CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 21 mars 2024

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s65B66A85 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s2D3BC823 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } Legal summary January 2026 Kavala v. Türkiye (No. 2) (relinquishment) - 2170/24   Article 3 Degrading treatment Torture Applicant’s detention after the Court’s judgment of 10   December 2019 in Kavala v.   Turkey and his sentence of aggravated life imprisonment: relinquishment in favour of the Grand Chamber Article 5 Article 5-1 Lawful arrest or detention Article 5-4 Speediness of review Applicant’s detention after the Court’s judgment of 10   December 2019 in Kavala v.   Turkey and the criminal proceedings in which he was sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment: relinquishment in favour of the Grand Chamber Article 6 Civil proceedings Criminal proceedings Article 6-2 Presumption of innocence Article 6-3 Rights of defence Article 6-3-d Examination of witnesses Fairness of the criminal proceedings in which the applicant was sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment: relinquishment in favour of the Grand Chamber Article 7 Article 7-1 Nulla poena sine lege Nullum crimen sine lege Applicant’s conviction for attempting “by force and violence to overthrow the Government of the Republic of Türkiye or to prevent it, in whole or in part, from carrying out its duties” and sentence to aggravated life imprisonment: relinquishment in favour of the Grand Chamber Article 10 Article 10-1 Freedom of expression Applicant’s detention after the Court’s judgment of 10   December 2019 in Kavala v.   Turkey and the criminal proceedings in which he was sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment: relinquishment in favour of the Grand Chamber Article 11 Article 11-1 Freedom of peaceful assembly Applicant’s detention after the Court’s judgment of 10   December 2019 in Kavala v.   Turkey and the criminal proceedings in which he was sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment: relinquishment in favour of the Grand Chamber Article 18 Restrictions for unauthorised purposes Applicant’s detention after the Court’s judgment of 10   December 2019 in Kavala v.   Turkey and the criminal proceedings in which he was sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment: relinquishment in favour of the Grand Chamber The applicant has been deprived of his liberty since 18   October 2017. The application concerns his detention after the Court’s judgment of 10   December 2019 in Kavala v.   Turkey (no.   28749/18) and the criminal proceedings in which he was sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment. In that judgment the Court found a violation of Article   5 §   1 and of Article   18 taken together with that provision, on the ground that the applicant’s pre-trial detention had not been justified by any “reasonable suspicion” but on the mere exercise of Convention rights or normal activism on the part of a human-rights defender and that it had pursued the ulterior purpose of silencing him. The Court also held that, having regard to the total duration of the Constitutional Court’s review of legality in the context of the first individual application (namely, one year, five months and twenty-nine days) and to what was at stake for the applicant, the proceedings by which the Turkish Constitutional Court had ruled on the lawfulness of his pre-trial detention could not be considered compatible with the “speediness” requirement of Article   5 §   4. Lastly, the Court held under Article 46 that the respondent State had to take every measure to put an end to the applicant’s “detention and to secure his immediate release”. As the applicant had not been released, in February 2022, the Committee of Ministers referred to the Court, in accordance with Article   46 §   4, the question whether the Republic of Türkiye had failed to abide by the above judgment . In its judgment of 11   July 2022 in the infringement proceedings ( Kavala v.   Türkiye (infringement proceedings), no.   28749/18), the Court found that Türkiye had failed to fulfil its obligation under Article   46 §   1 to abide by its judgment of 10   December 2019. In the present application the applicant complains under Article   5 §   1 that his detention since the Court’s judgment of 10   December 2019 amounted to an arbitrary deprivation of liberty. Relying on Article   5 §   4, he complains that the proceedings brought before the Constitutional Court with a view to challenging the lawfulness of his pre-trial detention were not conducted in compliance with Convention requirements. The applicant further complains under Article   6 §   1 that he was not heard by an “impartial” and “independent” tribunal within the meaning of that provision. He also complains under Article   6 §   2 of a breach of the principle of the presumption of innocence and under Article   6 §§   1 and   3 (d) that during the criminal proceedings against him he was denied a fair trial and that his defence rights were infringed. Moreover, the applicant alleges that his conviction was not in keeping with the principles of lawfulness and foreseeability enshrined in Article   7. Relying on Articles   10 and   11, he complains that his detention and conviction amount to an unjustified interference with his right to freedom of expression and association. Relying on Article   18, taken in conjunction with all the above provisions, the applicant complains that his Convention rights were restricted for purposes other than those prescribed in the Convention. Lastly, the applicant complains of a breach of Article   3 with regard to his detention which he claims is excessively long, arbitrary and unlawful, as well as in relation to the absence of any possibility to review his life sentence. On 16   December 2025 a Chamber of the Court relinquished jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber. (See Kavala v.   Turkey , 28749/18, 10   December 2019, Legal Summary ; Kavala v.   Türkiye (infringement proceedings) [GC], 28749/18, 11   July 2022, Legal Summary )   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. To access legal summaries in English or French click here . For non-official translations into other languages click here .