CEDH · PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG — 24 mars 1999

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s94935B0F { width:389.85pt; display:inline-block } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s23A41E03 { width:36pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sD35C6159 { width:1.54pt; display:inline-block } .s38DD6A04 { width:18.2pt; display:inline-block } .sBA8DCCFC { width:35.45pt; display:inline-block } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS     176   24.3.1999   Press release issued by the Registrar   HEARING IN THE CASE OF ÇAKICI v. TURKEY   Wednesday, 24 March 1999 at 9 a.m.     The applicant     The case concerns an application (application no.   23657/94) brought by a Turkish national, Izzet Çakıcı, who was born in 1953 and lives in Diyarbakır in south-east Turkey. The application was lodged on his behalf and on behalf of his brother Ahmet Çakıcı, who has disappeared.   Summary of the facts     On 8 November 1993, an operation was carried out by gendarmes from Hazro at the village of Çitlibahçe where Ahmet Çakıcı lived. The gendarmes were looking for, among other things, evidence concerning the kidnapping and murder of teachers and an imam by the PKK and for anyone who might have been involved. In a co-ordinated operation, gendarmes from Lice apprehended three persons at the neighbouring village of Bağlan, who were transferred the next day to the Diyarbakır provincial gendarme headquarters.     The applicant and the Government have put forward different versions of the events in question.     According to the applicant, the Hazro gendarmes apprehended Ahmet Çakıcı when they came to Çitlibahçe. They took him to Hazro from where he was transferred to Diyarbakır provincial gendarme headquarters. He was detained there for sixteen to seventeen days in the same room as the three people who had been apprehended at Bağlan. One of these three, Mustafa Engin, reported when he was released that Ahmet Çakıcı had been beaten, a rib being broken and his head split open. According to him, Ahmet Çakıcı had also been taken out for interrogation and received electric shock treatment. The applicant later learned from Hikmet Aksoy, who had been detained by gendarmes at Kavaklıboğaz station, that his brother had been taken from Diyarbakır provincial gendarme headquarters to Hazro gendarme station and from there to Kavaklıboğaz, where he had talked to Hikmet Aksoy. The applicant and his family had received no further news about Ahmet Çakıcı, until the Government provided information during the proceedings before the European Commission of Human Rights.     According to the Government, Ahmet Çakıcı was not taken into custody by the gendarmes during the operation on 8 November 1993. They rely on the custody records of Hazro gendarme station and Diyarbakır provincial gendarme headquarters, where there are no entries concerning Ahmet Çakıcı. During the Commission proceedings, they provided information that it had been reported that Ahmet Çakıcı’s identity card had been found on one of the bodies of terrorists killed during a clash with security forces from 17 to 19 February 1995 on Kıllıboğan hill, Hani district.     On 13 June 1996, the Hazro public prosecutor issued a decision of lack of jurisdiction concerning the allegations about Ahmet Çakıcı’s disappearance, finding, inter alia , that Ahmet Çakıcı’s identity card had been found on the body of a dead terrorist and that this confirmed the terrorist’s identity as Ahmet Çakıcı.   Complaints     The applicant complains that his brother was taken into custody by the security forces, that he was tortured during his detention contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights and deprived of the guarantees pertaining to the protection of the right to life contrary to Article 2 and the right to liberty and security of person contrary to Article 5. He also complains that he suffered inhuman and degrading treatment contrary to Article 3 as a result of the disappearance of his brother.   Further, he alleges that the lack of an effective official investigation into the disappearance constitutes additional independent violations of Articles 2 and 3 as well as depriving him of an effective remedy as guaranteed by Article 13. The applicant further alleges that the facts disclose discrimination prohibited by Article 14, since his brother was Kurdish and the alleged violations of life-threatening, unacknowledged detentions and disappearances occur overwhelmingly in respect of citizens of Kurdish origin. Finally, the applicant invokes Article 18, claiming that the unaccountability of the security forces is incompatible with the rule of law.   Procedure     The application was lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 2 May 1994. Having found the application admissible, the Commission adopted a report on 12 March 1998 in which it established the facts and expressed the opinion that there had   been a violation of Article   2 in respect of the disappearance of the applicant’s brother (unanimously), that there had been a violation of Article 3 in respect of the applicant’s brother (unanimously), that there had been a violation of Article 5 in respect of the disappearance of the applicant’s brother (unanimously), that there had been a violation of Article 3 in respect of the applicant himself (by 27 votes to 3), that there had been a violation of Article 13 (unanimously) and that there had not been a violation of Articles 14 (unanimously) or 18 (unanimously). It referred the case to the old Court on 24   September   1998.   Composition of the Court     Under the transitional provisions of Protocol No. 11 to the Convention, the case was transmitted to the Grand Chamber of the new European Court of Human Rights on the entry into force of the Protocol, on 1 November 1998. It will be heard by the Grand Chamber composed as follows:   Luzius Wildhaber   (Swiss), President , Elisabeth Palm   (Swedish), Vice-President , Luigi Ferrari Bravo   (Italian), Lucius Caflisch   (Swiss), Jean-Paul Costa   (French), Willi Fuhrmann   (Austrian), Karel Jungwiert   (Czech), Marc Fischbach   (Luxemburger), Boštjan Zupančič   (Slovenian), Nina Vajić   (Croatian), John Hedigan   (Irish), Wilhelmina Thomassen   (Dutch), Margarita Tsatsa-Nikolovska   (FYROMacedonia), Tudor Pantiru   (Moldovan), Egils Levits   (Latvian), Kristaq Traja   (Albanian), Judges , Feyyaz Gölcüklü (Turkish), ad hoc Judge , Giovanni Bonello   (Maltese), Pranas Kūris   (Lithuanian), Volodymyr Butkevych   (Ukrainian), Substitute Judges ,   and also Paul Mahoney , Deputy Registrar , and Maud de   Boer-Buquicchio , Deputy Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Government:   Deniz Akçay , co-agent , Bilal Çalişkan , Erdoğan Genel , Mustafa Soysal , Alev Günyakti and Hasan Mutaf , advisers.   Applicant:   Françoise Hampson , Aisling Reidy, counsel .     The European Commission of Human Rights will be represented by Jane Liddy .     After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private. Judgment will be delivered at a later date.     Subject to his duty of discretion, the Registrar is responsible under the Rules of Court for replying to requests for information concerning the work of the Court, and in particular to enquiries from the press.   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Contact: Roderick Liddell Telephone: (0)3 88 41 24 92; fax: (0)3 88 41 27 91