Přehled
Rozhodnutí
FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 76872/01
by Ekrem ERAT
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 10 October 2006 as a Chamber composed of:
Sir Nicolas Bratza, President,
Mr J. Casadevall,
Mr G. Bonello,
Mr R. Türmen,
Mr M. Pellonpää,
Mr K. Traja,
Mr S. Pavlovschi, judges,
and Mr T.L. Early, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 10 October 2001,
Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together.
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Ekrem Erat, is a Turkish national who was born in 1981 and lives in Diyarbakır. He was represented before the Court by Mr M.A. Altunkalem, a lawyer practising in Diyarbakır.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
On 7 August 2001 the applicant’s house was searched by police officers from the Diyarbakır Security Directorate. The applicant was arrested and taken into custody on suspicion of his involvement in the activities of an illegal organisation.
On 16 August 2001 the applicant was brought before the public prosecutor at the Diyarbakır State Security Court. He was released on the same day.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complained under Article 5 §§ 3 and 5 of the Convention about the length of his police custody.
The applicant complained under Article 8 of the Convention that the search conducted in his house amounted to a breach of his right to respect for his family life and home.
The applicant complained under Article 13 of the Convention about the lack of an effective remedy in domestic law in respect of his complaints.
THE LAW
On 23 May 2006 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:
“I declare that the Government of Turkey offer to pay ex gratia EUR 4,190 (four thousand one hundred and ninety euros) to Mr Ekrem Erat with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the application registered under no. 76872/01. This sum shall cover any pecuniary and non‑pecuniary damage as well as costs.
This sum will be payable within three months from the date of the decision by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It shall be paid in euros to a bank account named by the applicant, free of any taxes and charges that may be applicable. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertake to pay, until settlement, simple interest on the amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case. ”
On 4 May 2006 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant’s representative:
“I note that the Government of Turkey are prepared to pay ex gratia the sum of EUR 4,190 (four thousand one hundred and ninety euros) to Mr Ekrem Erat with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the application registered under no. 76872/01. This sum shall cover any pecuniary and non‑pecuniary damage as well as costs.
I also note that the amount indicated will be paid, in euros and free of any taxes and charges that may be applicable, within three months from the date of the decision by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. From the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Turkey in respect of the facts of this application. I declare that this constitutes a final settlement of the case.
This declaration is made in the context of a friendly settlement which the Government and the applicant have reached.”
The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons which justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention;
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
T.L. Early Nicolas bratza
Registrar President