CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 16 janvier 2017

.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 } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .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 } .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 } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt }   Communicated on 16 January 2017   SECOND SECTION Application no. 10439/12 Vedat KURŞUN against Turkey lodged on 25 January 2012 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant, Mr Vedat Kurşun, is a Turkish national who was born in 1976 and lives in Diyarbakır. He is represented before the Court by Mr   C.   Özen and Mr S. Eren, lawyers practising in Diyarbakır. The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. At the time of the events giving rise to the present application the applicant was the editor-in-chief of Azadiya Welat , a newspaper published in Kurdish. On various dates in 2007 and 2008 the Diyarbakır public prosecutor lodged thirty-three bills of indictment with the Diyarbakır Assize Court, charging the applicant with membership of the PKK, an illegal armed organisation, and with disseminating propaganda in favour of that organisation on account of the content of 103 articles published in Azadiya   Welat in 2007 and 2008. On an unspecified date the criminal proceedings initiated by the aforementioned bills of indictment were joined. On 20 May 2009 the applicant was detained pending trial in relation to the criminal proceedings brought against him. On 13 May 2010 the Diyarbakır Assize Court convicted the applicant of membership of an illegal organisation and of disseminating propaganda and sentenced him to a total of 166 years and six months’ imprisonment on account of the articles published in Azadiya Welat . The applicant appealed. On 22 February 2011 the Court of Cassation quashed the judgment of the Diyarbakır Assize Court. On 9 June 2011 the Diyarbakır Assize Court rendered its second judgment in the case. The court acquitted the applicant of the charge of membership of the PKK but convicted him for disseminating propaganda in favour of the PKK under section 7(2) of Law no. 3713. The applicant was sentenced to ten years and six months’ imprisonment. In its judgment, the Assize Court noted that in various articles published in Azadiya Welat , Abdullah Öcalan, the leader of the PKK, had been referred to as “the leader” or “the leader of the Kurdish people”. Likewise, members of the PKK had been referred to as “guerrillas” while deceased members of the organisation had been referred to as “martyrs”. The court also noted that the east and south-east regions of Turkey had been described as “Kurdistan” in the articles in question. Lastly, the court noted that the declarations and statements by the KCK, an illegal organisation related to the PKK, as well as leading figures of the PKK, had been published in the articles. The court found it established that by publishing the articles in question the applicant had demonstrated that he was a supporter of the PKK and concluded therefore that he should be convicted of the offence proscribed by section   7(2) of Law no. 3713. On 5 September 2011 the applicant appealed. On 20 March 2012 the Court of Cassation upheld the judgment of 9 June 2011. On 5 July 2012 Law no 6352, which amended various laws with a view to suspending proceedings and sentences given in cases concerning crimes committed through the press, media and similar expressions of thought, entered into force. On 24 July 2012, upon an application by the applicant, the Diyarbakır Assize Court ordered a stay of execution of his sentence, in accordance with Article 105 of Law no. 6352. The applicant was then released from prison. COMPLAINTS The applicant complains under Article 10 of the Convention that his conviction under section 7(2) of Law no. 3713 constituted a violation of his right to freedom of expression. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression, protected by Article 10 of the Convention, on account of his conviction under section 7(2) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (Law   no.   3713)?