CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 9 septembre 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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .sDB42E884 { height:83.75pt } .sAC521AF { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sDE044F24 { height:70pt } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sABC34627 { height:69.5pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } Published on 30 September 2024   SECOND SECTION Application no. 9850/22 Fehim İŞBİLİR against Türkiye and 2 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 9 September 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE All the applications listed below (see appendix) concern the criminal conviction of the applicants to prison sentences or a judicial fine combined with a measure of suspension of the pronouncement of the judgment on charges of insulting a public official or insulting the President of the Republic for their acts and statements allegedly relating to the use by them of their freedom of expression. Relying on Article 10 of the Convention, all the applicants complained that their convictions and the subsequent application of a measure of suspension of the pronouncement of the judgment violated their freedom of expression. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES Has there been an interference with the applicants’ right to freedom of expression, within the meaning of Article   10 §   1 of the Convention, due to their conviction to prison sentences or a judicial fine combined with a measure of suspension of the pronouncement of the judgment? If so, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article   10 §   2? Was the measure of the suspension of the pronouncement of the judgment imposed on the applicants prescribed by a legal basis defining the scope and modalities of this measure with sufficient clarity to enable the applicants to enjoy the degree of protection required by the rule of law in a democratic society ( Durukan and Birol v. Türkiye , nos. 14879/20 and 13440/21, §§   58 ‑ 68, 3   October 2023).   APPENDIX No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by Criminal Charges 1. 9850/22 İşbilir v.   Türkiye 25/01/2022 Fehim İŞBİLİR 1977 İzmir Turkish Nezahat PAŞA Insulting the President of the Republic   2. 13876/23 Kurt v.   Türkiye 06/03/2023 Murat KURT 1972 Şanlıurfa Turkish Müslüm BARAN Insulting the President of the Republic   3. 13977/23 Karataş v.   Türkiye 10/03/2023 Adnan KARATAŞ 1996 Adana Turkish Sevil ARACI Insulting a public official