CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 6 décembre 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .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 } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s8F670191 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold }   Communicated on 6 December 2016   SECOND SECTION Application no. 1905/16 Mehmet ORAN against Turkey and 3 other applications (see list appended)     The facts and complaints in these applications have been summarised in the Court’s decision, which is available in HUDOC.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Have the applicants exhausted all effective domestic remedies, as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention?   2.     Have the applicants’ relatives’ right to life, ensured by Article 2 of the Convention, been violated in the present cases? In this connection, were they killed by agents of the State? Also in this connection, what steps were taken by the authorities which, judged reasonably, might have been expected to protect the applicants’ relatives’ rights after they were shot and injured (see Osman v. the United Kingdom , 28   October 1998, § 116, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998 ‑ VIII)?   Having regard to the procedural protection of the right to life (see paragraph 104 of Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, ECHR 2000-VII), have investigations been opened into the deaths of the applicants’ relatives by the domestic authorities, as required by Article 2 of the Convention? If so, are those investigations being conducted in compliance with the requirements of an effective investigation, within the meaning of the Court’s case-law under Article 2 of the Convention?   The Government are requested to submit a copy of the investigation files, including a copy of the documents pertaining to the discovery of the applicants’ relatives’ bodies.   3.     Has there been a hindrance by the State with the effective exercise of the right of individual application of the two applicants in applications nos.   2105/16 and 4159/16 on account of the arrest and detention of their legal representative Mr   Ramazan Demir (see Colibaba v.   Moldova , no.   29089/06, §§   59-69, 23 October 2007)? In this connection, which activities of Mr   Demir were referred to by the prosecutor when that prosecutor accused Mr   Demir of carrying out “activities to weaken our country inside and at the international arena by making allegations of torture and alleging violations of human rights” (see Ramazan Demir’s statement dated 17 March 2016)?     Appendix   No Application No Lodged on Applicant Date of birth Place of residence Represented by   1905/16 10/01/2016 Mehmet ORAN 01/01/1964 İstanbul   Yunus MURATAKAN   2005/16 10/01/2016 Ayhan SEVİKTEK 03/03/1986 Diyarbakır   Yunus MURATAKAN   2105/16 08/01/2016 Mehmet İNAN 11/02/1983 Şırnak   Ramazan DEMİR   4159/16 19/01/2016 Abdullah KAPLAN 20/04/1988 Şırnak   Ramazan DEMİR