CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 juin 2024

.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 } .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 } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .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 } .sEDC5336B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } Published on 1 July 2024   SECOND SECTION Application no. 37479/18 Veysel KAPLAN against Türkiye and 22 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 13 June 2024   SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE All the applications listed below (see appendix) concern the refusal of prison authorities to send or deliver the applicants’ correspondence, and in some cases, their censorship of it. The prison authorities based their decisions on Section 68 § 3 of Law no. 5275 on the enforcement of sentences and preventive measures as well as Sections 91 § 3 and 123 § 1 of the Regulation on the management of prisons and the execution of sentences and preventive measures. These provisions allow the prison authorities to monitor, censor, and withhold incoming and outgoing correspondence of prisoners if it is deemed objectionable or a threat to prison order and security, targets officials, enables intra-organisational communication, contains false or misleading information, or includes threats or insults. The authorities’ decisions are subject to review by judicial bodies. Relying on Article 8 of the Convention, the applicants complain of an infringement of their right to respect for their correspondence due to the decisions made by the prison authorities.       QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES Has there been an interference with the applicants’ right to respect for their correspondence, within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention, by the interception or censorship of the letters to be sent by them, or to be delivered to them, by the prison authorities? If so, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article 8   §   2? In particular, did the national authorities carry out a sufficient examination and adequate balancing of the applicants’ right to respect for their correspondence and other interests at stake in the light of the criteria set out and applied by the Court in similar cases ( Halit Kara v.   Türkiye , no.   60846/19, §§ 51-59, 12 December 2023)?     APPENDIX   No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by 1. 37479/18 Kaplan v. Türkiye 20/03/2018 Veysel KAPLAN 1974 Kocaeli Turkish   2. 35099/19 Abi v. Türkiye 30/04/2019 Ebedin ABİ 1970 Bünyan Turkish Sinem COŞKUN 3. 11228/20 Tezel v. Türkiye 20/05/2020 Hakan TEZEL 1969 Manisa Turkish   4. 24415/20 Yiğit v. Türkiye 01/06/2020 Kemal YİĞİT 1982 Rize Turkish Esin ASLAN 5. 29798/20 Kaya v. Türkiye 02/07/2020 Musa KAYA 1973 Balıkesir Turkish   6. 33411/20 Oktay v. Türkiye 17/07/2020 Adem OKTAY 1991 Karabük Turkish   7. 1985/21 Bayna v. Türkiye 21/12/2020 Ahmet BAYNA 1993 Karabük Turkish Sevil ARACI 8. 6988/21 Çağırıcı v. Türkiye 25/12/2020 Mikail ÇAĞIRICI 1984 Kocaeli Turkish   9. 7142/21 Yıldız v. Türkiye 31/12/2020 Eren YILDIZ 1973 Antalya Turkish Gülizar TUNCER 10. 15760/21 İncedere v. Türkiye 10/03/2021 Suat İNCEDERE 1971 Edirne Turkish   11. 18440/21 Polat v. Türkiye 25/03/2021 Gökhan POLAT 1990 Kayseri Turkish   12. 18442/21 Dayan v. Türkiye 19/03/2021 Sabah DAYAN 1995 Kırıkkale Turkish   13. 20130/21 Barsak v. Türkiye 06/04/2021 Hüseyin BARSAK 1982 Bolu Turkish   14. 21889/21 Arpacı v. Türkiye 01/04/2021 İsmail ARPACI 1982 Elazığ Turkish   15. 29271/21 Yılmaz v. Türkiye 20/05/2021 Uğur YILMAZ 1991 Bitlis Turkish   16. 32450/21 Yaprak v. Türkiye 09/06/2021 Ömer Faruk YAPRAK 1994 Şanlıurfa Turkish   17. 36815/21 Laçin v. Türkiye 05/07/2021 Tahir LAÇİN 1961 Tekirdağ Turkish Faruk Nafiz ERTEKİN 18. 40786/21 Özalp v. Türkiye 05/08/2021 Roger Tirej ÖZALP 1963 Tekirdağ Turkish Mahmut EROL 19. 41424/21 Yılmaz v. Türkiye 30/07/2021 Özgür YILMAZ 1974 Tekirdağ Turkish   20. 51542/21 Laçin v. Türkiye 22/09/2021 Tahir LAÇİN 1961 Tekirdağ Turkish Faruk Nafiz ERTEKİN 21. 60974/21 Yılmaz v. Türkiye 19/11/2021 Özgür YILMAZ 1974 Tekirdağ Turkish   22. 36991/22 Karagöz v. Türkiye 07/07/2022 Veli KARAGÖZ 1972 Elazığ Turkish Burak ÇOLAK 23. 40444/22 Kahveci v. Türkiye 05/08/2022 Aydın KAHVECİ 1981 Kocaeli Turkish Cahit ÇIFTÇI