CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 octobre 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sD49F5E1D { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:21.85pt; text-align:justify } Published on 3 November 2025   SECOND SECTION Application no. 50428/20 Nizamettin ERTEKİN against Türkiye lodged on 30 October 2020 communicated on 13 October 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the State authorities’ disbursement of the applicant’s retirement bonus for his term of service exceeding thirty years while being affiliated to the Retirement Fund ( Emekli Sandığı ) and the loss in value of this amount due to monetary depreciation. The applicant retired in 1996 after completing 36 years and 11 months of service during which he was affiliated to the Retirement Fund. He was paid a retirement bonus pursuant to Article 89 of Law No. 5434, as in force at the time, which provided that civil servants’ periods of service beyond thirty years would not be taken into account in calculating the retirement bonus. In   2014, this provision was repealed by the Turkish Constitutional Court. Subsequently, the applicant submitted a request to the Social Security Institution (SSI) for payment of a retirement bonus corresponding to his service exceeding thirty years. Following the rejection of his request by the SSI, the applicant brought an action before the administrative courts, seeking the annulment of the administrative decision, and claiming a retirement bonus for his service exceeding thirty years, together with interest to compensate for the loss in value of his claim. The domestic courts partially accepted the applicant’s claim and annulled the administrative decision rejecting his requests, but did not make an adjustment for the loss in value of his claim. The applicant was subsequently paid retirement bonuses calculated on the basis of the “coefficients applicable on the date of his retirement”, together with statutory interest accruing from the date of his application to the SSI. In this regard, in 2017, he received a payment of 104.43 Turkish Liras (TRY) in respect of his retirement bonus, along with TRY 8.11 in statutory interest, amounting to a total of TRY   112.54 (equivalent to 28.27 euros (EUR) at that time). The applicant complained before the Turkish Constitutional Court of the loss in value of his retirement bonus due to the high inflation rates between the date of his retirement and the date of payment of the bonus and the domestic courts’ failure to adjust the amount on the basis of the inflation rates. On 3 September 2020 the Turkish Constitutional Court rejected his individual application with reference to its case-law in the Hikmet   Kuleci decision (application no. 2018/5145, 28 November 2018), in which it held that calculating retirement bonuses for service exceeding thirty years according to the regulations in force at the date of retirement was not arbitrary, and thus the amount paid to the applicant did not disclose a breach of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. The court, however, made no assessment regarding the loss in value of the applicant’s claim resulting from inflation. The applicant argues before the Court, under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, that the State authorities’ failure to address the loss in value of his retirement bonus as a result of high inflation between the date of his retirement and the date of payment of his bonus resulted in a violation of his right to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. In this connection, he further submits that, although the administrative courts retroactively recognised his entitlement to a retirement bonus for his service exceeding thirty years, his request for the adjustment of the payment in line with present-day monetary values was dismissed, which, in his view, rendered the decision ineffective and constituted a manifest error in the application and interpretation of domestic law.       QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol   No.   1 to the Convention, on account of the loss in value of his retirement bonus for his service exceeding thirty years due to monetary depreciation between the date of his retirement and the date of payment of his bonus (see Al and Demirci v. Türkiye , nos. 34280/17 and   71800/17, §§   93 et seq., 10   June 2025)?