Opuz v. Turkey (Application no. 33401/02)

Briefed on: November 28, 2022

This group of cases concerns the failure of the authorities to protect women (the applicants or their female relatives) from domestic violence, despite having been reasonably informed of the real and imminent risks and threats (Articles 2 and 3). In the cases of Opuz, M.G. and Halime Kılıç, the Court also found that the failure to protect the women was discriminatory on grounds of gender (violation of Article 14 in conjunction with Articles 2 and 3).

• Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

• Communication from Mor Cati Women’s shelter Foundation on 12 October 2022 and 23 October 2020

• Power point presentation by Elif Ege, Mor Cati

Kavala v. Turkey case (Application No 28749/18)

Briefed on 6th September 2021, and on 23rd February 2021.

• Turkey’s ‘evasive judicial tactics’ to circumvent its obligation to

  implement the ECtHR’s Selahattin Demirtaş and Osman Kavala

  judgments, Powerpoint from the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project

• DH-DD(2021)836, Rule 9.2 - Communication from NGOs (Human Rights Watch, the International Commission of Jurists, and the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project) (18/08/2021) in the case of Kavala v. Turkey (Application No. 28749/18)

• DH-DD (2021/841), Rule 9.2 – Communication from the applicant (30/08/2021) on the case of Kavala v Turkey (Application No. 28749/18)

• Latest Rule 9.2 by IFÖD (February 2021)

The case concerns a Turkish philanthropist and human rights defender who is unjustifiably being detained, for over 1200 days, as a means to silence his speech. More on Kavala here.

Selahattin Demirtaş v. Turkey (No.2) (Application No 14305/17)

Briefed on 27 November 2023, 16 September 2022, 30th May 2022, 6th September 2021 and 23rd February 2021.

Documents of the November 2023 briefing:

• Powerpoint presentation by Ramazan Demir, lawyer

• Latest joint Communication from various NGOs on the case (October 2023)

• Document of the September 2022 briefing:

• Powerpoint by Benan Molu, lawyer

• Documents of the May 2022 briefing:

  Recommendations by NGOs, as presented by Ayse Bingol Demir, Turkish Human Rights Litigation Support Project .

• Documents from past briefings:

  • DH-DD(2021)759, Communication from NGOs (ARTICLE 19, Human Rights Watch, the International Commission of Jurists, the International Federation for Human Rights and the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project to the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers) (26/07/2021) in the case of Selahattin Demirtas v. Turkey (No. 2) and reply of the authorities (Application No. 14305/17).

• Turkey’s ‘evasive judicial tactics’ to circumvent its obligation to

  implement the ECtHR’s Selahattin Demirtaş and Osman Kavala

  judgments, Powerpoint from the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project

  The case concerns the arrest/detention of one of Turkey's main opposition leaders to limit political debate.

Işıkırık v Turkey (Application Nr 41226/09)

Briefed on: 21 February 2020

by Dr Kerem Altiparmak, on behalf of the Freedom of Expression Association (IFÖD)

• Rules 9.2 and 9.6 - Communication from an NGO (The Freedom of Expression Association (İfade Özgürlüğü Derneği - IFÖD)) (21/01/2020) in the Işıkırık group of cases v. Turkey (Application No. 41226/09) and response from the Turkish authorities (28/01/2020) [Anglais uniquement] [DH-DD(2020)81]

• Rules 9.2 and 9.6 - Communication from NGOs (Article 19 and the Turkey Strategic Litigation Project (TSLP)) (21/01/2020) in the case of Işıkırık Group v. Turkey (Application No. 41226/09) and response from the Turkish authorities (28/01/2020) [Anglais uniquement] [DH-DD(2020)82]

Öner and Türk group of cases v Turkey (51962/12) Nedim Şener group v Turkey (38270/11) and Altuğ Taner Akçam group v Turkey (27520/07)

Briefed on: 1 March 2024, 28 February 2023, 25 May 2021 and 21 February 2020

Documents from the March 2024 briefing:

• Powerpoint presentation by Batikan Erkoc, MLSA, Özlem Zingil and Idil Özcan, Hafiza Merkezi

• Rule 9.2 Communication from MLSA (January 2024)

• Rule 9.2 Communication from Hafiza Merkezi (January 2024)

• Rule 9.2 Communication from the Human Rights Association (January 2024)

Documents from the February 2023 briefing:

• Powerpoint by Mümtaz Murat Kök, Project Coordinator and Editor at the Media and Law Studies Association.

• Rule 9.2 Communication by MLSA (January 2023)

Documents from the May 2021 briefing:

• Powerpoint of Aslı Ece Koçak, Editor and Project Coordinator, the Media and Law Studies Association

• Rule 9.2 - Communication from an NGO (İfade Özgürlüğü Derneği (İFÖD - Freedom of Expression Association)) (03/05/2021) in the Oner and Turk, Nedim Sener, Altug Taner Akcam and Artun and Guvener groups of cases of v. Turkey

• Rules 9.2 and 9.6 - Communication from an NGO (Media and Law Studies Association) (28/04/2021) in the cases of ONER AND TURK GROUP, NEDIM SENER GROUP, ALTUG TANER AKCAM GROUP and ARTUN AND GUVENER GROUP v. Turkey and reply from the authorities (20/05/2021)

Documents from the February 2020 briefing:

• Powerpoint of Kerem Altiparmak

• Rules 9.2 and 9.6 - Communication from a NGO (The Freedom of Expression Association (İfade Özgürlüğü Derneği - IFÖD)) (22/01/2020) in the cases of Altug Taner Akcam v. Turkey (27520/07), Nedim Sener v. Turkey (38270/11) and Oner and Turk v. Turkey (51962/12) and response from the Turkish authorities (30/01/2020) [Anglais uniquement] [DH-DD(2020)92]

• Rule 9.2 by Article 19 and the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project on the Öner and Türk case (January 2020)

These groups mainly concern unjustified and disproportionate interferences with the applicants’ freedom of expression on account of criminal proceedings initiated under various articles of the Criminal Code or Anti-Terrorism Law for having expressed opinions that did not incite hatred or violence, and the consequent chilling effect on society as a whole (Article 10).

CUMHURİYETÇİ EĞİTİM VE KÜLTÜR MERKEZİ VAKFI GROUP, ZENGIN HASAN AND EYLEM GROUP v TURKEY (32093/10, 62649/10, 1448/04)

Briefed on 22 November 2019

These groups of cases concerns the discrimination towards followers of the Alevi faith in Turkey.

Dr Mine Yildirim, Head of the Freedom of Belief Initiative at NHC provided an update about these cases, her analysis about the recent Action plan of the authorities, as well as her recommendations on how to get these cases properly implemented.

Power point presentation by Dr Mine Yildirim, Head of Freedom of Belief Initiative, Norwegian Helsinki Committee

• Rule 9.2 by the Norwegian Helsinki Committee on the cases: CUMHURİYETÇİ EĞİTİM VE KÜLTÜR MERKEZİ VAKFI GROUP, ZENGIN HASAN AND EYLEM GROUP v TURKEY (32093/10, 62649/10, 1448/04)

• Action Plan from the Turkish authorities (October 2019)

Oya Ataman group v Turkey (Application Nr 74552/01)

Briefed on 28 February 2023 and 25 February 2019

These cases concern violations of the applicants’ right to freedom of peaceful assembly and/or their ill-treatment or the death of their relatives when excessive force was used to disperse peaceful demonstrations. Certain cases also concern failure to carry out an effective investigation into the applicants’ allegations of ill-treatment or lack of an effective remedy in this respect (violations of Articles 2, 3, 11 and 13 of the Convention).

Documents from the 2023 briefing:

• Powerpoint presentation by Mümtaz Murat Kök, Project Coordinator and Editor at Media and Law Studies Association and Beril Onder, Project Lawyer at the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project.

• Rule 9.2 Communication by MLSA (January 2023)

Documents from the 2019 briefing:

An update on the group was delivered by Basak Cali,  EIN Chair, Hertie School of Governance, Berlin; Center for Global Public Law, Koç University, Istanbul, on behalf of the Human Rights Joint Platform (IHOP). IHOP submitted a Rule 9.2 communication on the case on 4 February 2019.

• Rule 9.2. of IHOP on the case and government answer (January/ February 2019)

• Latest communication from the Turkish government on the case

• Power Point presentation by Prof. Cali