Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-x5cpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-29T08:29:26.491Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Öcalan v. Turkey

European Court of Human Rights.  12 May 2005 .

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Get access

Abstract

Human rights — Right to liberty and security — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 5(4) — Whether failure to exhaust domestic remedies — Whether lack of remedy by which applicant could have lawfulness of his detention in police custody decided — Article 5(1) — Whether applicant being deprived of liberty unlawfully — Applicant intercepted by Kenyan agents — Applicant arrested and transferred to Turkey by Turkish officials — Whether cooperation between Turkey and Kenya — Whether Turkey acting extraterritorially in manner inconsistent with Kenya’s sovereignty — Whether applicant within jurisdiction of Turkey for purposes of Article 1 of European Convention — Whether applicant’s arrest and detention complying with Turkish law — Article 5(3) — Whether applicant being brought promptly before — Whether Turkey violating Article 5 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950

Jurisdiction — Extraterritorial jurisdiction — Whether Turkey acting extraterritorially in manner inconsistent with Kenya’s sovereignty — Whether proof in form of concordant inferences — Applicant intercepted by Kenyan agents — Applicant arrested and transferred to Turkey by Turkish officials — Applicant under Turkish authority — Applicant within jurisdiction of Turkey for purposes of Article 1 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether applicant’s arrest and detention complying with Turkish law — Whether cooperation between Turkey and Kenya — Balance between bringing fugitives to justice and protection of individual rights under European Convention — Whether applicant’s right to security under European Convention affected — Whether violation of Article 5(1) of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950

Human rights — Right to a fair trial — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 6(1) — Whether Ankara National Security Court independent and impartial — Whether applicant having reasonable concern regarding military judge — Whether proceedings in National Security Court fair — Legal assistance — Applicant’s access to case file — Access by applicant’s lawyers to case file — Whether Turkey violating Article 6 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950

Human rights — Right to life — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 2 — Applicant sentenced to death under Article 125 of Turkish Criminal Code — Turkey staying execution at request of European Court of Human Rights pursuant to Rule 39 — Turkey abolishing death penalty in peacetime — Whether implementation of death penalty constituting violation of Article 2 — Whether imposition of death penalty constituting violation of Article 2 — Whether Article 2 should be interpreted as no longer permitting capital punishment — Legal significance of practice of Council of Europe Contracting States as regards death penalty — Whether Turkey violating Article 2 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950

Human rights — Prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 3 — Whether implementation of death penalty constituting violation of Article 3 — Whether imposition of death penalty constituting violation of Article 3 — Whether imposition of death penalty following unfair trial amounting to inhuman treatment — Whether applicant’s conditions of detention amounting to inhuman treatment — When transferred from Kenya to Turkey — When in İmralı prison — Whether Turkey violating Article 3 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950

Treaties — Interpretation — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, Article 2 — Whether Article 2 should be interpreted as no longer permitting capital punishment — Legal significance of practice of Council of Europe Contracting States as regards death penalty — Whether imposition of death penalty amounting to inhuman and degrading treatment per se — Whether imposition of death penalty violating Article 3 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950

Terrorism — Threat from terrorism — Relevance — Applicant convicted of terrorism charges in Turkey — Whether relevant to delay in bringing applicant before judge — Whether relevant to assessment of inhuman treatment — Whether relevant to risk of implementation of death sentence — Whether relevant to applicant’s conditions of detention — Balance between State and individual interests — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950

Type
Case Report
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)