Hasan OĞUZ 1965 Balıkesir Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     1199/20 Tozlu v. Türkiye 27/11/2019 Mustafa Ali TOZLU 1975 Manisa Turkish Arife YÜKSEKDAĞ ALTUNAY                     2487/20 Kaya v. Türkiye 24/12/2019 Metin KAYA 1972 Istanbul Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     2754/20 Aydın v. Türkiye 17/12/2019 Ahmet AYDIN 1987 Istanbul Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     4197/20 Sevim v. Türkiye 07/01/2020 Mehmet SEVİM 1973 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     4394/20 Kara v. Türkiye 06/01/2020 Mustafa KARA 1986 Tekirdağ Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     5498/20 Altınbaş v. Türkiye 13/01/2020 Ufuk ALTINBAŞ 1977 Istanbul Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     5980/20 Akar v. Türkiye 08/01/2020 Fatih AKAR 1979 Istanbul Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     7152/20 Kılıç v. Türkiye 13/01/2020 Yaşar KILIÇ 1973 Istanbul Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     7346/20 Arslan v. Türkiye 20/01/2020 Halil İbrahim ARSLAN 1987 Istanbul Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     9289/20 Özkan v. Türkiye 30/01/2020 Cihan ÖZKAN 1983 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     11485/20 Ocak v. Türkiye 03/02/2020 Mehmet Zahit OCAK 1950 Manisa Turkish Arife YÜKSEKDAĞ ALTUNAY                     14837/20 Ekinci v. Türkiye 10/03/2020 Yasin EKİNCİ 1989 Kocaeli Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     15016/20 Tunçdemir v. Türkiye 26/02/2020 Derviş TUNÇDEMİR 1979 Ankara Turkish Emine Pınar TEKİNŞEN                     16028/20 Dal v. Türkiye 20/03/2020 Arif DAL 1985 Manisa Turkish Arife YÜKSEKDAĞ ALTUNAY                     16390/20 Durak v. Türkiye 20/03/2020 Hüseyin DURAK 1984 Manisa Turkish Arife YÜKSEKDAĞ ALTUNAY                     17625/20 Gündem v. Türkiye 25/03/2020 Ahmet GÜNDEM 1994 Istanbul Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     20189/20 Arabacı v. Türkiye 14/05/2020 Murat ARABACI 1971 Istanbul Turkish Adem UZAK                     20199/20 Yüksel v. Türkiye 14/05/2020 Neyfel YÜKSEL 1991 Karabük Turkish Adem UZAK                     20849/20 Özcan v. Türkiye 13/02/2020 Abdullah Himmet ÖZCAN 1985 Kocaeli Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     21264/20 Türker v. Türkiye 15/05/2020 Türker TÜRKER 1973 Ankara Turkish Emine Pınar TEKİNŞEN                     21710/20 Kaşağıcı v. Türkiye 08/05/2020 Hamdi KAŞAĞICI 1986 Istanbul Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     24036/20 Budak v. Türkiye 08/05/2020 Ali İhsan BUDAK 1984 Kocaeli Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     24076/20 Girgin v. Türkiye 22/05/2020 Irmak GİRGİN 1986 Bursa Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     24378/20 Türk v. Türkiye 22/05/2020 Yusuf TÜRK 1976 Niğde Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     26375/20 Irmak v. Türkiye 19/06/2020 İsmail IRMAK 1985 Bursa Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     26420/20 Gökçe v. Türkiye 19/06/2020 İbrahim GÖKÇE 1981 Istanbul Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     26564/20 Yumuşak v. Türkiye 08/06/2020 Hacı İbrahim YUMUŞAK 1975 Manisa Turkish Arife YÜKSEKDAĞ ALTUNAY                     27441/20 Çelik v. Türkiye 29/06/2020 Ersan ÇELİK 1978 Muğla Turkish Adem UZAK                     28170/20 Güzeldal v. Türkiye 18/06/2020 Metin GÜZELDAL 1980 Manisa Turkish Arife YÜKSEKDAĞ ALTUNAY                     28783/20 Karabıyık v. Türkiye 24/06/2020 Metin KARABIYIK 1975 Istanbul Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     30515/20 Atalay v. Türkiye 01/07/2020 Ramazan ATALAY 1969 Istanbul Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     30740/20 Fırat v. Türkiye 26/06/2020 Halil İbrahim FIRAT 1984 Istanbul Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     31639/20 Sarı v. Türkiye 09/07/2020 Serkan SARI 1984 Istanbul Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     31669/20 Sünger v. Türkiye 09/07/2020 Özcan SÜNGER 1974 Istanbul Turkish Emre AKARYILDIZ                     33006/20 Tekin v. Türkiye 24/07/2020 Ertuğrul TEKİN 1987 Manisa Turkish Arife YÜKSEKDAĞ ALTUNAY                     36114/20 Yıldız v. Türkiye 14/08/2020 Mehmet YILDIZ 1976 Ordu Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     36196/20 Tana v. Türkiye 14/08/2020 Erdem TANA 1984 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     40620/20 Karaoğlu v. Türkiye 01/09/2020 Ruhi KARAOĞLU 1974 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     41450/20 Şahin v. Türkiye 01/09/2020 Ali Kemal ŞAHİN 1966 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     42218/20 Çerkez v. Türkiye 04/09/2020 Kerim ÇERKEZ 1988 Ankara Turkish Adem KAPLAN                     42397/20 Sert v. Türkiye 11/09/2020 Alper SERT 1974 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     43529/20 Gönül v. Türkiye 29/09/2020 Ertuğrul GÖNÜL 1989 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     43558/20 Gülüm v. Türkiye 29/09/2020 Mustafa GÜLÜM 1978 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     43561/20 Babaarslan v. Türkiye 29/09/2020 Recep BABAARSLAN 1976 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     43571/20 Tüccar v. Türkiye 21/09/2020 İsa TÜCCAR 1968 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     43594/20 Sönmez v. Türkiye 29/09/2020 Sultan SÖNMEZ 1987 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     43662/20 Arslan v. Türkiye 21/09/2020 Miray ARSLAN 1992 Kayseri Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     45074/20 Baloğlu v. Türkiye 07/10/2020 Remziye BALOĞLU 1978 İzmit Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     46052/20 Önal v. Türkiye 13/10/2020 İsmail ÖNAL 1983 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     46056/20 Meme v. Türkiye 13/10/2020 Mehmet MEME 1988 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR                     46057/20 Manav v. Türkiye 13/10/2020 Yunus MANAV 1991 Istanbul Turkish Mehmet ÇAVDAR        &