CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 4 avril 2018

.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 } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .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 } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline }   Communicated on 4 April 2018   SECOND SECTION Application no. 62450/11 R.M. against Turkey lodged on 6 August 2011 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the alleged breaches of Article   3, Article   5 §§   1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 and Article 13 of the Convention on account of the applicant’s detention at the Kumkapı Foreigners’ Removal Centre in 2011. The applicant relies on Article 3, Article 5 §§ 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 and Article   13 of the Convention. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the conditions of the applicant’s detention at the Kumkapı Foreigners’ Removal Centre?   2.     Has there been a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention on account of the applicant’s detention at the Kumkapı Foreigners’ Removal Centre?   3.     Was the applicant informed promptly of the reasons for his detention as required by Article 5 § 2 of the Convention?   4.     Did the applicant have at his disposal a remedy by which he could challenge the lawfulness of his deprivation of liberty, as required by Article   5 § 4 of the Convention?   5.     Did the applicant have an effective and enforceable right to compensation for his detention in alleged contravention of Article 5 §§   1, 2 and 4, as required by Article 5 § 5 of the Convention?   6.     Did the applicant have at her disposal an effective domestic remedy for his complaint under Article 3 of the Convention, as required by Article   13 of the Convention?   The parties are requested to submit all documents in support of their replies.