CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 17 avril 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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 17 April 2018   SECOND SECTION Application no. 2429/13 Cuma SARI against Turkey lodged on 8 August 2009 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the security operation conducted on 19   December 2000 in the Çanakkale Prison where the applicant’s daughter Sultan Sarı was being detained at the time. During the operation five persons, including the applicant’s daughter, were killed and a large number of others were injured. The applicant complains that his daughter was killed in breach of Article 2 of the Convention and that no effective investigation was conducted into her killing. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the applicant’s daughter’s right to life, ensured by Article 2 of the Convention, been violated in the present case?   In particular, did the applicant’s daughter’s death result from a use of force which was absolutely necessary and strictly proportionate to the achievement of the aims set out in the subparagraphs of Article 2 § 2 of the Convention?   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?