PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 28439/03) against the Republic of Turkey lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Turkish national, Mr Hakan Duman (“the applicant”), on 12 May 2003.

The applicant was represented by Mrs N. Bener, a lawyer practising in Bursa. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

On 9 January 2009 the President of the Second Section decided to give notice of the application to the Government. It was also decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility (Article 29 § 3).

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1983 and lives in Bursa.

The applicant had been previously convicted of burglary on 21 March 2001 and his prison sentence had been commuted to a fine.

On 11 January 2002 at approximately 12.40 a.m. the applicant was arrested, together with a friend, and taken into custody on suspicion of having committed several burglaries. The arrest was effected on the basis of incriminating information received regarding the applicant and his friend.

Later, at approximately 2.40 a.m., the applicant was examined by a doctor, who noted a 2 x 2 cm graze on his left shoulder and a graze under his right knee.

It appears that at some point the applicant and his friend confessed to committing a number of burglaries and, as a result, on 11 and 12 January 2002, were required to participate in a number of reconstructions of events. According to the record drafted by police officers and signed by the applicant, the latter indicated one by one the houses and other premises he had broken into, the times of the incidents, the methods used to enter the buildings and the exact amount of goods which had been stolen from each place.

On 11 January 2002 the police heard evidence from the applicant's father. It appears from Mehmet Duman's police statement and the seizure report drafted on that day that the applicant's father helped the police recover two stolen guns, one from his own basement and another near a bus stop, on the basis of information he had received from a certain Mr H.P., who had participated in burglaries with his son.

On 12 and 13 January 2002 the police heard evidence from the owner of one of the guns and the person to whom the suspects had sold it.

In the meantime, on an unspecified date, the applicant signed a pre‑printed form explaining the rights of arrested persons, including the right to remain silent and the right to legal assistance.

On 13 January 2002 the applicant was questioned by two police officers in respect of five incidents he had confessed to during the reconstruction of events. According to the verbatim records signed by the applicant, he was reminded of his legal rights, including his right to remain silent and his right to legal assistance.

On the same day the applicant's friend was also questioned. He admitted committing two offences with the applicant. The statements provided by him regarding these incidents were worded in similar fashion to the applicant's statements.

Between 11 January and 14 January 2002, the police heard evidence from the owners of the houses and businesses which had been robbed. It appeared that some of the owners had not made any prior complaints to the police about the burglaries committed in their houses.

On 14 January 2002 the police returned a watch found on the applicant's friend to its owner.

On 14 January 2002, on the release of the applicant from police custody, the Bursa Forensic Medicine Institute issued a medical report indicating that no signs of beating or violence had been observed on his body and that the applicant did not have any complaints.

On the same date the Bursa Magistrates' Court heard evidence from the applicant. According to the minutes of the hearing he was reminded of his legal rights and his statements to the police were read out to him and accepted by him. He further stated that, at that juncture, he did not remember with whom and where he had committed the burglaries. The reports and other documents in the case file were read out to him. The applicant did not contest their veracity.

On 21 February 2002 the Bursa public prosecutor filed a bill of indictment against the applicant with the Bursa Criminal Court, accusing him of having committed five burglaries.

At the hearing held on 28 February 2002, the applicant retracted his earlier statements, claiming that when he had given evidence to the Bursa Magistrates' Court he had been in custody for more than six days, during which time he had been electrocuted, hosed and beaten with a stick in order to force him to confess to the offences. The applicant claimed that he did not remember how he had been brought before the Bursa Magistrates' Court and that before the judge he had just sat there while the verbatim record was written, which he had not signed. The court heard evidence from the other accused and five complainants, who all stated that the accused had accepted the accusations during the reconstruction of events.

In the hearing held on 25 April 2002, the prosecutor submitted his opinion on the merits. The applicant's legal representative submitted that some of the evidence in the case file had been unlawfully obtained.

At the hearing held on 2 May 2002, the applicant reiterated that he did not accept the charges against him. When asked about the medical reports, the reports of the reconstruction of events and the arrest and seizure form, the applicant submitted that he had nothing to say.

On 9 May 2002 the Bursa Criminal Court, relying on the evidence in the case file and, in particular, on the statements made by the applicant and Mr I.Ö. before the police and the Magistrates' Court, found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced him in total to nine years, two months and five days' imprisonment.

On 27 May 2002 the applicant appealed against the trial court's judgment. In particular, he claimed that there was no evidence to demonstrate his guilt and that his statements to the police had been written in accordance with the complainants' testimonies. The applicant submitted that he had not been reminded of his legal rights under Article 135 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and that his statements before both the police and the Magistrates' Court had not been given of his own free will. In part of his appeal petition the applicant submitted that he had not been in a fit condition to give a statement before the Magistrates' Court since he had been exhausted from the torture, coercion and duress he had been subjected to in police custody.

On 26 September 2002 the Court of Cassation, relying on Article 318 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, dismissed the applicant's request for an oral hearing and upheld the judgment of the first-instance court. The opinion of the principal public prosecutor submitted to this court was not communicated to the applicant.

On 16 December 2002 the decision of the Court of Cassation was returned to the registry of the Bursa Criminal Court.

A request by the applicant dated 26 December 2002 for a rectification of the Court of Cassation's judgment was dismissed by the principal public prosecutor at the Court of Cassation on 19 February 2003.

On 17 December 2004 the Bursa Criminal Court, taking into account the relevant provisions of the new Criminal Code (Law no. 5237), ordered the applicant's release from prison. By an additional judgment dated 29 June 2005 the first-instance court adjusted the applicant's sentence in accordance with the provisions of the new Criminal Code (Law no. 5237).
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e1
001-97851_a2_em1
CODE
DIRECT
28439/03
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-97851_a2_e2
001-97851_a2_em2
ORG
NO_MASK
Republic of Turkey
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e3
001-97851_a2_em3
DEM
QUASI
Turkish
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e4
001-97851_a2_em4
PERSON
DIRECT
Mr Hakan Duman
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e5
001-97851_a2_em5
DATETIME
QUASI
12 May 2003
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e6
001-97851_a2_em6
PERSON
QUASI
Mrs N. Bener
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-97851_a2_e7
001-97851_a2_em7
LOC
QUASI
Bursa
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e8
001-97851_a2_em8
ORG
NO_MASK
Turkish Government
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e9
001-97851_a2_em9
DATETIME
QUASI
9 January 2009
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e10
001-97851_a2_em10
DATETIME
QUASI
1983
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e7
001-97851_a2_em11
LOC
QUASI
Bursa
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-97851_a2_e11
001-97851_a2_em12
MISC
QUASI
convicted of burglary
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e12
001-97851_a2_em13
DATETIME
QUASI
21 March 2001
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e13
001-97851_a2_em14
DATETIME
QUASI
11 January 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e14
001-97851_a2_em15
DATETIME
QUASI
12.40 a.m.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e15
001-97851_a2_em16
DATETIME
QUASI
approximately 2.40 a.m.
HEALTH
check
001-97851_a2_e16
001-97851_a2_em17
QUANTITY
QUASI
2 x 2 cm
HEALTH
insert
001-97851_a2_e17
001-97851_a2_em18
MISC
QUASI
graze on his left shoulder
HEALTH
insert
001-97851_a2_e18
001-97851_a2_em19
MISC
QUASI
graze under his right knee
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e19
001-97851_a2_em20
DATETIME
QUASI
11 and 12 January 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e13
001-97851_a2_em21
DATETIME
QUASI
11 January 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e20
001-97851_a2_em22
PERSON
QUASI
Mehmet Duman
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e21
001-97851_a2_em23
DATETIME
NO_MASK
that day
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e22
001-97851_a2_em24
PERSON
QUASI
Mr H.P.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e23
001-97851_a2_em25
DATETIME
QUASI
12 and 13 January 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e24
001-97851_a2_em26
DATETIME
QUASI
13 January 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-97851_a2_e25
001-97851_a2_em27
QUANTITY
QUASI
five incidents
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-97851_a2_e26
001-97851_a2_em28
QUANTITY
QUASI
two offences
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e27
001-97851_a2_em29
DATETIME
QUASI
Between 11 January
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e28
001-97851_a2_em30
DATETIME
QUASI
14 January 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e28
001-97851_a2_em31
DATETIME
QUASI
14 January 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e28
001-97851_a2_em32
DATETIME
QUASI
14 January 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e29
001-97851_a2_em33
ORG
QUASI
Bursa Forensic Medicine Institute
HEALTH
insert
001-97851_a2_e30
001-97851_a2_em34
MISC
NO_MASK
no signs of beating or violence had been observed on his body
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-97851_a2_e31
001-97851_a2_em35
ORG
QUASI
Bursa Magistrates' Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e32
001-97851_a2_em36
DATETIME
QUASI
21 February 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e7
001-97851_a2_em37
LOC
QUASI
Bursa
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-97851_a2_e33
001-97851_a2_em38
ORG
QUASI
Bursa public prosecutor
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e34
001-97851_a2_em39
ORG
QUASI
Bursa Criminal Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-97851_a2_e35
001-97851_a2_em40
QUANTITY
QUASI
five burglaries
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e36
001-97851_a2_em41
DATETIME
QUASI
28 February 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e31
001-97851_a2_em42
ORG
QUASI
Bursa Magistrates' Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e37
001-97851_a2_em43
DATETIME
QUASI
more than six days
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e31
001-97851_a2_em44
ORG
QUASI
Bursa Magistrates' Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-97851_a2_e38
001-97851_a2_em45
QUANTITY
QUASI
five complainants
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e39
001-97851_a2_em46
DATETIME
QUASI
25 April 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e40
001-97851_a2_em47
DATETIME
QUASI
2 May 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e41
001-97851_a2_em48
DATETIME
QUASI
9 May 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e34
001-97851_a2_em49
ORG
QUASI
Bursa Criminal Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e42
001-97851_a2_em50
PERSON
QUASI
Mr I.Ö.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-97851_a2_e43
001-97851_a2_em51
ORG
NO_MASK
Magistrates' Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-97851_a2_e44
001-97851_a2_em52
QUANTITY
QUASI
nine years, two months and five days' imprisonment
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e45
001-97851_a2_em53
DATETIME
QUASI
27 May 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e43
001-97851_a2_em54
ORG
QUASI
Magistrates' Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e43
001-97851_a2_em55
ORG
QUASI
Magistrates' Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e46
001-97851_a2_em56
DATETIME
QUASI
26 September 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e47
001-97851_a2_em57
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Cassation
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e48
001-97851_a2_em58
DATETIME
QUASI
16 December 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e47
001-97851_a2_em59
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Cassation
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e34
001-97851_a2_em60
ORG
QUASI
Bursa Criminal Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e49
001-97851_a2_em61
DATETIME
QUASI
26 December 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e50
001-97851_a2_em62
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Cassation's
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e47
001-97851_a2_em63
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Cassation
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e51
001-97851_a2_em64
DATETIME
QUASI
19 February 2003
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e52
001-97851_a2_em65
DATETIME
QUASI
17 December 2004
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e34
001-97851_a2_em66
ORG
QUASI
Bursa Criminal Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-97851_a2_e53
001-97851_a2_em67
DATETIME
QUASI
29 June 2005
Hakan Duman
TUR
CHAMBER
Task: Annotate the document to anonymise the following person: Hakan Duman