CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 9 septembre 2013

.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 } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s28F5597F { margin-top:18pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .s72EB7DC5 { margin-top:18pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }       SECOND SECTION Application no. 45169/10 Mahfuz ARSLAN against Turkey lodged on 15 June 2010 STATEMENT OF FACTS   The applicant, Mr   Mahfuz   Arslan, is a Turkish national, who was born in 1981 and lives in Diyarbakır. He is represented before the Court by Mr   M.   Beştaş and Ms   M.   Danış   Beştaş, lawyers practising in Diyarbakır. A.     The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. On 22 October 2008 the applicant participated in a demonstration concerning the problems of the Kurdish people. On 6   February 2009 he further kept singing a song in the Kurdish language during a Kurdish activity. On 9   September 2009 the applicant was taken into police custody in Batman. On 10   September 2009 the applicant was brought before the investigating judge at the Batman Magistrates’ Court, who ordered his detention on suspicion of membership of an illegal organisation, the Kurdish Workers’ Party (PKK). On 25   September 2009 criminal proceedings were brought against the applicant by the Diyarbakır Public Prosecutor on suspicion of aiding and abetting an illegal organisation, the PKK (Kurdish Workers’ Party), under Article   314 of the Criminal Code and making terrorist propaganda on behalf of an illegal organisation under Article   7 §   2 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (Law   No.   3713). On 4   March 2010 the Diyarbakır Assize Court with special jurisdiction, which replaced the Batman Assize Court, found the applicant guilty of making terrorist propaganda on behalf of an illegal organisation under Article   7 §   2 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act due to participating in the demonstration as charged, and sentenced the applicant to ten months’ imprisonment. Also the Assize Court found that Article   7 §   2 of Law   No.   3713 had been infringed by his keeping singing a song, and sentenced him to ten months’ imprisonment. In addition, on the same day, the applicant was released pending appeal. On 28   March 2013 the Court of Cassation quashed the judgement of first-instance court. Accordingly, the case was remitted to the Diyarbakır Assize Court. The case is still pending before the Diyarbakır Assize Court. B.     Relevant domestic law A full description of the relevant domestic law may be found in Faruk   Temel v. Turkey no.   16853/05, §§   43-64, 1   February 2011. COMPLAINT The applicant maintains under Article   5 §   3 of the Convention that the length of his pre-trial detention was excessive. In this regard the applicant complains that he had already been detained for nearly six months.     QUESTION TO THE PARTIES   Has there been a violation of Articles   5 §   3 on account of the length of the applicant’s detention on remand?