This judgment concerns the case of a Kazakhstani national who faced extradition from Turkey to Kazakhstan, where he was wanted for alleged terrorism-related offenses.The key aspects of the decision are:
- The Court found that Turkey violated Article 3 of the Convention by extraditing the applicant to Kazakhstan without adequately examining the risk of ill-treatment he would face there, particularly given his profile as a terrorism suspect
- The Court found no violation of Article 13 in conjunction with Article 2 regarding the risk of death penalty, as Kazakhstan had provided sufficient assurances
- The Court found violations of Article 3 regarding poor detention conditions and Article 5§4 due to lack of speedy review of detention
The main provisions of the decision include:
- Diplomatic assurances from Kazakhstan were deemed insufficient to eliminate the risk of ill-treatment, being too general and lacking practical verification mechanisms
- The Turkish authorities failed to conduct a rigorous assessment of the specific risks faced by terrorism suspects in Kazakhstan
- The Constitutional Court’s 3-year delay in reviewing detention was found to violate the requirement for speedy judicial review
- Poor conditions at the Kumkapi Removal Centre constituted degrading treatment
The most important aspects for implementation are:
- States must conduct thorough individual assessments of risks before extradition, especially for terrorism suspects
- Diplomatic assurances must be specific, verifiable and practically effective
- Constitutional Court review of detention must be conducted speedily
- Detention conditions must meet basic standards regardless of immigration pressures
