CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 31 mars 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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } Published on 22 April 2025   SECOND SECTION Application no. 965/21 Mahmut ÖNGÖR against Türkiye lodged on 17 December 2020 communicated on 31 March 2025   SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s alleged ill-treatment. The   applicant, who was in pre-trial detention on suspicion of membership of an armed terror organisation, was brought to the Şanlıurfa Counter-Terrorism Department on 28 November 2017 for further questioning by the police. The applicant remained in the police station until 8 December 2017, when he was brought back to the prison. By petitions of 30 November and 3 December 2017, the applicant filed a criminal complaint with the Şanlıurfa Public Prosecutor’s Office, claiming that he had been left naked, blindfolded and handcuffed behind his back, and subjected to means of torture such as electric shocks, falaka (beating on the soles of the feet) and beatings. A medical report drawn up at the Şanlıurfa Forensic Medicine Institute on 8   December 2017 noted several ecchymoses, abrasions and bruises across the applicant’s body, including on both arms, wrists, neck and back. On 22 June 2020 the applicant submitted an individual application to the Constitutional Court, claiming that he was subjected to ill-treatment by State agents and that the authorities failed to conduct an effective investigation into his claims, as the investigation was pending for more than two years. On   2   November 2020 the Constitutional Court found his application inadmissible as manifestly ill-founded. On 17 December 2020 the applicant lodged the present application with the Court. Subsequently, on 2 November 2021 he was notified of the Public Prosecutor’s decision of non-prosecution dated 11 December 2020. In the decision, the Public Prosecutor referred to a video analysis report, drawn up by police officers, which stated that the examination of the CCTV footage had shown that the applicant had injured himself in the police station. He concluded therefore that there was not sufficient evidence to prosecute the officers. The applicant’s objection to that decision was rejected by the Magistrates’ Court. Before the Court, the applicant argues that he was subjected to ill ‑ treatment at the hands of State agents, in violation of the substantive head of Article 3 of the Convention. He further argues under the procedural head of Article 3 and under Article 6 of the Convention that the investigation into his allegations of ill-treatment was ineffective and, in particular, that the Constitutional Court’s decision was insufficiently reasoned.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the applicant exhausted all effective domestic remedies, as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention (see, for the general principles, Communauté genevoise d’action syndicale (CGAS) v. Switzerland [GC], no.   21881/20, §§ 138-43 and 158, 27 November 2023)?   2.     Has the applicant been subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article   3 of the Convention (see Bouyid v.   Belgium [GC], no.   23380/09, §§ 81-90, ECHR 2015, and Salin and Karşin v.   Turkey , no.   44188/09, §§ 60-72, 23 June 2015)?   The Government are invited to submit the medical reports obtained in respect of the applicant between 28 November and 9 December 2017. Furthermore, the Government are invited to submit any medical reports obtained following the applicant’s referral by the Forensic Medicine Institute to Harran University Hospital for further examination.   3.     Having regard to the procedural protection from inhuman or degrading treatment, was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article   3 of the Convention (see Bouyid , cited above, §§ 114-23, and Salin and Karşin , cited above, §§   75-81)?