CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 septembre 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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .sA56BACAB { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; list-style-position:inside } .s13783063 { width:6.24pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s3537C2D6 { font-weight:normal }   Communicated on 13 September 2017   SECOND SECTION Application no. 33436/10 Meysu ÇAKMAK and others against Turkey lodged on 10 May 2010 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings against the applicants as a result of the absence of a lawyer during their questioning by the police. It also raises an issue with regard to the validity of the waiver of their right to legal assistance. The applicants, whose names are listed in the appendix, complain of a violation of their rights under Article   6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the applicants, whose names are listed in the appendix, have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against them, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, has there been a breach of Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention, in conjunction with Article 6 § 1, as a result of the lack of legal assistance available to the applicants during their detention in police custody (see Salduz v. Turkey [GC], no. 36391/02, ECHR 2008, and Ibrahim and   Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 50541/08 and 3 others, ECHR   2016)? In that connection, could the applicants be considered to have waived their right to legal assistance in an unequivocal manner in the circumstances of the instant case (see Yoldaş v. Turkey , no.   27503/04, 23   February 2010)?   2.     The Government are invited to submit copies of all the relevant documents concerning the criminal proceedings against the applicants, including but not limited to the minutes of all interviews conducted during the preliminary investigation stage, the minutes of all the hearings, the reasoned judgments of the trial court, the evidence against the applicants and the written submissions of the applicants and their lawyers throughout the proceedings.         List of applicants:       Meysu ÇAKMAK     Yalçın KILIÇ     Aydın NAS