CEDH · PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG — 23 novembre 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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sD35C6159 { width:1.54pt; display:inline-block } .s4598CDF { width:70.9pt; display:inline-block } .s38DD6A04 { width:18.2pt; display:inline-block } .sCB27B9E { width:16.66pt; display:inline-block } .sC5412BEF { width:51.05pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .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     580   23.11.99   Press release issued by the Registrar   HEARING IN THE CASE OF TİMURTAŞ v. TURKEY   Tuesday, 23 November 1999, at 9.30 a.m.     The applicant   The case concerns an application (application no. 23531/94) brought by a Turkish national, Mehmet Timurtaş, who was born in 1925 and lives in Istanbul, Turkey.   Summary of the facts   The applicant alleges that his son, Abdulvahap Timurtaş, born in 1962, was taken into custody by security forces on 14 August 1993 near the village of Yeniköy in the Silopi district of Şırnak province and has since disappeared. He filed a complaint with the Turkish authorities but on 3 June 1996 the Şırnak public prosecutor issed a decision not to instigate a prosecution in view of the abstract character of the applicant’s allegations and the likelihood that Abdulvahap Timurtaş was a member of the PKK terrorist organisation. In support of his account the applicant has submitted a photocopy of a document said to have been drawn up by security forces in which the apprehension of Abdulvahap Timurtaş is reported.   According to the Government, the applicant’s son was not taken into custody. They rely on the custody records of the police and district gendarmerie headquarters in Silopi, the Şırnak provincial central gendarmerie headquarters and the interrogation centre at the Şırnak provincial gendarmerie headquarters, none of which contain entries concerning Abdulvahap Timurtaş. Moreover, the Government dispute the authenticity of the document mentioned above.   Complaints   The applicant complains that his son was taken into custody by the security forces, that he was tortured and subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment 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 his son’s disappearance caused him such anguish as to amount to inhuman and degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention. Further, he alleges that the lack of an effective official investigation into the disappearance deprived 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 son 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 Articles 18 and 34 of the Convention, claiming that the conspiracy on the part of the security forces to conceal from him the unlawful detention of his son is incompatible with the rule of law and frustrated the effective exercise of his right of individual petition.   Procedure   The application was lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 9 February 1994. Having declared the application admissible, the Commission adopted a report on 29 October 1998 in which it expressed the opinion that there had been a violation of Article 5 of the Convention in respect of the unacknowledged detention and disappearance of Abdulvahap Timurtaş (unanimously), that it was not necessary to examine separately the complaints made under Articles 2 and 3 in relation to Abdulvahap Timurtaş (by twenty-eight votes to two), that there had been a violation of Article 3 in respect of the applicant himself (by twenty-nine votes to one), that there had been a violation of Article 13 (by twenty-nine votes to one), that there had not been a violation of Article 14 (by twenty-nine votes to one) or Article 18 (unanimously) and that Turkey had not failed to comply with its obligations under former Article 25 of the Convention (now replaced by Article 34; unanimously). It referred the case to the Court on 8 March 1999.   Composition of the Court   The case will be heard by a Chamber composed as follows:   Elisabeth Palm (Swedish), President , Josep Casadevall (Andorran), Luigi Ferrari Bravo [1] (Italian), Bostjan Zupančič (Slovenian), Wilhelmina Thomassen (Dutch), Rait Maruste (Estonian),   judges , Feyyaz Gölcüklü (Turkish), ad hoc judge , Tudor Panţîru (Moldovan), substitute judge ,   and also Michael O’Boyle, Section Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Government:   Şükrü Alpaslan , Acting Agent , Meltem Gülşen , Necdet Güngör ,   Fırat Polat, Advisers;   Applicant:   Françoise Hampson, 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 Contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: (0)3 88 41 24 92)   Emma Hellyer (telephone: (0)3 90 21 42 15) Fax: (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. On 1 November 1998 a full-time Court was established, replacing the original two-tier system of a part-time Commission and Court. [1] Elected as the judge in respect of San Marino.