Doc. 9206

18 September 2001

Turkey and the European Court of Human Rights

Written Question No. 390

Reply from the Committee of Ministers

adopted at the 763^rd meeting of the Ministers' Deputies (12 September 2001)

I.       Written Question No. 390 by Mr Jurgens and others (Doc. 8964)

      Considering that since 1996 the European Court of Human Rights has delivered a great number of judgments against Turkey, finding serious breaches of the European Convention on Human Rights due to homicides, torture, destruction of property, deficient domestic remedies etc;

      Considering that, notwithstanding Turkey’s obligation to respect these judgments, including erasing the consequences of the violations found and preventing new violations, the great majority of them still remain largely or totally unexecuted, and in particular that:

-       no amendment of the Code of Criminal Procedure has yet been made to ensure the systematic presentation of the detailed person to a judge within four days after apprehension;

-       no effective domestic judicial remedy is yet available against the members of the security forces who still enjoy de facto immunity, even where exceptionally found guilty of abuses; in addition, no significant reorganisation of the security forces’ training has been undertaken to prevent new violations;

-       no remedial action has been taken to erase the unjustified interference with the applicant’s right to freedom of expression and political freedom, so that many applicants continue to suffer undue restrictions of their civil and political rights; furthermore, no important legislative amendments have improved the freedom of speech and the political freedom so as to prevent new similar violations in future, nor have the domestic courts changed their practice so as to respect the Convention;

-       Turkey clearly refuses to pay just satisfaction or to take any other measures to comply with the Loizidou judgment, regarding a continuing violation of the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions in northern Cyprus;

Noting that despite the time which has elapsed since all these judgments by the European Court, the repeated appeals to Turkey by the other European governments in the Committee of Ministers, and even a clear summons to comply with the Loizidou judgment, remain without effect;

Stressing that such a vast and persistent disregard by a member state for the European Court’s judgments raises a major political problem which should be addressed thoroughly by all responsible bodies of the Council of Europe, in particular by the Committee of Ministers in accordance with its responsibilities under the Convention and the Statute of the Organisation, and indeed by the governments of the member states,

To ask the Committee of Ministers,

What short-term strategy the Committee envisages vis-à-vis Turkey to ensure that it rapidly complies with all the judgments of the European Court and thus satisfies its basic obligation under the European Convention on Human Rights and the Statute of the Council of Europe.

II.       Reply from the Committee of Ministers

1.       The Committee of Ministers can assure Mr Jurgens that it is fully aware of the problems raised in the Written Question No. 390 tabled by him and his colleagues. Member states of the Council of Europe must take rapid and adequate action to comply with their obligation to abide by the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in cases to which they are parties.

2.       The execution of the judgments referred to in the Question is regularly supervised by the Committee of Ministers in accordance with its responsibilities under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention. In the course of this examination, the Committee has acknowledged that significant progress has been achieved in certain areas, while also noting that certain specific individual and/or general measures referred to in the Written Question have not yet been adopted. The importance and urgency of such measures have been repeatedly emphasised, particularly, in view of the seriousness of the violations found and the time elapsed since the judgments concerned were delivered (see Interim Resolutions DH(99)245 and DH(99)529 in the Socialist Party and others v. Turkey case, Interim Resolution DH(99)434 in the cases concerning the action of Turkish security forces, Interim Resolutions DH(99)680, DH(2000)105 and DH(2001)80 in the Loizidou v. Turkey case, Interim Resolution DH(2001)106 in the cases concerning violations of freedom of expression in Turkey).

3.       The Committee of Ministers will continue to pursue its examination of all outstanding points, until full and proper execution of the Court’s judgments has been secured, notably in the context of its regular Human Rights meetings. It will define its future strategy in the light of the information which it expects from the Turkish authorities in the near future.