CEDHCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 7 janvier 2014
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-140723
- Date
- 7 janvier 2014
- Publication
- 7 janvier 2014
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulAnalyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s72EB7DC5 { margin-top:18pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s37CDBE05 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }     Communicated on 7 January 2014   SECOND SECTION Application no. 30496/09 Hayrettin ŞAYIK against Turkey lodged on 18 May 2009 STATEMENT OF FACTS   The applicant, Mr Hayrettin Şayık, is a Turkish national, who was born in 1963 and is currently serving a prison sentence in the Bayburt Prison. On 26 June 2000 the applicant was taken into police custody on suspicion of membership of an illegal organisation, namely the Hizbullah. On 30 June 2000 the applicant was questioned by police, allegedly under duress, and in the absence of a lawyer. In his statement, the applicant confessed to being a member of the Hizbullah and gave a detailed account of his acts within the illegal organisation. On 7 July 2000 a medical report was issued in respect of the applicant, which indicated an ecchymosis of 2 x 3 cm on the inner side of the right elbow, and hematomas of 2 x 3 cm on both right and left dorsal sides. In 2000, the applicant’s trial commenced before the Adana State Security Court. During the proceedings, the applicant consistently denied the accusations against him and maintained that he had been ill-treated during his police custody. He also stated that his police statement should not be taken into account by the trial court, as it had been extracted from him under duress. By Law no. 5190 of 16 June 2004, published in the Official Gazette on 30 June 2004, State Security Courts were abolished. Therefore, the Diyarbakır Assize Court acquired jurisdiction over the case. On 9 November 2007 the Diyarbakır Assize Court found the applicant guilty as charged by relying on his statements taken by the police while he was in custody and sentenced him to life imprisonment. This judgment was upheld by the Court of Cassation on 19 January 2009. COMPLAINTS The applicant complains under Article 6 of the Convention that he was convicted on the basis of unlawful evidence in that the domestic court relied on his police statement which had been taken under duress. He further submits under Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention that he was denied legal assistance during the preliminary investigation stage.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a breach of Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention as a result of the lack of legal assistance available to the applicant during his detention in police custody (see Salduz v. Turkey [GC], no. 36391/02, §§ 45-63, 27   November 2008)?   2.     Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against him in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, to what extent was the applicant’s conviction based on his statements extracted allegedly under duress and in the absence of a lawyer? Did the trial court sufficiently assess their reliability before admitting these statements to the case file?        Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
- Date
- 7 janvier 2014
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-140723
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel