CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 25 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 } .sAA6B1D82 { font-family:Arial; color:#313131 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 25 September 2017   SECOND SECTION Application no. 8152/13 Aşkın ÇANAKÇI against Turkey lodged on 4 December 2012 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the disappearance of the applicant’s brother in 2006 and the effectiveness of the ensuing search and investigation. The applicant complains of a violation of Articles 2 and 13 of the Convention. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the applicant’s brother’s right to life, ensured by Article 2 of the Convention, been violated in the present case?   In this connection, when did the national authorities first become aware of the disappearance and, after they became aware of it, what preventive operational measures were taken by those authorities to protect the applicant’s brother’s life ( Osmanoğlu v. Turkey , no. 48804/99, §   76, 24   January 2008 )?   2.     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), was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article 2 of the Convention?