CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 29 janvier 2025

.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 } .s1DE04B9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Published on 17 February 2025   SECOND SECTION Application no. 40627/23 Ramazan YILDIZ against Türkiye lodged on 1 November 2023 communicated on 29 January 2025   SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns, under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention, the alleged unfairness of criminal proceedings against the applicant on account of the Istanbul Regional Court of Appeal’s failure to examine the applicant’s appeal dated 28 August 2020 against his conviction for abuse of official duties. The application further concerns the domestic courts’ failure to address and decide on the applicant’s requests to collect further evidence.         QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charge against him, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, has there been a breach of the principles of equality of arms and adversarial proceedings as a result of the appeal review carried out by the Istanbul Regional Court of Appeal on the basis of the applicant’s short notice of appeal ( süre tutum dilekçesi ), without taking into account his appeal dated 28 August 2020 in which his grounds of appeal were set out? In other words, did the Istanbul Regional Court of Appeal properly examine the applicant’s appeal dated 28 August 2020 (see, for general principles, Yüksel   Yalçınkaya   v. Türkiye [GC], no. 15669/20, § 306, 26   September 2023; Ayetullah   Ay v.   Turkey , nos. 29084/07 and 1191/08, § 127, 27   October 2020; and see also Quadrelli v. Italy , no. 28168/95, §§ 33-34, 11   January 2000)?   2.     Was the domestic courts’ refusal of the applicant’s request to examine defence witnesses and to collect and examine further evidence at the trial compatible with Articles 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention (see   Murtazaliyeva v. Russia [GC], no. 36658/05, §§ 139-68, 18   December 2018)?