Showing 46747 results

Applicants' pleadings on the merits of the Abdurrazak and Halil İkincisoy application. The pleadings note that this the Government interference with the right of petition in this case is not the first time this has happened and that the Government' have clearly made no effort to change the practices.' It is also submitted that the applicants' complaint of the torture and killing of Mehmet Şah İkincisoy has been established beyond reasonable doubt.

Final pleadings of the applicant in the Şarlı case. The applicant requests the Commission to find the claimed violations of the European Commission on Human Rights, to draw up a report, and to refer the case to the European Court of Human Rights. Attached are appendices pertaining to the 21 March 1996 indictment of Şarlı's domestic lawyer, Mahmut Şakar, who was accused of violating Law no. 3713 by preparing the Şarlı application without a client-solicitor relationship having been established. The Government claimed that the purpose of this was to degrade the State and make propaganda in favour of the PKK.

Final submissions of the applicant on the merits of the Ergi application authored by Françoise Hampson. Hampson goes over the events of 29 September 1993 before concluding with discussion of the two interviews Ergi was summoned by the Aydın Security Directorate to on 30 October and 2 November 1995 (A44/43/1/29/7). Hampson states that 'the interviews with the anti-terror branch of the police department and the threat to his job represent an unlawful interference by the authorities in his exercise of the right of individual petition in violation of Article 25.'

Final submissions of the applicants in the Elçi and others cases prior to the European Commission of Human Rights' decision on admissibility.

Memorial of the applicant in the Sabuktekin case submitted to the European Court of Human Rights, including the applicant's claims for just satisfaction and statements of the applicant.

Memorial of the applicant in the Mahmut Kaya case submitted to the European Court of Human Rights, including the applicant's claims for just satisfaction.

Memorial of the applicant in the Nasır İlhan case submitted to the European Court of Human Rights, including appendices which include schedules of damages claimed and of legal costs and fees, a report authored by Suzy Sumner compiling the inadequacies uncovered in ECHR reports and judgments regarding the Turkish investigations into the various Kurdish human rights cases being litigated at the time, and a report on the unreliability of gendarme testimony.

Memorial of the applicants in the Ersöz and others (Özgür Gündem) case submitted to the European Court of Human Rights, including the applicants' claims for just satisfaction.

Memorial of the applicant submitted to the European Court of Human Rights in the Taş case, including the applicant's claims for just satisfaction. The memorial states that there is now enough evidence to suggest that Muhsin Taş has died. Appendices include schedules of damages claims, schedules of professional legal fees and costs, and an expert report analysing Muhsin Taş’s medical reports.

Memorial of the applicant in the Tanrıkulu case submitted 4 February 1999 to the European Court of Human Rights, restating the applicant's claims and noting the interference with the applicant as stated in the European Commission of Human Rights' case report. Appendices include the applicant's claims for just satisfaction, a signed statement from Selma Tanrıkulu indicating her wish to participate in proceedings before the Court and nominating her legal representatives, sketches of the crime scene, articles pertaining to the dangers faced by health services professionals in southeast Turkey and the ineffectiveness of domestic remedies in Turkey, and schedules of legal costs and expenses provided by the applicant's representatives. The Court Registrar received the applicant’s memorial on 5 February 1999. The Government’s memorial was received on 16 February 1999 after the expiry of the time allowed, which had already been extended at the Government’s request. On 17 February 1999 the President of the Court declined to give leave for inclusion of the Government’s memorial in the case file.