CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 11 décembre 2012

.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 } .sB176A172 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:24pt } .s9296A950 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .s98A7B623 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sB4C2C3E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .sE208486F { font-family:Arial; color:#ff0000 } SECOND SECTION Application no. 14129/11 by Haci İnan against Turkey lodged on 27 December 2010 The facts and complaints in this case have been summarised in the Court’s partial decision on admissibility, which is available in HUDOC QUESTIONS 1.     (a) Was the applicant subjected to ill-treatment while in police custody before 27 May 2000, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention?       (b) Did the authorities carry out an effective official investigation, in compliance with the requirements of Article 3, into the applicant’s complaint of ill-treatment raised on 27 May 2000, at the hearing concerning his detention on remand before the duty judge of the State Security Court, and on 27   October 2010 at the hearing before the Istanbul Assize Court?   2.     Was the length of the applicants’ pre-trial detention in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention?   3.     Is the length of the criminal proceedings in the present case in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention?   4.     Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy for his complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention regarding the allegedly excessive length of the proceedings, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?