Showing 48102 results

Further observations submitted on behalf of Akkum and others to the European Commission of Human Rights in response to the Turkish Government's observations on their application.

Response of the applicants in the Berktay case to the previous observations of the Turkish Government.

Reply of the applicants to the Turkish Government's observations in the Aranacak and Matyar case. The applicants submit that there are 'serious flaws with the content and procedures of this inquiry on which the Government's Observations are based' and notes that no mention is made of the two fatalities which took place in Ormanici on 24 July 1993 in either the gendarme commander's report or the prosecutor's report. (2 copies)

Response of the applicant to the observations of the Turkish Government on the application of Zübeyir Dündar to the European Commission of Human Rights.

Applicant's reply to the preliminary observations of the Turkish Government on the application of Mehmet Haran, including appendices. The reply notes that the applicant does not purport to be applying on behalf of 4 other villagers as purported by the Government, and it repeats the applicant's claims regarding the ineffectiveness of domestic remedies. Appendices include a map of the Lice area and 3 Amnesty International Urgent Action reports from May and June 1994 on village raids in the Lice region.

Response of the applicants in the Berktay case to the previous observations of the Turkish Government. The reply notes the implausibility of Devrim Berktay being able to escape six policemen and throw himself off of a balcony when he had already been in their custody for some time, and question why Devrim would call to his parents for help if he was voluntarily throwing himself off a balcony. The applicants also condemn Annex 11 of the Government documents submitted on 30 January 1995 (A44/43/1/16/6/2) which they frame as an attempt to blame Hüseyin Berktay for an attempted suicide attempt by Devrim, inquire as to the whereabouts of the supposed statement of Devrim Berktay incriminating himself and others in PKK activities, and state that the prosecution of 6 police officers for negligence does not address the applicants' complaint as the policemen will not be tried for attempted murder or even assault as the Government maintains the incident was a suicide attempt.

Reply of the applicant to the observations of the Turkish Government on the Koçeri Kurt application. The reply asserts that the bulk of the points made in the Government's observations 'are irrelevant to the allegations made by the applicant… …none address the specific complaints being made concerning Üzeyir Kurt's detention, maltreatment, and subsequent disappearance at the hands of the State.' The reply also notes that 'in claiming that its action was justified as a reasonable response to terrorism, the Government contradicts the essence of its own case, which is that it never did take Üzeyir Kurt into custody in the first place.' The reply notes that the supposed refutation of the application by Mrs Kurt will be addressed in separate correspondence (see A44/43/1/44/1 and A44/43/1/44/8).

Response of the applicants to the supplementary observations of the Turkish Government on the application of Elçi and others to the European Commission of Human Rights. The reply notes that the Government has ignored the evidence submitted in the complaints of four of the applicants, and that the delays in bringing the detained lawyers before an examining judge (which ranged from 6 to 26 days) in itself discloses a violation of the Convention. Attached (in Turkish with English translation) is a document (Appendix I) of 14 February 1994 from the Ministry of Justice Penal Works General Directorate to the Chief State Prosecution informing that adherence to the special 'lawyer's procedure' is mandatory in all circumstances, which thus means that the Government cannot claim that non-observance of the domestic procedure governing detention of lawyers was 'strictly required'.

Reply of the applicant to the Observations of the Government of Turkey (not including appendices).

Materials pertaining to the reply of the applicant to the Turkish Government's observations in the Sabuktekin case, including the reply submitted 31 March 1997, the appended statements (in Turkish with English translations) of Sultan and Halil Sabuktekin, correspondence between the Essex team and the Kurdish Human Rights Project regarding the statements and their translations, and the 12 May 1998 decision (in French) of the European Commission of Human Rights declaring the application admissible (CLOSED UNTIL 2073/11/01).