CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 22 janvier 2026

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 9 February 2026   SECOND SECTION Application no. 6336/25 Ramiz ISLAMOV against Türkiye lodged on 13 February 2025 communicated on 22 January 2026 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the alleged breach of the applicant’s right to education owing to a restriction code imposed on him in the context of an expulsion procedure. At the time of the events, the applicant, who is a Kazakhstani national, was completing his final year of medical studies in Türkiye. On 4 December 2017 the Bursa Provincial Directorate of Migration Management imposed a restriction code ( G82 tahdit kodu ) on him, based on an intelligence report obtained from the National Intelligence Agency ( Millî İstihbarat Teşkilatı ) linking him to a terrorist organisation, namely FETÖ/PDY   (Fetullahist Terrorist Organisation / Parallel State Structure). An ensuing criminal investigation commenced. On 9 February 2018 a deportation order was issued against the applicant. Although his exact departure date is unclear, domestic authorities accept that he left the country of his own accord on or after 14 February 2018. On 13 March 2018 a decision not to prosecute was taken in the context of the criminal investigation, as the sole evidence against the applicant was his attendance at a high school in his country of origin thought to be affiliated with FETÖ/PDY. Subsequently, the applicant’s lawyer requested the lifting of the G82 restriction code, which was rejected. The applicant unsuccessfully challenged this refusal before the administrative courts. On 3 October 2024 the Constitutional Court declared his individual application inadmissible for being manifestly ill-founded, reasoning that the interference with his final year of studies as a consequence of the expulsion procedure did not constitute an interference with his right to education. Relying on Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, the applicant complains about the impossibility to continue his university education on account of the unjustified maintenance of the restriction code, which prevents him from returning to Türkiye and completing his studies. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to education, as guaranteed by Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, due to the imposition of the restriction code which prevented him from re-entering the respondent State and pursuing his studies there? In particular, considering the subsequent criminal investigation, which resulted in a decision not to prosecute, was the limitation on his right to education foreseeable and proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued (see, for general principles, Leyla Şahin v. Turkey [GC], no. 44774/98, §§ 152-56, 10 November 2005; Telek and Others v. Türkiye , nos. 66763/17, 66767/17 and 15891/18, §§   129-54, 21   March 2023; and compare and contrast with the Commission decisions: Sorabjee v. the United Kingdom , no. 23938/94, 23 October 1995; Jaramillo v.   the   United Kingdom , no. 24865/94, 23 October 1995; and Dabhi v.   the   United Kingdom , no. 28627/95, 17 January 1997)?