CEDH · PRESS;GCREFERRALS;ENG — 11 juillet 2003

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s5FFF0A77 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:1pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s94935B0F { width:389.85pt; display:inline-block } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF6D5444A { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:56.85pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-28.5pt } .s5CFA5DA9 { width:24.5pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s4BAE41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .s3964C3A3 { width:1.36pt; display:inline-block } .s901C2590 { width:56.7pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 }   EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS     387   11.7.2003     Press release issued by the Registrar   ÖCALAN v. TURKEY REFERRED TO GRAND CHAMBER   The Grand Chamber panel of five judges has accepted the case Öcalan v. Turkey (application no. 46221/99) for referral to the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights under Article 43 [1] of the European Convention on Human Rights following a request by the applicant on 5 June 2003 and the Government on 11 June 2003.   In its Chamber judgment of 12 March 2003 the Court found that there had been a violation of the following provisions of the Convention:-   -                  Article 5 § 4 : lack of a remedy against detention in police custody (unanimous); -                  Article 5 § 3 : failure to bring the applicant promptly before a judge after his arrest (unanimous); -                  Article 6 § 1 : applicant not tried by an independent and impartial tribunal (6:1); -                  Article 6 § 1 together with Article 6 § 3 (b) and (c) : unfair trial (unanimous); and -                  Article 3 : imposition of the death penalty following an unfair trial (6:1).     It found no violation as regards the following complaints:   -                  Article 5 § 1 : lawfulness of the applicant’s arrest in Kenya and of his subsequent detention on remand in Turkey (unanimous); -                  Article 2 , taken alone and in conjunction with Article 14 and Article 3 : implementation of the death penalty (unanimous); -                  Article 3 : conditions of transfer from Kenya to Turkey and conditions of detention in İmralı Prison (unanimous); -                  Article 34 : right of individual application (unanimous).     The Chamber considered that the violations found constituted in themselves sufficient just satisfaction. It awarded the applicant a total sum of 100,000 euros for costs and expenses.   See press release no. 135, dated 12. 3.2003, for a summary of the Court’s Chamber judgment.   ***   Further information about the Court can be found on its Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 24 92)   Joanna Reynell (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 33 34)   Stéphanie Klein (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 21 54) Fax: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 27 91     The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. On 1 November 1998 a full-time Court was established, replacing the original two-tier system of a part-time Commission and Court. [1] Under Article 43 of the European Convention on Human Rights, within three months from the date of a Chamber judgment, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the 17 ‑ member Grand Chamber of the Court. In that event, a panel of five judges considers whether the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its Protocols, or a serious issue of general importance, in which case the Grand Chamber will deliver a final judgment. If no such question or issue arises, the panel will reject the request, at which point the judgment becomes final. Otherwise Chamber judgments become final on the expiry of the three-month period or earlier if the parties declare that they do not intend to make a request to refer.