CEDH · PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG — 13 octobre 2005

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .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 } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .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 } .sD3D1773B { width:35.45pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s595A57E4 { width:85.05pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s9DBFFD93 { width:32.12pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s8AD435A6 { width:20.6pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sBF0FE613 { width:36pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sA38DE3C2 { width:1.22pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s7912C836 { width:12.44pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sBAB26A04 { width:23.5pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sFCE9F18B { width:14.45pt; 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   535 13.10.2005   Press release issued by the Registrar   CHAMBER HEARING KAVAKÇI v. TURKEY, FAZILET PARTISI AND KUTAN v. TURKEY, SILAY v. TURKEY and ILICAK v. TURKEY   The European Court of Human Rights is holding a Chamber hearing today Thursday 13   October 2005 at 9.30 a.m., on the merits in the case of Kavakçi v. Turkey (no. 71907/01) , Fazilet Partisi and Kutan v. Turkey (no.1444/02), Sılay v. Turkey (no.   8691/02) and Ilıcak v. Turkey (no. 15394/02).   The applicants   Merve Safa Kavakçi, Mehmet Recai Kutan, Mehmet Sılay and Nazlı Ilıcak are Turkish nationals who were born in 1968, 1930, 1949 and 1944 respectively. They live in Ankara, with the exception of Ms Ilıcak, who lives in Istanbul. They are former members of the Turkish Grand National Assembly and members of Fazilet Partisi (the Virtue Party).   Summary of the facts   Founded in December 1997, Fazilet Partisi obtained some 24% of the vote in the 1999 municipal elections and almost 15.5% of the vote in the general election of the same year. When it was dissolved in 2001, it was an opposition party with 111 members of parliament.   On 7 May 1999 Principal State Counsel applied to the Constitutional Court for an order dissolving Fazilet, on the ground that it had become a “centre” of activities contrary to the principle of secularism and was a continuation of Refah, a party which had been permanently dissolved. He argued in particular that, whenever they spoke in public, Mr Kutan, the party chairman, and the other party leaders and members advocated the wearing of Islamic headscarves in State universities and premises of the public authorities, despite the Constitutional Court ruling that this infringed the principle of secularism enshrined in the Constitution.   In support of his application, Principal State Counsel referred in particular to certain actions and statements by the applicants. For instance, he cited the book written by Mr Sılay, entitled News from Parliament , which was published in 1998 and was seized following a judicial decision. He accused Ms Kavakçi of having taken an oath before the National Assembly wearing an Islamic headscarf, and Ms Ilıcak of having stated on television that Ms Kavakçi had been nominated by the members and leadership of Fazilet to raise the issue of Islamic headscarves in the National Assembly.   State Counsel also applied to have Ms Kavakçi and Ms Ilıcak, who had both recently been elected to the National Assembly, stripped of their status as members of parliament.   On 13 May 1999, Ms Kavakçi was stripped of her Turkish nationality under section 25 (a) of Law no. 403 on nationality, on the ground that she had acquired US nationality without the prior agreement of the Turkish authorities. Her appeals against that decision were unsuccessful. After marrying a Turkish national in October 1999 she acquired Turkish nationality again on that basis.   In a judgment of 22 June 2001 the Constitutional Court dissolved Fazilet, on the ground that the party had become a “centre of activities contrary to the principle of secularism”. It based its decision on Articles 68 and 69 of the Constitution and sections 101 and 103 of Law no. 2820 on political parties. In arriving at its conclusion, it took account of the actions and statements of certain leaders and members of the party, including the applicants. As an ancillary measure pursuant to Article 69 § 9 of the Constitution, the Court banned Ms   Kavakçi, Mr Sılay and Ms Ilıcak from becoming founder members, ordinary members, leaders or auditors of any other political party for five years.   Complaints   The applicants allege that the dissolution of Fazilet constituted a violation of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 (right to free elections). In addition, in the cases Fazilet Partisi and Kutan , Sılay and Ilıcak , the applicants contend that they were the victims of a violation of Article 10 (freedom of expression) and Article 11 (freedom of assembly and association). Relying on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property), Ms Ilıcak also complains that she was unjustly deprived of the benefit of her parliamentary remuneration. In the cases Kavakçi and Fazilet Partisi and Kutan , the applicants complain of a violation of Article 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion) and Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination). Finally, Fazilet Partisi and Mr Kutan allege that the Constitutional Court exceeded its powers under Article 17 (prohibition of abuse of rights) and Article 18 (limitation on use of restrictions on rights).   Procedure   The applications were lodged on 28 May 2001, 18 December 2001, 4 January 2002 and 26   February 2002 respectively, and declared admissible on 30 June 2005.   Composition of the Court   The case will be heard by a Chamber composed as follows:   Boštjan M. Zupančič (Slovenian), President , John Hedigan (Irish), Lucius Caflisch (Swiss) [1] , Riza Türmen (Turkish), Corneliu Bîrsan (Romanian), Margarita Tsatsa-Nikolovska (citizen of “the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”), Alvina Gyulumyan (Armenian), judges , Vladimiro Zagrebelsky (Italian), Renate Jaeger (German), Egbert Myjer (Netherlands), David Thór Björgvinsson (Icelandic), Ineta Ziemele (Latvian), substitute judges , and also Vincent Berger , Section Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Government :     Münci Özmen , co-Agent ,     Erdoğan İşçan , Ayşen Emüler , Işık Batmaz Keremoğlu , Selman Karakul , Vedia Sirmen, Şirin Pala , Amir Çiçek , Nihat Karaca ,   Advisers ;   Applicants:   in the case of   Kavakçi:         Laurent   Hincker , Valérie Billamboz , Counsel ;     in the case of Fazilet   Partisi and Kutan:   Oya Akgönenç , Adviser ;   in the case of Sılay :         Mehmet Sılay , the applicant ;   in the case of Ilıcak:         Nazlı Ilıcak , the applicant           Fuat Aksoy , Counsel .   ***   After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private. 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)   Beverley Jacobs (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 90 21 54 21) 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.