Işıldak v. Turkey (12863/02)

Date	20080930
Article	8
Decision	violation

Violation of Article 8

Işıldak v. Turkey (no. 12863/02)

The applicant, Sadi Işıldak, is a Turkish national who was born in 1966 and lives in Istanbul.

In November 2000 a police officer entered the applicant’s workshop, which is part of his home, without being asked by the applicant to come in and without a search warrant. The search was carried out in response to information from the applicant’s neighbours to the effect that drugs were consumed on the premises. The applicant complained on the following day, but no criminal investigation could be conducted in respect of the police officer since the district administrative committee, ruling on the basis of the investigation report produced by the police inspector charged with investigating the case, decided not to authorise one. Relying on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy), the applicant complained of an infringement of his right to respect for his home.

The Court noted that at the relevant time the police could conduct searches without prior authorisation if delay might hamper an investigation, and had unfettered discretion to decide whether a search should be carried out and how extensive it should be. In the applicant’s case, the Court saw no reason to justify the lack of prior judicial review and found that the search had constituted interference with the applicant’s right to respect for his home. In addition, the Court observed that at the relevant time the applicant did not have an effective remedy whereby he could obtain judicial review of the lawfulness and necessity of the search. Consequently, the Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 8. Lastly, it considered that it was not necessary to examine separately the complaint under Article 13. It awarded Mr Işıldak EUR 1,000 for non-pecuniary damage. (The judgment is available only in French.)