CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 30 septembre 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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 18 October 2021   SECOND SECTION Application no. 49535/18 Ramazan ÇAYLI against Turkey lodged on 9 October 2018 communicated on 30 September 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns letters, sent by his lawyer to the applicant, detained in a prison at the time of the events, which were read and controlled by the prison authorities. He complained before national authorities of this general practice of prison authorities which systematically checked letters sent by his lawyer. His objections to the Enforcement Judge and the Assize Court were rejected on the ground that there was no restriction under domestic law on the control of letters sent from outside to detainees. Relying on Article 8 of the Convention, the applicant complains about the control of letters sent by his lawyer, which, in his view, was unlawful. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect of his correspondence with his lawyer, contrary to Article   8 of the Convention (see, for instance,   Campbell v. the United Kingdom ,   25 March 1992, §§   32 ‑ 54, Series A no. 233; Ekinci and Akalın v. Turkey , no. 77097/01, §   47, 30 January 2007 and Eylem Kaya v. Turkey , no. 26623/07, § 61, 13   December 2016)?