CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 8 octobre 2008

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sDB9EB187 { font-weight:bold } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s87C74EA6 { font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s7F74B77E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; font-size:12pt } .sF8AEFD1F { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s5B629078 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:36pt; font-size:12pt } .s4894483B { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sFB5BB313 { width:29.88pt; display:inline-block } .sE3D66594 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s4D3D443E { height:3.45pt } .s41E9DBF5 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s24AC208E { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF004B676 { border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB30C44B0 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sC3AB69A { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2342A031 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s546C9D04 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s40B7A780 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4F2EDFF { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s49A78FE0 { width:26.55pt; display:inline-block } .sF66F4DA4 { width:23.21pt; display:inline-block } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s23ADBB69 { font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } Resolution CM/ResDH(2008)83 [1] Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Sertkaya and 9 other cases against Turkey   (See details in Appendix)     The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);   Having regard to the judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee once they had become final;   Recalling that the violations of the Convention found by the Court in these cases concern the excessive length of criminal proceedings before state security courts (violation of Article 6§1) (see details in Appendix);   Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with Turkey’s obligation under Article   46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgments;   Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee’s Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;   Having satisfied itself that, the respondent state paid the applicants the just satisfaction provided in the judgments (see details in Appendix),   Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded in the judgments, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate, of - individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum ; and   - general measures preventing, similar violations;     DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state to that effect (see Appendix), that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases and   DECIDES to close the examination of these cases.         Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2008)83   Information about the measures taken to comply with the judgments in the cases of Sertkaya and 9 other cases against Turkey     Introductory case summary   These cases concern the excessive length of criminal proceedings before state security courts (violation of Article 6§1).     I.   Payments of just satisfaction and individual measures   a) Details for each case Name and application number Date of judgment Final on Pecuniary damage Non-pecuniary damage Costs and expenses Paid on 77113/01 Sertkaya 22/06/2006 22/09/2006   3   420 EUR 1   500 EUR 08/12/2006 35073/97 Başlık and others 20/04/2006 20/07/2006 No just satisfaction 40530/98 Aydoğan 22/12/2005 22/03/2006   6   000 EUR   21/06/2006 69124/01 Hikmedin Yildiz 19/10/2006 19/01/2007   3   500 EUR 1   000 EUR 19/04/2007 75694/01 Kondu 23/01/2007 23/04/2007 4   000 EUR pecuniary + non-pecuniary damage 1   000 EUR 20/07/2007 497/02 Çitikbel 04/10/2005 04/01/2006   3   000 EUR 1   000 EUR 31/03/2006 4415/02 Osman 19/12/2006 19/03/2007   4   500 EUR 1   000 EUR 19/06/2007 8147/02 Sakçi 16/01/2007 16/04/2007 No just satisfaction 18342/02 Özkan and Adibelli 09/01/2007 09/04/2007   7   200 EUR 1   500 EUR 02/07/2007 39863/02 Yavuz and Osman 19/12/2006 19/03/2007 No just satisfaction   b) Individual measures   The proceedings are ended in all cases.     II.   General measures   State security courts were abolished following the constitutional amendments of May 2004 (Article No.   143 Constitution). The jurisdiction of these courts was transferred to the Assize Courts by virtue of Law No. 5190 concerning the modification of the Code of Criminal Procedure and abolition of state security courts (Article 394/a).     III.   Conclusions of the respondent state   The government considers that the measures taken will prevent new, similar violations and that Turkey has thus complied with its obligations under Article   46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.     [1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 8 October 2008 at the 1035th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies