CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 17 mai 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 7 June 2021   SECOND SECTION Application no. 28791/10 Namık YÜKSEL against Turkey lodged on 15 April 2010 communicated on 17 May 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the custody of a child in prison, whose parents are both serving a prison sentence. The applicant’s child – aged four at the time of the application – was staying with his mother in the women’s section of the same prison (during the day, at the kindergarten and during the night, in the dormitory with his mother) in accordance with the legal provisions in force. The applicant could spend one hour a week with his child. He could also see him during family visits, organized once a month. The applicant requested the national authorities to allow him to stay with his child. His request was rejected on the grounds that, according to the applicable law, children between the ages of 0 and 6 could only stay with their imprisoned mother. The applicant complains under Article 8 of the Convention that his right to family life was violated as the domestic authorities rejected his request to stay with his four-year-old child, who was living with his imprisoned mother in the same prison as him. Relying on Article 14 of the Convention, he also complains of discrimination in favour of imprisoned mothers who could keep their children with them, unlike imprisoned fathers.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his private and family life contrary to Article 8 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis , Alexandru Enache v. Romania , no. 16986/12, 3 October 2017)? In particular, did the authorities put disproportionate restrictions on the applicant’s personal contact with his child during his prison sentence?   2.     Has the applicant suffered discrimination in the exercise of his rights under the Convention on the basis of sex, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 8, insofar as the national legislation allowed only imprisoned mothers of a child under six year of age to keep their children with them (see, Alexandru Enache , cited above)?