The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has delivered a judgment in the case of \u00c7etin and Others v. T\u00fcrkiye, concerning 137 applications related to arrests and pre-trial detentions following the 2016 coup attempt in Turkey. The applicants, suspected of being members of the “Fetullahist Terror Organisation\/Parallel State Structure” (FET\u00d6\/PDY), alleged violations of Article 5 of the Convention, particularly regarding the lack of reasonable suspicion for their detention and the insufficiency of reasons provided by domestic courts for ordering and extending their pre-trial detention. The ECtHR found a violation of Article 5 \u00a7 3 of the Convention due to the absence of sufficient grounds for the applicants’ pre-trial detention, noting that the domestic courts’ reasoning was formulaic and stereotyped, without an individualised assessment of the risks involved. The Court did not find it necessary to examine the complaints under Article 5 \u00a7 1 (c) of the Convention. The Court awarded 3,000 euros to each applicant who submitted a claim for just satisfaction in respect of non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses.<\/p>\n
The decision is structured as follows: It begins with the procedural history and the facts of the case, outlining the applicants’ arrests and detentions, the evidence relied upon by the Turkish authorities, and the domestic legal proceedings. The Court then addresses the joinder of the applications and the admissibility of the complaints, dismissing the Government’s objections regarding the exhaustion of domestic remedies and abuse of the right of application. The core of the decision lies in the Court’s assessment of the merits of the complaints under Article 5 \u00a7\u00a7 1 and 3, where it analyses the reasoning provided by the domestic courts for ordering and extending the applicants’ pre-trial detention. Finally, the Court addresses the application of Article 41 of the Convention, awarding just satisfaction to the applicants.<\/p>\n
The main provisions of the decision highlight the ECtHR’s concern with the lack of individualised assessment and the formulaic reasoning used by Turkish courts in ordering and extending pre-trial detention in the aftermath of the 2016 coup attempt. The Court reiterated that any system of mandatory detention on remand is per se incompatible with Article 5 \u00a7 3 of the Convention. The Court emphasized that even when a reasonable suspicion exists, decisions ordering and prolonging pre-trial detention must contain relevant and sufficient reasons justifying the necessity of the detention. This decision reinforces the importance of providing concrete justifications for pre-trial detention, especially in the context of mass arrests and detentions following states of emergency. **** This decision has implications for Ukrainians, as it highlights the importance of individualized assessments and concrete justifications for pre-trial detention, especially in situations of armed conflict or political instability.<\/p>\n