CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 21 novembre 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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .s1DE04B9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sD227234A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .sEC2CB098 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } Published on 11 December 2023   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 36916/19 M.A. against Türkiye lodged on 11 July 2019 communicated on 21 November 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant is a Syrian national who entered Türkiye on 8   December 2015. On 17 January 2016 he was taken into custody in connection with a criminal investigation into the ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham). On 19   January 2016 a decision was taken for his deportation from Türkiye for reasons of public security and he was placed in administrative detention in the Kumkapı Foreigners’ Removal Centre. On 11 May 2016, the applicant was transferred to the Gaziantep Foreigners’ Removal Centre where he stayed until his deportation to Sudan on 12 January 2017. The application concerns the alleged breaches of Article 3, Article   5   §§   1, 2, 4 and 5, Article 8 and Article 13 of the Convention on account of the applicant’s detention at the Kumkapı and Gaziantep Foreigners’ Removal Centres, as well as the conditions of detention at the Gaziantep Foreigners’ Removal Centre pending the expulsion proceedings. The applicant relies on Article 3, Article 5 §§ 1, 2, 4 and 5, Article 8 and Article   13 of the Convention.         QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES Regarding the conditions of detention at the Gaziantep Foreigners’ Removal Centre: 1.     Were the conditions of the applicant’s detention at the Gaziantep Foreigners’ Removal Centre compatible with Article 3 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis , Yarashonen v. Turkey , no. 72710/11, §§   51-91, 24   June 2014; Erkenov v. Turkey , no. 18152/11, §§ 26-42, 6   September 2016; G.B. and Others v. Turkey , no. 4633/15, §§ 114-117, 17 October 2019)?   2.     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 on account of the restrictions imposed on his telephone contact with his lawyer and family members, and the allegedly inadequate conditions of his detention, in particular, the alleged lack of outdoor exercise and access to open air (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; Ananyev and Others v. Russia , nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§   150-155, 10   January 2012)?   3.     Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy for his complaints under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention, as required by Article   13 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis , G.B. and Others v.   Turkey , cited above, §§ 118-138, and the cases cited therein)? Regarding the applicant’s administrative detention at the Kumkapı and Gaziantep Foreigners’ Removal Centres:   4.     (a)     Did the applicant’s detention comply with the requirements of Article   5   § 1 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis , A. and Others v.   the United Kingdom [GC], no. 3455/05, § 164, ECHR 2009, and the cases cited therein)?   (b)     Regarding the applicant’s complaint that he had been detained despite the absence of any official decision ordering/extending his deprivation of liberty at the Kumkapı Removal Centre, has there been a violation of Article   5 §   1 of the Convention on account of the applicant’s detention between 19   March and 18 April 2016?   5.     Was the applicant informed promptly of the reasons for his detention as required by Article 5 § 2 of the Convention (see, for example, Khlaifia and Others v. Italy [GC], no. 16483/12, § 115, 15 December 2016)?   6.     Did the applicant have at his disposal a remedy by which he could challenge the lawfulness of his deprivation of liberty, as required by Article   5 §   4 of the Convention (see, for example, A.M. v. France , no.   56324/13, §§   40 ‑ 41, 12 July 2016, and G.B. and Others v. Turkey , no.   4633/15, §§   156 ‑ 188, 17 October 2019)?   7.     Did the applicant have an effective and enforceable right to compensation for his detention in alleged contravention of Article 5 §§ 1, 2 and 4, as required by Article 5 § 5 of the Convention?   The Government are invited to submit information and supporting documents on the conditions at the Gaziantep Foreigners’ Removal Centre, in particular the size and the capacity of the rooms where the applicant was held and the number of occupants held in those rooms between 11 May 2016 and 12 January 2017.   The Government are also invited to submit all documents relating to the applicant’s detention.   The parties are requested to submit, within the same time-limit, reports or information documents regarding the conditions of detention at the Gaziantep Removal Centre from reliable sources.