CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 20 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 } .s2E302ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:14pt } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .sEC2C3242 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 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 } .s6CDC6B81 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } Published on 11 December 2023   SECOND SECTION Application no. 10410/20 Levent BAYRAM against Türkiye and 5 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 20 November 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. 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, within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention, on account of the impugned restrictions on weekend visits (see Subaşı and Others v.   Türkiye , nos.   3468/20 and 18   others, §§   77-79, 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)?     ANNEX List of applications   No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Represented by 1. 10410/20 Bayram v. Türkiye 04/02/2020 Levent BAYRAM 1973 Ülkü BAYRAM (not lawyer) 2. 21237/20 Demir v. Türkiye 29/04/2020 Selçuk DEMİR 1980   3. 33063/20 Ayar v. Türkiye 09/06/2020 Adem AYAR 1979   4. 33175/20 Hazar v. Türkiye 24/07/2020 Halil HAZAR 1983   5. 34920/20 Patırgan v. Türkiye 27/07/2020 Uğur PATIRGAN 1977   6. 38022/20 Bulut v. Türkiye 04/08/2020 Ahmet BULUT 1980