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 } .s83BE5C30 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .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 } .sFA23A319 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:11pt } Published on 1 June 2026   SECOND SECTION Application no. 10937/23 Hasan SAĞIR against Türkiye and 14 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 13 May 2026 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications concern the alleged unfairness of criminal proceedings and punishments without law applied against certain members of the Armed Forces for their alleged involvement in the attempted coup on the night of 15   July 2016 on account of their acts in Kars, a city in the east of Türkiye. All the applicants were, at the material time, serving with various low ranks in the 1 st Tank Battalion, in the 14 th Mechanised Infantry Battalion Command in Kars. The trial court initially acquitted some of the applicants and imposed no penalties on the others. The judgments were subsequently quashed on appeal, and the applicants were convicted of aiding and abetting an attempt to subvert the constitutional order under Articles 309 § 1 and 39 of the Criminal Code. They were sentenced to terms of imprisonment of either thirteen years and four months or twelve years and six months. On various dates the applicants lodged several applications with the Constitutional Court, which ultimately declared them inadmissible in summary decisions. The applicants complain, under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, of the domestic courts’ failure to provide sufficient reasons in their judgments. They further complain, under Article 7 of the Convention, that their convictions were incompatible with the requirements of that provision in that the domestic courts had failed to duly establish the constituent elements of Articles   309 §   1 and 39 of the Criminal Code. The applicants in applications nos.   10937/23 and 11015/23 further complain that their right of access to a court under Article   6 §   1 of the Convention was breached in that the Constitutional Court did not examine their complaints under Article 7 of the Convention with reference to the provisions under which they had been convicted. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the applicants have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against them, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, did the domestic courts provide sufficient reasons for their decision to convict the applicants of aiding and abetting an attempt to subvert the constitutional order under Articles 309 § 1 and 39 of the Criminal Code (see, for the relevant principles, Moreira Ferreira v.   Portugal (no. 2) [GC], no.   19867/12, §§ 83 and 84, 11   July 2017, and Ayetullah   Ay v.   Turkey , nos.   29084/07 and 1191/08, §§   127-28 and 191, 27   October 2020)?   2.     Were the applicants’ convictions for aiding and abetting an attempt to subvert the constitutional order compatible with the requirements of Article   7 of the Convention? In particular:   What are the elements of the offence of attempting to subvert the constitutional order set out in Article 309 § 1 of the Criminal Code, and of aiding and abetting in Article 39 of the Criminal Code, and were those elements present in the applicants’ cases? In particular, did the domestic courts duly establish whether the mental element of the relevant offence, as laid down in the case-law of the Court of Cassation, had materialised in the applicants’ cases, as required by Article 7 of the Convention (see, for instance, G.I.E.M. S.R.L. and Others v.   Italy   [GC], nos.   1828/06 and 2 others, §§   242 and 246, 28   June 2018, and K.-H.W. v.   Germany ([GC], no.   37201/97, §   45, ECHR   2001 ‑ II (extracts))?   3.     In respect of applications nos.   10937/23 and 11015/23, did the Constitutional Court’s allegedly erroneous assessment of the applicants’ complaints under Article 7 of the Convention breach their right of access to a court under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see, for the general principles, Zubac v. Croatia [GC], no. 40160/12, §§ 76-79, 5 April 2018)?   APPENDIX No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by 1. 10937/23 Sağır v. Türkiye 16/02/2023 Hasan SAĞIR 1980 Turkish Yakup Çağrı ARISOY 2. 11015/23 Bayram v. Türkiye 16/02/2023 Özgür BAYRAM 1980 Turkish Yakup Çağrı ARISOY 3. 11182/23 Arpaku v. Türkiye 16/02/2023 Mustafa Rauf ARPAKU 1979 Turkish Yakup Çağrı ARISOY 4. 11872/23 Arslan v. Türkiye 01/03/2023 Murat ARSLAN 1980 Turkish Yakup Çağrı ARISOY 5. 11877/23 Yılmaz v. Türkiye 21/02/2023 Serdar YILMAZ 1977 Turkish Yakup Çağrı ARISOY 6. 11888/23 Çolak v. Türkiye 21/02/2023 Yunus ÇOLAK 1988 Turkish Yakup Çağrı ARISOY 7. 11972/23 Taşkıran v. Türkiye 21/02/2023 Lokman Murat TAŞKIRAN 1992 Turkish Yakup Çağrı ARISOY 8. 11979/23 Eşmeli v. Türkiye 21/02/2023 Özcan EŞMELİ 1982 Turkish Yakup Çağrı ARISOY 9. 11990/23 Pehlivan v. Türkiye 21/02/2023 Volkan PEHLİVAN 1978 Turkish Yakup Çağrı ARISOY 10. 12023/23 Erişken v. Türkiye 21/02/2023 Mustafa ERİŞKEN 1990 Turkish Yakup Çağrı ARISOY 11. 12389/23 Bayraktepe v. Türkiye 21/02/2023 Hakan BAYRAKTEPE 1979 Turkish Yakup Çağrı ARISOY 12. 13737/23 Güngör v. Türkiye 15/02/2023 Yener GÜNGÖR 1980 Turkish Yakup Çağrı ARISOY 13. 14542/23 Zıngıl v. Türkiye 21/02/2023 Serkan ZINGIL 1978 Turkish Yakup Çağrı ARISOY 14. 24382/23 Arık v. Türkiye 02/06/2023 Yasin ARIK 1985 Turkish Emir Tunahan CENİK 15. 18092/24 Çiçek v. Türkiye 11/06/2024 Zeki ÇİÇEK 1989 Turkish Önder ALKURT