CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 28 juin 2023

.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 } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s65E06E64 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s943D4F93 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-indent:21.8pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Published on 17 July 2023   SECOND SECTION Application no. 22188/19 Bayram Ali KARABÜBER against Türkiye and 5 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 28 June 2023   SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications concern the refusal of the domestic authorities to grant the applicants, who were detained at the time of the events, permission to receive visits from their school-age children during the weekends. Application no. 15504/20 also concerns the authorities’ refusal to allow telephone calls at weekends. The applicants complain of a violation of their rights under Article 8 of the Convention.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been an interference with the applicants’ right to respect for their private and family life and correspondence, within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention, on account of the impugned restrictions on weekend visits and telephone calls (see Subaşı and Others v.   Türkiye , nos.   3468/20 and 18   others, §§ 77-79 and 105, 6 December 2022)? 2.     If so, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article 8 § 2 of the Convention? In particular, did the domestic authorities make a concrete assessment of the applicants’ needs and engage with their complaints in accordance with the guarantees inherent in Article 8 of the Convention (ibid., §§ 80-93 and 106‑09)?     No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Represented by 1. 22188/19 Karabüber v. Türkiye 15/04/2019 Bayram Ali KARABÜBER 1980   2. 23977/19 Atça v. Türkiye 27/04/2019 Zekeriya ATÇA 1980   3. 5855/20 Akpınar v. Türkiye 31/12/2019 Yusuf Ziya AKPINAR 1977 Türkan AKPINAR (not lawyer) 4. 8741/20 Baykuş v. Türkiye 16/01/2020 Göksel BAYKUŞ 1970   5. 13773/20 Küçüka v. Türkiye 07/02/2020 Ender KÜÇÜKA 1982   6. 15504/20 Eroğlu v. Türkiye 11/03/2020 Fatih EROĞLU 1975