CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 25 janvier 2018

.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 } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .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 25 January 2018   SECOND SECTION Application no. 41788/09 Ali BULUŞ and Others against Turkey lodged on 21 July 2009 SUBJECT MATTER OF the CASE The application concerns the conviction of the applicants for membership of the PKK, an illegal armed organisation, under Articles 220 § 7 and 314 of the Criminal Code. At the time of the events giving rise to the present application, the applicants, Mr Ali Buluş, Mr Mehmet Karaaslan and Mr   Bayram Parlak, were journalists and worked for Dicle News Agency (DİHA). The first-instance court considered that the applicants had aided the PKK, an illegal armed organisation, knowingly and willingly, and thus should be considered as members of that organisation on the basis of the materials found in the Mersin branch of DİHA, as well as their homes and the applicants’ cameras. The court found it established that the applicants had collected information, photographs and video footages of PKK members and public meetings held in favour the PKK; distributed them to media outlets that broadcasted in favour of that organisation; and hence had aided the PKK. The first-instance court also noted that Mr   Mehmet Karaaslan and Mr Bayram Parlak had signed a petition in the context of a campaign organised with a view to disseminating propaganda in favour of the PKK. Mr   Mehmet Karaaslan was also convicted under section 7(2) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act as he was he was arrested at the end of a demonstration held in protest of the detention conditions of Abdullah Öcalan, the leader of the PKK, despite his claim that he had been at the demonstration to cover the story as a journalist. The applicants allege a violation of Articles 6 and 10 of the Convention.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to freedom of expression, contrary to Article 10 of the Convention, on account of their conviction under Articles 220 § 7 and 314 of the Criminal Code?   2.     Has there been a violation of Mr Mehmet Karaaslan’s right to freedom of expression, contrary to Article 10 of the Convention, on account of his conviction under section 7(2) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act?   The parties are requested to submit a copy of the file of case no.   2007/297 of the Eighth Division of the Adana Assize Court.     APPENDIX     Ali BULUŞ who was born in 1982, lives in Adana and is represented by Ms S. Aracı Bek and Mr T. Bek, lawyers practising in Adana.     Mehmet KARAASLAN who was born in 1981, lives in Mersin and is represented by Ms S. Aracı Bek and Mr T. Bek, lawyers practising in Adana.     Bayram PARLAK who was born in 1977, lives in Mersin and is represented by Ms S. Aracı Bek and Mr T. Bek, lawyers practising in Adana.