Ali Göktaş v. Turkey (9323/03)
| Date | 20080212 |
|---|---|
| Article | 6(1) |
| Decision | violation |
Two violations of Article 6 § 1 (fairness)
Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1
Ali Göktaş v. Turkey (no. 9323/03)
Apaydin v. Turkey (no. 502/03)
Faruk Deniz v. Turkey (no. 19646/03)
Kılıç and Korkut v. Turkey (nos 25949/03 and 25976/03)
The six applicants are Turkish nationals.
Suspected of belonging to an illegal organisation, the DHKP/C (Revolutionary People's Liberation Party/Front), they were arrested and remanded in custody. They were subsequently acquitted and took action seeking compensation for the damage sustained as a result of their deprivation of liberty. Under Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) they complained, in particular, that they had been denied a hearing and had not been notified of the expert’s report in the proceedings before the Assize Court or of the opinion of the Principal State Counsel at the Court of Cassation. Relying on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) and Article 13 of the Convention (right to an effective remedy), the applicants also complained of the loss sustained as a result of the failure to pay, or the late payment of, the damages they had been awarded.
The Court found unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 on account of the lack of a hearing in the domestic proceedings and the failure to notify the applicants of the opinion of the Principal State Counsel at the Court of Cassation. It held that there was no need to examine separately the complaint concerning the failure to notify them of the expert’s report. It also found that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, and held that it was not necessary to examine separately the complaint under Article 13. In the Apaydin case the complaint under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 was declared inadmissible in respect of the applicant Fulya Apaydin. The Court awarded the applicants the total amounts of EUR 6,144 in respect of pecuniary damage and EUR 8,225 in respect of non-pecuniary damage. (The judgments are available only in French.)