CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 mai 2026

.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 } .s417B2516 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s62C3E828 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center } .s707F0445 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .sEC2C3242 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s6CDC6B81 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Published on 1 June 2026   SECOND SECTION Application no. 19263/23 Ömer ATALAR against Türkiye and 7 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 13 May 2026 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications concern disciplinary sanctions imposed on the applicants, civil servants at the material time, on account of their social media posts and/or public statements (for details regarding the nature of and reasons given for the sanctions, see the Appendix). The domestic authorities considered that the impugned posts and statements of the applicants exceeded the boundaries of permissible criticism and that the disciplinary sanctions were appropriate and necessary given the duties incumbent upon the applicants by virtue of their civil servant status. The applicants complained under Article 10 of the Convention that the disciplinary sanctions constituted a breach of their right to freedom of expression. In addition, invoking Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicant in application no.   22311/24 complained about the length of the proceedings before the administrative courts, which lasted more than seven years and three months at two levels of jurisdiction. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES Questions for all applications 1.     Has there been an interference with the applicants’ right to freedom of expression, within the meaning of Article 10 § 1 of the Convention, on account of the disciplinary sanctions imposed upon them?   2.     If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in a democratic society within the meaning of Article   10 § 2 (see, for the general principles, Baka v. Hungary [GC], no.   20261/12, § 162, 23   June 2016)?   3.     In particular, having regard to the content of the applicants’ impugned posts and statements, the context in which they were expressed, and the circumstances of each case, did the national courts, in their decisions, carry out a sufficient examination and a proper balancing of the interests at stake in the light of the criteria set out by the Court in cases concerning freedom of expression ( Kula v. Turkey , no. 20233/06, §§ 44-52, 19   June 2018)? Additional questions for application no. 22311/24 4.     Did the applicant exhaust domestic remedies, as required by Article   35   § 1 of the Convention, as regards his complaint about the length of the proceedings?   5.     If domestic remedies were exhausted, were the judicial proceedings brought by the applicant challenging his dismissal concluded within a “reasonable time” in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention ( see   Frydlender v. France [GC], no.   30979/96, § 43, ECHR   2000-VII; Ümmühan Kaplan v.   Turkey , no.   24240/07, §   45, 20   March 2012; and Polyakh and Others v.   Ukraine , nos.   58812/15 and 4 others, §§ 171-93, 17   October 2019)?       APPENDIX No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by Sanctions Imposed   Alleged acts for which sanctions were imposed 1. 19263/23 Atalar v.   Türkiye 20/04/2023 Ömer ATALAR 1972 Ankara Turkish Kerem ALTIPARMAK Suspension of grade advancement for three years Sharing and reposting political content on his social media account 2. 19865/23 Aktaş v.   Türkiye 18/04/2023 Hatice Deniz AKTAŞ 1983 Gaziantep Turkish Bedia BORAN BULUT Dismissal from civil service   Posts on social media, re-postings of news by national and regional media outlets, concerning “Hendek Operations”   3. 37462/23 Çavuşoğlu v. Türkiye 06/09/2023 Hamit ÇAVUŞOĞLU 1972 Ankara Turkish   1/30 of salary deduction Alleged defamatory statements made against the then Prime Minister   4. 5272/24 Ok v.   Türkiye 31/01/2024 Serap OK 1975 Şırnak Turkish Bedia BORAN BULUT Suspension of grade advancement for one year Wearing attire during the “Newruz” celebrations, considered to symbolise the PKK and posting photographs in such clothing on Facebook     5. 5273/24 Kaplan v.   Türkiye 31/01/2024 Nizam KAPLAN 1977 Şırnak Turkish Bedia BORAN BULUT Suspension of grade advancement for one year Wearing attire during the “Newruz” celebrations, considered to symbolise the PKK and posting photographs in such clothing on Facebook 6. 22311/24 Üzümcü v.   Türkiye 29/07/2024 Levent ÜZÜMCÜ 1972 Istanbul Turkish Pınar GÜRSOY KILINÇ Dismissal from civil service   Alleged defamatory statements made against the then Prime Minister, insulting a part of the population 7. 10122/25 Kara v.   Türkiye 10/03/2025 Mehmet KARA 1985 Şırnak Turkish Gürgin BABAT Dismissal from civil service Sharing and reposting political content on his social media account 8. 11898/25 Kaval v.   Türkiye 21/03/2025 Halil İbrahim KAVAL 1985 Diyarabakır Turkish Öztürk TÜRKDOĞAN Dismissal from civil service Sharing and reposting political content on his social media account