In co-operation with London Advocacy, we launched a new project aimed at ensuring Turkey complied with ECHR rulings, in particular Grand Chamber’s Yüksel Yalçınkaya v Türkiye.
European Court of Human Rights and the Turkish Judiciary
The independence of the Turkish judiciary remains a significant concern, highlighted by various Council of Europe bodies as a primary factor contributing to serious human rights violations. The Committee of Ministers has consistently called on Turkey to resolve these issues, especially in light of resolutions enforcing European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) judgments in high-profile cases such as those involving Selahattin Demirtas and Osman Kavala.
Turkey has one of the worst track records in terms of delayed or non-implementation of ECHR judgments. The state currently faces an infringement proceeding, underscoring the severity of these concerns.
Since 2016, the broad application of Article 314 of the Turkish penal code has resulted in the prosecution of over 400,000 individuals on charges of terrorism. This includes more than 100,000 individuals prosecuted for using ByLock, an app the government alleges is linked to the Gulen Movement. In a landmark ruling (Yüksel Yalçınkaya v Türkiye) in September 2023, the ECHR’s Grand Chamber condemned the conviction of individuals based solely on ByLock usage, ruling it a violation of the principle that there should be no punishment without law. The Court recognized this issue as systemic, demanding that Turkey implement general measures and criticized the reliance on ByLock evidence as a breach of fair trial rights.
Following this judgment, a coalition of NGOs, legal scholars, and human rights advocates called on the president of the Turkish Constitutional Court to regard the ECHR’s decision as a pivotal moment for judicial normalization. For instance, The Arrested Lawyers Initiative and the Norwegian Helsinki Committee led a coalition of international human rights organizations and esteemed legal professionals to send an open letter to Prof. Dr Zühtü Arslan, the President of the Constitutional Court of Türkiye, expressing concerns over the Turkish judiciary’s adherence to the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
Turkish Constitutional Court urged to observe the ECHR judgments
The Arrested Lawyers Initiative led a coalition of international human rights organisations and legal experts in sending a letter to the TCC urging it to comply with ECHR judgments, in particular the recent Yalcinkaya judgment.
Project Aims and Objectives
The enforcement of ECHR judgments is overseen by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe (COE) following verdicts. It is crucial that Turkish authorities implement these judgments, particularly in landmark cases like the Yalcinkaya case, which affects tens of thousands.
The project will target both individual and general measures mandated by these judgments. Individual measures may include retrials or compensation, while general measures will focus on preventing similar future violations.
Planned Outputs
- Monitoring: We will systematically collect data to verify if Turkish legal authorities are incorporating the Yalcinkaya judgment into their rulings.
- Rule 9.2 Submissions: We will engage with the Committee of Ministers of the COE through Rule 9.2 submissions, essential for overseeing the implementation of judgments. This involves detailed tracking and ongoing submissions during the execution phase.
- Third Party Intervention: We will seek grant from the Court to submit third party interventions to similar cases.
- Panel Discussions: By organizing panels, we aim to facilitate dialogue between stakeholders and enhance awareness.
- Legal Education: We will provide specialized training for Turkish lawyers to empower them to effectively apply the ECHR judgment in domestic cases.
- Final Report: A comprehensive report will be compiled, documenting the monitoring activities, submission processes, educational efforts, and the overall impact on the enforcement of the ECHR judgment in Turkey.
This project is partially funded by prestigious Sigrid Rausing Trust grant.
Activities carried out with the scope of the Project
Rule 9.2 Submissions
| Rule 9.2. Submission (I) | July 2024 |
| Rule 9.2. Submission (II) 🇹🇷 Türkçe Versiyonu (II) | August 2024 |
| Rule 9.2. Submission (III) | September 2024 |
| Rule 9.2. Submission (IV) | December 2024 |
| Rule 9.2_Submission (V) | April 2025 |
| Rule 9.2_Submission (V)I | July 2025 |
Training Video
| Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi (AİHM) Kararlarının Etkinliğinin Artırılması (Furthering ECHR Compliance in Turkey) Projesi kapsamında hazırlanan bu eğitim videosunda, AİHM kararlarının etkinliğinin artırılması ve AİHM mekanizmasının daha etkin kullanılmasına yönelik önemli bilgiler paylaşılıyor. Videoda, insan hakları hukukçusu Dr. Emre Turkut ve insan hakları alanında uzman avukat Hakan Kaplankaya, kapsamlı ve uygulamaya yönelik pratik bilgiler sunuyor. İşte sizin için önemli bilgiler ve değerli perspektifler içeren bu eğitim videosunu kaçırmayın! |
| This training video in Turkish, prepared as part of the Furthering ECHR Compliance in Turkey Project, provides important information on how to increase the effectiveness of ECtHR judgments and use the ECtHR mechanism more effectively. In the video, human rights lawyer Dr. Emre Turkut and human rights expert lawyer Hakan Kaplankaya provide comprehensive and practical information. |
Aşagıdaki rapor ilk kez Mart 2024’te State Watch tarafından yayınlanmıştır. Raporun muhtemel etki alanını artırmak ve Türk hukuk uygulayıcıları açısından bir kaynak teşkil etmesini sağlamak amacıyla, Furthering ECHR Compliance in Turkey projesi kapsamında raporun Türkçe’ye özet tercümesi yapılmış ve yeniden yayınlamıştır.
The report below was first published by State Watch in March 2024. In order to increase the potential impact of the report and to ensure that it serves as a resource for Turkish legal practitioners, a summary translation of the report into Turkish has been made and republished as part of the Furthering ECHR Compliance in Turkey project.
Third Party Intervention / Amicus Curiae / Üçüncü Taraf Görüşü
Coordinated an amicus curiae (third-party) submission in the case of Nazim Altıntaş v. Türkiye.
Drafted by project experts and the Italian Federation for Human Rights, the intervention aimed to inform the Court of the broader factual and legal context surrounding the case, thereby facilitating a judgment that accurately reflects systemic issues in Turkey.