CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 9 février 1996

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s23A41E03 { width:36pt; display:inline-block } .s490C142E { width:28.91pt; display:inline-block }    The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),     Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Yagci and Sargin case delivered on 8 June 1995 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;     Recalling that the case originated in two applications (Nos. 16419/90 and 16426/90) against Turkey, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 6 February 1990 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention by Mr Nabi Ya_ci and Mr Nihat Sargin, Turkish nationals, and that the Commission declared admissible the complaints relating to the excessive length of the applicants' detention and of the criminal proceedings brought against them;     Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission on 11 March 1994;     Whereas in its judgment of 8 June 1995 the Court:     - dismissed unanimously the preliminary objection of lack of jurisdiction ratione temporis;     - dismissed unanimously the objection that domestic remedies were not exhausted;     - dismissed unanimously the objection based on loss of victim status;     - held by eight votes to one that there had been a breach of Article 5, paragraph 3 (art. 5-3), of the Convention on account of the length of the applicants' detention;     - held by eight votes to one that there had been a breach of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention on account of the length of the criminal proceedings;     - held by eight votes to one that the respondent state was to pay each of the applicants, within three months, 30 000 French francs in respect of non-pecuniary damage;     - held unanimously that the respondent state was to pay the two applicants jointly, within three months, 38 000 French francs in respect of costs and expenses and 30 000 francs in respect of laywers' fees;     - dismissed unanimously the remainder of the claim for just satisfaction;     Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention;     Having invited the Government of Turkey to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 8 June 1995, having regard to Turkey's obligation under Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention to abide by it;     Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of Turkey gave the Committee information about the measures taken in consequence of the judgment, which information appears in the appendix to this resolution;     Having satisfied itself that on 11 September 1995 the Government of Turkey paid the applicants the sums provided for in the judgment of 8 June 1995,     Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of Turkey, that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this case.     Appendix to Resolution DH (96) 23     Information provided by the Government of Turkey   during the examination of the Ya_ci and Sargin case   by the Committee of Ministers     1.   The offence of making communist propaganda and of being director of an organisation aiming at establishing the domination of one social class, which constituted the principle charges brought against the applicants in the present case, have been abolished by Act 3713 which entered into force on 12 April 1991.   2.   Article 110 of the Code of Judicial Procedure, as amended by Act 3842, which entered into force on 1 December 1992, provides:     "The length of detention during the preliminary investigation cannot exceed six months.   If criminal proceedings are instituted, the length of detention cannot exceed two years, including the detention already imposed.     If no criminal proceedings are instituted or if no judgment is rendered because of particular problems relating to the investigation or the judgment, the detention order is lifted at the expiration of the above time-limits if the maximum sanction risked does not exceed seven years' imprisonment.   In those cases where the sanction risked is equal to or exceeds seven years' imprisonment, or is capital punishment, the decision whether to lift or continue the detention may take into account the motives underlying the detention, the state of the evidence in the case and the accused's personal situation; release may also be ordered after an adequate monetary guarantee has been fixed."   3.   Directly after it received the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in this case, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs transmitted the judgment to the Ministry of Justice with a request that it be communicated to all courts concerned, after being duly translated.     Brief articles dealing with the present judgment have been published in certain private publications.   In addition, Dr Seref Ünal, associate university professor and a high ranking official within the Ministry of Justice, has published an article summarising the Mansur judgment of the Court, which concerns issues similar to those raised in the present case, and which stresses the criteria used by the Court when ascertaining whether or not the length of the detention on remand and the criminal proceedings at issue had a reasonable character.   The article concluded by indicating the main legal and organisational problems raised by the Court's judgment.   The article has been published in the "Constitutional Court's Bulletin", April-July-October 1995 issue, which is distributed to all the courts, the public prosecutors' offices and the bar associations.   The Turkish Government is convinced that the authorities concerned will not fail to adapt their practices to the requirements of the Convention as defined by the Court's judgment.   4.   The Turkish Government considers that the above-mentioned measures comply with the requirements of Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention.