CEDH · PRESS;GENERAL;ENG — 3 juin 2004

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s5FFF0A77 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:1pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sE208486F { font-family:Arial; color:#ff0000 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s61E420C2 { font-family:Arial; font-variant:small-caps } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s69BE285C { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:85.05pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-85.05pt } .s9A223E1B { width:11.03pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s595A57E4 { width:85.05pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sA8C2B9B0 { width:20.37pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s9F8EB0C0 { width:18.63pt; display:inline-block } .s9E97F54A { width:85.05pt; display:inline-block } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 }   EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   278 3.6.2004   Press release issued by the Registrar   CHAMBER HEARING TAŞKIN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY     The European Court of Human Rights is holding a Chamber hearing today, Thursday 3 June 2004 at 9.30 a.m., on the merits in the case of Taşkın and Others v. Turkey (application no.   46117/99).   The applicants   The case concerns an application brought by ten Turkish citizens living in Bergama (Turkey). One of them, Sefa Taşkın, used to be the mayor of that town.   Summary of the facts   On 12 February 1992 the company E.M. Eurogold Madencilik (subsequently re-named Normandy Madencilik A.Ş) was issued with a 10-year permit to operate a gold mine in the district of Bergama. On 19 October 1994, in accordance with the legislation in force, the Ministry of the Environment approved the use of sodium cyanide in mining operations on the basis of an environmental impact report.   On 8 November 1994 some inhabitants of Bergama, including the applicants, sought to have the decision of the Ministry of the Environment annulled on grounds of the dangers inherent in the cyanide process used by the mining company, the health risks involved, the risks of polluting the ground water and the destruction of the local ecosystem. They lost their case in the Izmir Administrative Court, but succeeded before the Supreme Administrative Court, which, on 13   May 1997, held that the safety measures implemented by the mining company did not suffice to eliminate the risks involved in such an activity. On 15 October 1997 the Izmir Administrative Court annulled the decision to allow the mining operations in accordance with the Supreme Administrative Court’s judgment.   In February 1998 the gold mine commenced its activities for an experimental three-day period. Three tons of cyanide were stored at the site of the mine. Production was halted at the request of the Izmir Provincial Authority.   Between 1998 and 1999 the mining company sought an operating permit from various ministries and took additional measures to ensure better safety in the mining operations. In March 1999 the prime minister instructed the Turkish Institute of Scientific and Technical Research (the TÜBİTAK) to prepare a report assessing the potential impact of using cyanide in the mining operations. The report concluded that the risks had been completely removed or reduced to a level below the acceptable limits.   On 5 April 2000 the prime minister’s office drew up a report concluding that the gold mine could be allowed to operate. Between October 2000 and January 2001 the Forestry Commission, the Ministry of Health and Ministry of the Environment successively granted permits or extensions of permits on the basis of the TÜBİTAK’s report. On 13 April 2001 the mining company started its mining operations.   Some inhabitants of Bergama, including the applicants, brought an action in the administrative courts to have the permits granted by each of the ministries revoked and succeeded in having them deferred. Other proceedings are currently pending before the administrative courts. However, on 29 March 2002 the Council of Ministers adopted a “decision of principle” allowing the mining company to continue its activities.   Complaints   Relying on Article 2 (right to life) and Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights, the applicants complain of the authorities’ decision to issue a licence permitting the use of sodium cyanide and of the long-term risks incurred in storing 18 tons of cyanide. Relying on Article 6 (right to a fair hearing) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy), the applicants submit that the refusal by the administrative authorities to comply with the administrative courts' decisions infringes their right to effective judicial protection. Despite the annulment of the decision to allow the mining operations, the gold mine has not been closed; neither has it ceased its drilling and mining operations.   Procedure   The application was lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 25 September 1998 and transmitted to the Court on 1 November 1998. It was declared partly admissible on 29 January 2004.   Composition of the Court   The case will be heard by a Chamber composed as follows:   Georg Ress (German), President , Ireneu Cabral Barreto (Portuguese), Lucius Caflisch (Swiss) [1] , Riza Türmen (Turkish), Boštjan Zupančič (Slovenian), Hanne Sophie Greve (Norwegian), Kristaq Traja (Albanian), judges , John Hedigan (Irish) , Alvina Gyulumyan (Armenian) , substitute judges , and also Vincent Berger , Section Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Government :   Münci Özmen , Agent ,   Burçe Arı,   Didem Kilislioğlu,   Havva Denge Akal,   Derin Orhon,   Mustafa Çolakoğlu,   Jale Kalay,   Ahmet Oğuz,   Sevgi Şafak , Counsel.   Applicants :   Mehmet Nur Terzi , Counsel .   Noyan Özkan,   Uğur Kalelioğlu ,   İbrahim Arzuk ,   Serkan Cengiz , Advisers.     After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private. A judgment will be delivered at a later date.   ***   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Press contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 24 92)   Emma Hellyer (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 15)   Stéphanie Klein (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 21 54) Fax: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. Since 1 November 1998 it has sat as a full-time Court composed of an equal number of judges to that of the States party to the Convention. The Court examines the admissibility and merits of applications submitted to it. It sits in Chambers of 7 judges or, in exceptional cases, as a Grand Chamber of 17 judges. The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe supervises the execution of the Court’s judgments. More detailed information about the Court and its activities can be found on its Internet site. [1] Judge elected in respect of Liechtenstein.