CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 22 janvier 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 10 February 2025   SECOND SECTION Application no. 9628/20 Yasir YILDIZ against Türkiye lodged on 29 January 2020 communicated on 22 January 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s alleged ill-treatment when he was in police custody. On 20 February 2018 the applicant was arrested in Mersin on suspicion of being a member of an armed terrorist organisation. The applicant remained in custody in Mersin Security Directorate until 3   March 2018, when he was placed in pre-trial detention by the Magistrates’ Court. On 6 July 2018 the applicant submitted a criminal complaint to the Mersin Public Prosecutor’s office, claiming that he had been subjected to ill-treatment and been insulted and threatened by the police officers, during the time he spent in custody. He claimed that he had been forced to stand for extended periods of time facing the wall and had been slapped and kicked by a policeman in the chest multiple times, and that his head had been hit against the wall. He further alleged that he had been hit in the testicles. In support of his claims, he submitted medical reports taken during his custody. The medical report dated 20 February 2018 noted that the applicant had pain in the chest due to blunt trauma, and that there were 4-5 abrasions around 5 cm in length in the lower back, appearing as redness. The medical report dated 22 February 2018 further noted superficial abrasions and redness in his back area. Lastly, the medical report dated 25 February 2018 stated that the applicant alleged to have been beaten and that there did not exist any findings in addition to those in the previous medical reports. On 25 September 2018 the Public Prosecutor issued a decision not to prosecute any officers. In his decision, he stated that the applicant’s allegations and the findings in the medical reports were not coherent, and that while the medical report dated 20 February 2018 noted pain in the applicant’s chest, this was a subjective submission from the applicant himself and not a doctor’s finding. Moreover, the abrasions noted in the medical report were not in his chest and therefore could not be considered as evidence of assault or battery on the chest or face as alleged by the applicant. He further stated that the applicant had met with three different lawyers on five occasions when he had been in custody, and that he had not raised a complaint about such ill-treatment to them. The Public Prosecutor concluded that in view of these factors as a whole, the applicant’s allegations were abstract in nature and that there was no sufficient evidence to prosecute the officers. On 23 November 2018 the Mersin Magistrate’s Court rejected the applicant’s objection to that decision. On 18 November 2019 the Constitutional Court found the applicant’s individual application inadmissible as being manifestly ill-founded. Before the Court, the applicant argues that he was subjected to ill-treatment at the hands of State agents while he was in police custody, in violation of Article 3 of the Convention. He further argues under Articles   3 and 6 of the Convention that the investigation into his allegations of ill-treatment was ineffective. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the applicant been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article   3 of the Convention (see Bouyid v. Belgium [GC], no.   23380/09, §§ 81-90, ECHR 2015, and Salin and Karşin v.   Turkey , no.   44188/09, §§ 60-72, 23 June 2015)?   2.     Having regard to the procedural protection from inhuman or degrading treatment, was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article   3 of the Convention? In particular, was the investigation capable of determining the cause of the applicant’s injuries and leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Bouyid , cited above, §§ 114-123, and Salin and Karşin , cited above, §§   75-81)?   The Government are invited to submit all the medical reports obtained in respect of the applicant during his period in custody between 20   February and 3 March 2018, and specifically the reports dated 20, 22 and 25   February 2018.