CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 11 décembre 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 } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both }   Communicated on 11 December 2017   SECOND SECTION Application no. 33528/10 Fatih TAŞ against Turkey lodged on 1 June 2010 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the criminal proceedings brought against the applicant under Article 169 of the former Criminal Code for aiding and abetting the PKK, an illegal organization, and subsequently under section   7(2) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (Law no. 3713) for disseminating propaganda in favour of the same organisation. At the time of the events giving rise to the present application, the applicant was the owner and the editor-in-chief of a publishing house, Aram Basım ve Yayıncılık. In 2001 he published a book entitled “Waters of Avaşin are blue” (“ Mavidir Avaşin’in Suları ”). Copies of the book were seized and criminal proceedings were brought against the applicant on account of the content of the book. In 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006 the applicant was convicted by the first-instance courts on the ground that he had aided and abetted the PKK (judgment of 2002) by publishing the book in question and that the content of the book as a whole constituted propaganda in favour of the PKK (judgments of 2004, 2005 and 2006). The first-instance judgments were quashed by the Court of Cassation and in 2010 the Istanbul Assize Court acquitted the applicant in view of the fact that in 2009 the Constitutional Court had annulled the legal provision which had allowed for punishment of owners of media organs and publishing companies for dissemination of propaganda in favour of terrorist organisations for materials written by others. The applicant relies on Article 10 of the Convention.   QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Having regard to the Court’s case-law (see Dilipak v. Turkey , no.   29680/05, 15 September 2015; Semir Güzel v. Turkey , no.   29483/09, 13   September 2016; and Döner and Others v. Turkey , no.   29994/02, 7   March 2017), has there been an interference with the applicant’s right to freedom of expression on account of the criminal proceedings brought against him before the Istanbul State Security Court, the Istanbul Assize Court and the Fatih Criminal Court?   2.     Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression, contrary to Article 10 of the Convention in the present case?