Sub-sub-series 52 - Cemile Şarlı

3 files

Materials pertaining to the case filed by Cemile Şarlı (originally introduced by her husband, Ahmet Şarlı, who passed away soon after) on 23 June 1994 against the Republic of Turkey with the European Commission of Human Rights (application number 24490/94, referred to internally within the Kurdish Litigation Project as Case 115 and assigned to Françoise Hampson as lead) regarding the disappearance of her son Ramazan Şarlı and her daughter also named Cemile Şarlı after being taken from their home in Ulusoy, Tatvan District, Bitlis Province, by security forces in December 1993. Supplementary materials pertaining to this case are located at A44/43/6/75.
In the early morning hours of 24 December 1993, six armed men arrived at İsmet Orakçi’s house. These six men required İsmet Orakçi to take them to the house of Ahmet Şarlı. There, they found that his daughter Cemile Şarlı was absent and leaving İsmet at the Şarlı house, took the son Ramazan Şarlı to show them the house of Abdullah Milyas where Cemile was spending the night. They left that house with Abdullah, Ramazan and Cemile. After a while, they released Abdullah and disappeared with Ramazan and Cemile, who were never seen by any of their family or the villagers again. The Commission identified the crucial point of disagreement as being whether the six men were soldiers or members of the PKK. With regards to Government evidence that Ramazan and Cemile Şarlı were PKK sympathisers, Captain Dursun Ertuğrul’s opinion was based on information which he had received from State informers in the villages. The two other gendarme officers from the local station had however no knowledge that the Şarlı family were suspected sympathisers. Servet Urhan expressed the opinion nonetheless that the two Şarlıs had left voluntarily with the PKK but was unable to give any firm ground for that belief beyond that this was being said in the village. The evidence of Kamil Kaya and Ali Veris indicated that Ramazan and Cemile Şarlı had been aiding and abetting the terrorists and when their identity had become known it was necessary for the PKK to kidnap them; that they joined the PKK in the mountains under the code names ‘Roken’ and ‘Dilgeç’, and when they tried to leave, they were executed by the PKK. The Commission gave little weight to the oral evidence of these two ex-members (‘confessors’) of the PKK.
As pointed out by the applicant, all the written statements referred to their abduction. The oral evidence of the applicant and Keyvan and Necla Şarlı also indicated that the men used force. İsmet Orakçi referred to seeing the men drag some-one out of the Şarlı house while Abdullah Milyas described Cemile Şarlı as acting under duress. The Commission found therefore that there was insufficient evidence to conclude that Ramazan and Cemile Şarlı left with the men voluntarily.
On 22 May 2001 the European Court of Human Rights ruled that there had been violations of Articles 13 and 25 of the European Convention of Human Rights (6 votes to 1) and no violation of Article 5 (unanimous). The Turkish Government was ordered to pay Cemile Şarlı £5,000 sterling in non-pecuniary damages and £18,000 sterling in legal fees and expenses (less 11,500 French francs awarded in legal aid). The full judgment is available for viewing at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-59460