Cultura y Educación

El 4 de abril de 2017, mientras el demandante se encontraba en prisión y en una celda de observación, dos guardias penitenciarios le rociaron con gas pimienta. Las circunstancias exactas fueron objeto de controversia. El demandante se quejó en virtud de los aspectos sustantivos y procesales del artículo 3 del Convenio.

La demanda se refiere esencialmente a la imposibilidad de los demandantes de acceder a un tribunal para impugnar una decisión administrativa por la que no se exige la realización de una evaluación de impacto ambiental (EIA) respecto de una planta geotérmica en las proximidades del olivar del primer demandante y de las restantes residencias de los demandantes. Los demandantes denuncian una violación de los artículos 6 y 8 del Convenio.

The case concerns the applicant’s conviction for membership of an armed terrorist organisation described by the Turkish authorities as the “Fetullahist Terror Organisation/Parallel State Structure” (Fetullahçı Terör Örgütü / Paralel Devlet Yapılanması, hereinafter referred to as “the FETÖ/PDY”), considered by the authorities to be behind the coup attempt that took place in Türkiye on 15 July 2016. The conviction was based decisively on the applicant’s use of an encrypted messaging application by the name of “ByLock”, which the domestic courts held was designed for the exclusive use of the members of the FETÖ/PDY. Other evidence used against the applicant included his use of an account at Bank Asya, and his membership of a trade union and an association that were considered to be affiliated with the FETÖ/PDY. The applicant complained that his trial and conviction entailed a violation of Articles 6, 7, 8 and 11 of the Convention.