{"id":21869,"date":"2023-12-12T10:11:10","date_gmt":"2023-12-12T10:11:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/laweuro.com\/?p=21869"},"modified":"2023-12-12T10:11:10","modified_gmt":"2023-12-12T10:11:10","slug":"case-of-vuckovic-v-croatia-15798-20","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/laweuro.com\/?p=21869","title":{"rendered":"CASE OF VU\u010cKOVI\u0106 v. CROATIA – 15798\/20"},"content":{"rendered":"

The present applications mainly concern the arrest and pre-trial detention of the applicants in the aftermath of the coup attempt of 15 July 2016, on suspicion of their membership of an organisation described by the Turkish authorities as the \u201cFetullahist Terror Organisation\/Parallel State Structure\u201d<\/p>\n

\n

European Court of Human Rights
\nSECOND SECTION
\nCASE OF KOLAY AND OTHERS v. T\u00dcRK\u0130YE<\/strong>
\n(Applications nos. 15231\/17 and 283 others)<\/em>
\nJUDGMENT
\nSTRASBOURG
\n12 December 2023<\/p>\n

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.<\/p>\n

In the case of Kolay and Others v. T\u00fcrkiye,<\/strong><\/p>\n

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
\nJovan Ilievski, President,
\nLorraine Schembri Orland,
\nDiana S\u00e2rcu, judges,
\nand Dorothee von Arnim, Deputy Section Registrar,<\/p>\n

Having regard to:<\/p>\n

the applications against the Republic of T\u00fcrkiye lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (\u201cthe Convention\u201d) by the applicants listed in the appended table (\u201cthe applicants\u201d);<\/p>\n

the decision to give notice to the Turkish Government (\u201cthe Government\u201d), represented by their Agent, Mr Hac\u0131 Ali A\u00e7\u0131kg\u00fcl, Head of the Department of Human Rights of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of T\u00fcrkiye, of the complaints under Article 5 of the Convention concerning the alleged lack of reasonable suspicion regarding the commission of an offence, the alleged lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention, the length of pre-trial detention, the ineffectiveness of judicial review of the lawfulness of detention, and the absence of a remedy to obtain compensation, and to declare the remainder of the applications inadmissible;<\/p>\n

the parties\u2019 observations;
\nthe decision to dismiss the Government\u2019s objection to the examination of the applications by a Committee;<\/p>\n

Having deliberated in private on 21 November 2023,<\/p>\n

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:<\/p>\n

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE<\/strong><\/p>\n

1. The present applications mainly concern the arrest and pre-trial detention of the applicants in the aftermath of the coup attempt of 15\u00a0July 2016, on suspicion of their membership of an organisation described by the Turkish authorities as the \u201cFetullahist Terror Organisation\/Parallel State Structure\u201d (Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc \/ Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 \u2013 hereinafter referred to as \u201cFET\u00d6\/PDY\u201d), which was considered by the authorities to be behind the coup attempt (further information regarding the events that unfolded after the coup attempt, including the details of the state of emergency declared by the Government and the ensuing notice of derogation given to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, as well as the legislative developments that followed the declaration of the state of emergency, may be found in Ba\u015f v. Turkey, no. 66448\/17, \u00a7\u00a7\u00a06\u201114 and\u00a0109\u201110, 3 March 2020).<\/p>\n

2. On various dates the applicants were arrested and placed in pre-trial detention, mainly on suspicion of membership of FET\u00d6\/PDY, an offence punishable under Article 314 of the Criminal Code (see Ba\u015f, cited above, \u00a7\u00a058). The applicants lodged objections against the detention orders but without success. On various dates in the course of the ensuing criminal investigations and trials, the competent judicial authorities ordered the applicants\u2019 continued detention. The applicants were held in pre-trial detention for periods ranging from one year to four years and six months.<\/p>\n

3. It appears from the information and documents in the case files that, when ordering and extending the applicants\u2019 pre-trial detention, the competent judicial authorities relied on various evidential grounds, including but not limited to: witness statements indicating ties with FET\u00d6\/PDY; social media posts; possession of pro-FET\u00d6\/PDY publications; working in, or being a member of, institutions having ties with the organisation in question or an organisation shut down by the state\u2011of\u2011emergency legislative decrees; provision of financial support to FET\u00d6\/PDY or to institutions with ties to FET\u00d6\/PDY; attending or holding meetings (sohbet); communication with senior executives of the organisation; ensuring communication between FET\u00d6\/PDY members; staying in FET\u00d6\/PDY houses; and carrying out various other activities on the orders of the organisation.<\/p>\n

4. It further appears from the case files that, in accordance with Articles\u00a0100 and 101 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (\u201cthe CCP\u201d, for the text of these provisions see Kavala v. Turkey, no.\u00a028749\/18, \u00a7\u00a7 71-72, 10\u00a0December 2019), the competent judicial authorities justified their decisions to deprive the applicants of their liberty not only on the basis of the existence of reasonable suspicion, but also on the grounds of the nature and the severity of the alleged offence of membership of an armed terrorist organisation and the fact that that offence was among the \u201ccatalogue\u201d offences listed in Article 100 \u00a7 3 of the CCP. Without making an individualised assessment, they also relied on the state of the evidence and the risk of the applicants\u2019 absconding and tampering with evidence, and considered that detention would be a proportionate measure in the circumstances. Moreover, in the later stages of the proceedings, the competent judges took into account the time spent by the applicants in pre\u2011trial detention when deciding to extend their detention, without explaining the relevance of that factor to their decision.<\/p>\n

5. In the meantime, the applicants lodged one or more individual applications with the Constitutional Court in respect of the detention orders, complaining, inter alia, about the alleged lack of reasonable suspicion that they had committed an offence and the alleged lack of reasons to justify the decision to remand them in pre-trial detention, all of which were declared inadmissible by the Constitutional Court in summary fashion.<\/p>\n

6. According to the latest information provided by the parties, most of the applicants were convicted of membership of an armed terrorist organisation by the courts of first instance on the basis of evidence that was present at the time of their detention or that appeared at a later stage in the proceedings. It further appears that, for the most part, the proceedings are still pending before the appellate courts or the Constitutional Court.<\/p>\n

THE COURT\u2019S ASSESSMENT<\/strong><\/p>\n

I. JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS<\/strong><\/p>\n

7. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.<\/p>\n

II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 \u00a7\u00a7 1 and 3 OF THE CONVENTION<\/strong><\/p>\n

8. The applicants complained that there had been no specific evidence giving rise to a reasonable suspicion that they had committed a criminal offence necessitating pre-trial detention. They further argued that the domestic courts had not provided relevant and sufficient reasons in their decisions ordering their placement in detention and their continued detention. They also maintained that the domestic authorities had failed to consider alternative measures to detention. In that connection, they alleged that there had been a violation of Article 5 \u00a7\u00a7 1 (c) and 3 of the Convention.<\/p>\n

9. The Government first urged the Court to declare those complaints inadmissible in respect of the applicants who had not made use of the compensatory remedy under Article 141 of the CCP, or whose compensation claims were still pending. The Government further claimed that some of the applicants had been granted compensation pursuant to Article 141 of the CCP and had therefore lost their victim status. They also asked the Court to declare the applications inadmissible as being an abuse of the right of application, in so far as the applicants had not informed the Court of the developments in their cases following the lodging of their applications. The Government lastly submitted that the applicants\u2019 initial and continued pre-trial detention had complied with the domestic legislation and Article 5 \u00a7\u00a7 1 (c) and 3 of the Convention.<\/p>\n

10. The Court notes that similar objections raised by the Government have already been dismissed in other cases against T\u00fcrkiye (see, for instance, Ba\u015f v. Turkey, no. 66448\/17, \u00a7\u00a7 118-21, 3 March 2020; Alparslan Altan v. Turkey, no.\u00a012778\/17, \u00a7\u00a7 84-85, 16 April 2019; Selahattin Demirta\u015f v. Turkey (no.\u00a02) [GC], no. 14305\/17, \u00a7\u00a7\u00a0212-214, 22 December 2020; and Turan and Others v. Turkey, nos.\u00a075805\/16 and 426 others, \u00a7\u00a7\u00a057-64, 23 November 2021), and sees no reason to depart from those findings in the present case. The Court therefore considers that the applicants\u2019 complaints under Article\u00a05 \u00a7\u00a7 1 (c) and 3 of the Convention are not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 \u00a7\u00a03 (a) of the Convention or inadmissible on any other grounds. They must therefore be declared admissible.<\/p>\n

A. Alleged lack of reasoning in the decisions ordering the applicants\u2019 pre-trial detention (Article 5 \u00a7 3 of the Convention)<\/strong><\/p>\n

11. Under the Court\u2019s established case-law under Article 5 \u00a7 3, the persistence of a reasonable suspicion that the detainee has committed an offence is a condition sine qua non for the validity of his or her continued detention. The Court must further establish whether the national authorities gave relevant and sufficient reasons for the detention from the time of the first decision ordering detention on remand onwards. Those other grounds may be a risk of flight, a risk of pressure being brought to bear on witnesses or of evidence being tampered with, a risk of collusion, a risk of reoffending, or a risk of public disorder and the related need to protect the detainee (see Buzadji v. the Republic of Moldova [GC], no. 23755\/07, \u00a7\u00a7\u00a087-88 and 101-102, 5 July 2016). Those risks must be duly substantiated, and the authorities\u2019 reasoning on those points cannot be abstract, general or stereotyped (see Merabishvili v. Georgia [GC], no. 72508\/13, \u00a7\u00a0222, 28\u00a0November 2017).<\/p>\n

12. The Court notes that when ordering the applicants\u2019 initial and continued pre-trial detention, the judicial authorities cited, in a formulaic manner, numerous pieces of evidence in support of their findings that there were concrete indications that the applicants had committed an offence (see\u00a0paragraph 3 above). However, in the Court\u2019s view, the national courts failed to demonstrate the link between the pieces of evidence they mentioned in the detention orders and the existence of a \u201creasonable suspicion\u201d that the applicants had committed the offence of membership of an armed organisation they were suspected of.<\/p>\n

13. Even assuming that there was \u201creasonable suspicion\u201d that an offence has been committed, decisions ordering pre-trial detention must contain relevant and sufficient reasons justifying the necessity of the detention. In that connection, the Court observes that in T\u00fcrkiye, as required by the Convention, domestic law provides that the competent judicial authorities must put forward \u201crelevant and sufficient\u201d reasons when considering the need to place and keep a suspect in pre-trial detention. This is a procedural obligation laid down in Articles 100 and 101 of the CCP, which provide that decisions to place or keep a suspect in pre-trial detention must include legal and factual reasons (see Tuncer Bak\u0131rhan v. Turkey, no. 31417\/19, \u00a7\u00a7\u00a023\u201124, 14 September 2021).<\/p>\n

14. The Court notes in this regard that the competent courts relied on the following grounds for detention: the nature of the offence; the severity of the sentences prescribed by law for the offence concerned; the state of the evidence; the period spent in detention; the risk of the applicants\u2019 absconding and tampering with evidence; and the finding that alternative measures to detention appeared insufficient (see paragraph 4 above).<\/p>\n

15. In so far as the detentions were justified on the basis of the \u201cnature of the offence\u201d, the Court notes that the courts ruling on the applicants\u2019 detention considered that they were accused of offences listed in Article\u00a0100\u00a0\u00a7 3 of the CCP (also referred to as the \u201ccatalogue\u201d offences). As regards these \u201ccatalogue\u201d offences, the Court notes that under Article\u00a0100\u00a0\u00a7\u00a03 of the CCP, Turkish law provides that for certain offences there is a statutory presumption of the existence of grounds for detention (risk of absconding, tampering with evidence or putting pressure on witnesses, victims and other persons). In this connection, the Court reaffirms that any system of mandatory detention on remand is per se incompatible with Article\u00a05 \u00a7 3 of the Convention. Where the law provides for a presumption concerning the grounds for pre-trial detention, it must nevertheless be convincingly demonstrated that there are concrete facts warranting a departure from the rule of respect for individual liberty. This is also the case where the judicial authorities justify the detention of a suspect by the nature of the offence in question or the severity of the potential sentence prescribed by law (compare also Tuncer Bak\u0131rhan, cited above, \u00a7\u00a7\u00a046-49). The Court therefore needs to examine whether the national courts carried out an individualised examination when ordering the applicants\u2019\u00a0pre\u2011trial detention.<\/p>\n

16. As regards the other reasons given by the national courts for placing or keeping the applicants in pre-trial detention, the Court observes firstly that they entail a formulaic enumeration of the grounds for detention under domestic law in a general and abstract manner, such as the state of the evidence, the period spent in detention and the risk of the applicants\u2019 absconding and tampering with evidence. While the Court is prepared to accept that, in view of the particular circumstances surrounding the attempted coup, the risk of the applicants\u2019 absconding and\/or tampering with evidence might justify the measure of detention, at least during the initial phase of the criminal investigation, it nevertheless observes that the subsequent decisions ordering the applicants\u2019 continued pre-trial detention did not contain an individualised analysis in that respect. In the Court\u2019s view, decisions worded in formulaic and stereotyped terms as in the present case can on no account be regarded as sufficient to justify a person\u2019s continued pre-trial detention (see, mutatis mutandis, \u015e\u0131k v.\u00a0Turkey, no.\u00a053413\/11, \u00a7 62, 8 July 2014). This is particularly so given that the applicants in the present case were remanded in pre-trial detention for periods ranging from one year to four years and six\u00a0months.<\/p>\n

17. The Court notes that it has already examined many cases in which it has found a violation of Article 5 \u00a7 3 of the Convention for similar reasons (see Tuncer Bak\u0131rhan, cited above, \u00a7\u00a7\u00a040\u201158, and the cases cited therein). In the present case, having regard to the grounds provided by the national judicial authorities, the Court considers that they ordered and extended the applicants\u2019 pre-trial detention on grounds that cannot be regarded as \u201csufficient\u201d to justify the measure in issue.<\/p>\n

18. As regards Article 15 of the Convention and T\u00fcrkiye\u2019s derogation, the Court notes at the outset that the applicants were detained a short time after the coup attempt \u2013 that is, the event that prompted the declaration of the state of emergency and the notice of derogation by T\u00fcrkiye \u2013 which is undoubtedly a contextual factor that should be fully taken into account in interpreting and applying Article 5 of the Convention (see Alparslan Altan v.\u00a0Turkey, no.\u00a012778\/17, \u00a7 147, 16 April 2019). Nonetheless, Articles 100 and 101 of the CCP, which specifically require the judicial authorities to provide \u201crelevant and sufficient\u201d reasons when deciding to place or keep a suspect in pre-trial detention and to provide legal and factual reasons as to why alternative measures would be insufficient, were not amended during the state of emergency, unlike some other provisions of the CCP in relation to deprivations of liberty (see, for instance, Alparslan Altan, \u00a7\u00a7 113 and 117, and Ba\u015f, \u00a7 81, both cited above, for the restrictions introduced after the coup attempt on the procedural safeguards laid down in domestic law for those held in pre-trial detention, such as restrictions on access to case files and on the examination of objections against detention orders). The applicants\u2019 detention was therefore decided on the basis of the legislation in force before the declaration of the state of emergency, legislation which is still applicable (see, mutatis mutandis, Akg\u00fcn v. Turkey, no. 19699\/18, \u00a7\u00a0183, 20 July 2021). While the Government requested that the applicants\u2019 complaints under Article 5 be examined from the perspective of Article\u00a015 of the Convention, they have not submitted arguments to justify the derogation from the above\u2011mentioned requirements set out under Articles\u00a0100 and 101 of the CCP. Therefore, the Court considers that it is not established that the failure to comply with the requirements described above could be justified by the derogation notified by the Government of T\u00fcrkiye under Article 15 of the Convention and had not gone beyond the \u201cextent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation\u201d (see, mutatis mutandis, Mehmet Hasan Altan v.\u00a0Turkey, no. 13237\/17, \u00a7 140, 20\u00a0March 2018). This is particularly so having regard to the duration of the applicants\u2019 pre-trial detention, which lasted at least one year in each case. The Court points out in this connection that the considerations giving rise to the application of Article 15 of the Convention have gradually become less forceful and relevant as the public emergency threatening the life of the nation, while still persisting, has declined in intensity, at which point the \u201cexigency\u201d criterion must be applied more stringently (see Ba\u015f, cited above, \u00a7 224).<\/p>\n

19. In the light of the foregoing, the Court concludes that there has been a violation of Article 5 \u00a7 3 of the Convention in respect of all the applicants.<\/p>\n

B. Alleged lack of reasonable suspicion that the applicants committed a criminal offence (Article 5 \u00a7 1 (c) of the Convention)<\/strong><\/p>\n

20. Having regard to the particular circumstances of the present case (see\u00a0paragraphs 12-13 above) and its findings under Article 5 \u00a7 3 of the Convention (see paragraph 19 above), the Court considers that it is not necessary to determine whether in the present case there was any objective information showing that the suspicion against the applicants was \u201creasonable\u201d at the time of their initial detention (for a similar approach, see\u00a0Tuncer Bak\u0131rhan, cited above, \u00a7\u00a7 36-39).<\/p>\n

III. OTHER COMPLAINTS<\/strong><\/p>\n

21. As regards any remaining complaints under Article 5 \u00a7\u00a7 3, 4 and 5 of the Convention, the Court decides not to examine the admissibility and merits of those complaints, in view of its findings under Article 5 \u00a7 3 above and its considerations in Turan and Others (cited above, \u00a7 98).<\/p>\n

APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION<\/strong><\/p>\n

22. Some of the applicants did not submit, or failed to submit within the allotted time-limit, a claim for just satisfaction. Accordingly, the Court considers that there is no call to award them any sum on that account (see the appended table indicating the applicants to whom no award is to be made).<\/p>\n

23. The remaining applicants requested varying amounts in respect of non-pecuniary damage, submitting their claims within the time-limit allotted. The majority of them also claimed compensation in respect of pecuniary damage, as well as the legal costs and expenses incurred before the domestic courts and the Court.<\/p>\n

24. The Government contested the applicants\u2019 claims as being unsubstantiated and excessive.<\/p>\n

25. For the reasons set out in Turan and Others (cited above, \u00a7\u00a7\u00a0102\u201107), the Court rejects any claims for pecuniary damage and awards each of the applicants who submitted claims a lump sum of 3,000 euros in respect of non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses, plus any tax that may be chargeable on that amount (see the last column of the appended table).<\/p>\n

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,<\/strong><\/p>\n

1. Decides to join the applications;<\/p>\n

2. Declares the complaints concerning Article 5 \u00a7\u00a7 1 (c) and 3 of the Convention admissible;<\/p>\n

3. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 5 \u00a7 3 of the Convention on account of the absence of sufficient grounds for ordering and keeping the applicants in pre-trial detention;<\/p>\n

4. Holds that there is no need to examine separately the merits of the complaints under Article\u00a05 \u00a7\u00a01 (c) of the Convention;<\/p>\n

5. Holds that there is no need to examine the admissibility and merits of the applicants\u2019 remaining complaints under Article 5 of the Convention;<\/p>\n

6. Holds<\/p>\n

(a) that the respondent State is to pay, within three months, to each of the applicants who submitted a claim for just satisfaction (see the appended table), EUR\u00a03,000 (three thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;<\/p>\n

(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points;<\/p>\n

7. Dismisses the remainder of the applicants\u2019 claim for just satisfaction.<\/p>\n

Done in English, and notified in writing on 12 December 2023, pursuant to Rule\u00a077\u00a0\u00a7\u00a7\u00a02 and 3 of the Rules of Court.<\/p>\n

Dorothee von Arnim\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Jovan Ilievski
\nDeputy Registrar\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 President<\/p>\n

____________<\/p>\n

APPENDIX<\/strong><\/p>\n

List of cases:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
No.<\/strong><\/td>\nApplication no.<\/strong><\/td>\nCase name<\/strong><\/td>\nApplicant<\/strong><\/td>\nJust satisfaction<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
1.<\/td>\n15231\/17<\/td>\nKolay v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFatih KOLAY<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2.<\/td>\n34063\/17<\/td>\nYal\u00e7\u0131nsoy v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFikret YAL\u00c7INSOY<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
3.<\/td>\n34069\/17<\/td>\nAk v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMehmet AK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
4.<\/td>\n39406\/17<\/td>\nKaya v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nOg\u00fcn KAYA<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
5.<\/td>\n41289\/17<\/td>\nDemirci v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nS\u00fcleyman DEM\u0130RC\u0130<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
6.<\/td>\n41522\/17<\/td>\nAk\u0131nc\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAhmet AKINCI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
7.<\/td>\n41873\/17<\/td>\nAtasoy v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFatih ATASOY<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
8.<\/td>\n43361\/17<\/td>\nY\u0131lmaz v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAli R\u0131za YILMAZ<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
9.<\/td>\n43769\/17<\/td>\nY\u00fccel v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nR\u0131dvan Y\u00dcCEL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
10.<\/td>\n45792\/17<\/td>\nArslan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nErhan ARSLAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
11.<\/td>\n46354\/17<\/td>\nAcar v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSeyhan ACAR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
12.<\/td>\n47114\/17<\/td>\n\u00c7a\u011flar v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nO\u011fuz \u00c7A\u011eLAR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
13.<\/td>\n49526\/17<\/td>\nAnla\u015f\u0131ker v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMustafa ANLA\u015eIKER<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
14.<\/td>\n49744\/17<\/td>\n\u015eanl\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nErsin \u015eANLI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
15.<\/td>\n56308\/17<\/td>\nC\u00f6mert v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMustafa C\u00d6MERT<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
16.<\/td>\n58475\/17<\/td>\nD\u00fczg\u00fcn v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMu\u015ftak D\u00dcZG\u00dcN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
17.<\/td>\n58601\/17<\/td>\nToraman v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nNurullah TORAMAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18.<\/td>\n58643\/17<\/td>\n\u00dcn\u011fan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nOkan \u00dcN\u011eAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
19.<\/td>\n58681\/17<\/td>\nK\u0131l\u0131\u00e7 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMehmet KILI\u00c7<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
20.<\/td>\n58682\/17<\/td>\nUzun v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMuammer UZUN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21.<\/td>\n58697\/17<\/td>\nG\u00f6kce v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAli G\u00d6KCE<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
22.<\/td>\n59568\/17<\/td>\nKaralo\u011flu v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHakan KARALO\u011eLU<\/td>\nNot awarded<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
23.<\/td>\n60948\/17<\/td>\nErol v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHasan EROL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
24.<\/td>\n60964\/17<\/td>\nYirik v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u015eevket Y\u0130R\u0130K<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
25.<\/td>\n61339\/17<\/td>\nAte\u015f v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nOktay ATE\u015e<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
26.<\/td>\n62832\/17<\/td>\nErdem v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nCengiz ERDEM<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
27.<\/td>\n62876\/17<\/td>\nY\u00fczba\u015f\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nKamil Y\u00dcZBA\u015eI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
28.<\/td>\n63445\/17<\/td>\nTanr\u0131verdi v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130smail TANRIVERD\u0130<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
29.<\/td>\n63612\/17<\/td>\nAyn\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130sa AYNI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
30.<\/td>\n63682\/17<\/td>\nYilmaz v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nErdem YILMAZ<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
31.<\/td>\n63898\/17<\/td>\n\u015eener v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHamit \u015eENER<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
32.<\/td>\n66702\/17<\/td>\nBilgin v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nZafer B\u0130LG\u0130N<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
33.<\/td>\n68983\/17<\/td>\nG\u00f6kay v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nKadir Koray G\u00d6KAY<\/td>\nNot awarded<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
34.<\/td>\n69764\/17<\/td>\nS\u00f6ztutan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAli \u0130hsan S\u00d6ZTUTAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
35.<\/td>\n69817\/17<\/td>\nBa\u015ftu\u011f v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMustafa BA\u015eTU\u011e<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
36.<\/td>\n69821\/17<\/td>\nDevirmi\u015f v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u00c7a\u011fr\u0131 DEV\u0130RM\u0130\u015e<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
37.<\/td>\n69824\/17<\/td>\nG\u00fcll\u00fcce v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSinan G\u00dcLL\u00dcCE<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
38.<\/td>\n69851\/17<\/td>\nLa\u00e7iner v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSedat LA\u00c7\u0130NER<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
39.<\/td>\n69855\/17<\/td>\nG\u00fcney v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nEnis G\u00dcNEY<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
40.<\/td>\n69857\/17<\/td>\nAslanta\u015f v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMuammer ASLANTA\u015e<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
41.<\/td>\n69875\/17<\/td>\nYazgan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nCumali YAZGAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
42.<\/td>\n69883\/17<\/td>\nY\u0131lmaz v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u00d6zg\u00fcr YILMAZ<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
43.<\/td>\n70186\/17<\/td>\nKahyalar v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nKayhan KAHYALAR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
44.<\/td>\n70276\/17<\/td>\nY\u0131ld\u0131z v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nRemzi YILDIZ<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
45.<\/td>\n70279\/17<\/td>\nErba\u011fc\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSelim ERBA\u011eCI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
46.<\/td>\n70499\/17<\/td>\nG\u00f6kkoyun v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nTurgay G\u00d6KKOYUN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
47.<\/td>\n70869\/17<\/td>\nKaraca v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHikmet KARACA<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
48.<\/td>\n71049\/17<\/td>\n\u00c7akmak v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFuat \u00c7AKMAK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
49.<\/td>\n71071\/17<\/td>\n\u00d6nler v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nYusuf \u00d6NLER<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
50.<\/td>\n73021\/17<\/td>\nBoy v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHayati BOY<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
51.<\/td>\n76224\/17<\/td>\nCoruk v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMehmet CORUK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
52.<\/td>\n76261\/17<\/td>\nYaz\u0131l\u0131ta\u015f v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAhmet YAZILITA\u015e<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
53.<\/td>\n76301\/17<\/td>\nYaz\u0131c\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nYavuz YAZICI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
54.<\/td>\n76312\/17<\/td>\nBayar v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nLevent Serhat BAYAR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
55.<\/td>\n79815\/17<\/td>\nDereba\u015f\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHarun DEREBA\u015eI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
56.<\/td>\n79844\/17<\/td>\nDeniz v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHasan DEN\u0130Z<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
57.<\/td>\n80966\/17<\/td>\nDemirkandan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nOsman DEM\u0130RKANDAN<\/td>\nNot awarded <\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
58.<\/td>\n81926\/17<\/td>\nKabak v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130rfan KABAK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
59.<\/td>\n82066\/17<\/td>\n\u00c7oksoylu v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMahmut Murat \u00c7OKSOYLU<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
60.<\/td>\n82313\/17<\/td>\nKarabudak v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFatih KARABUDAK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
61.<\/td>\n83959\/17<\/td>\nHavabulut v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nG\u00f6kay HAVABULUT<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
62.<\/td>\n83973\/17<\/td>\n\u00c7i\u00e7ek v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMusa \u00c7\u0130\u00c7EK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
63.<\/td>\n83983\/17<\/td>\nBoyal\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHac\u0131 Salih BOYALI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
64.<\/td>\n83995\/17<\/td>\nSa\u011flam v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nG\u00fcltekin SA\u011eLAM<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
65.<\/td>\n84046\/17<\/td>\nDuran v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMuharrem DURAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
66.<\/td>\n84322\/17<\/td>\nM.Y. v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMuharrem YILMAZ<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
67.<\/td>\n117\/18<\/td>\nKeskin v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nH\u00fcseyin KESK\u0130N<\/td>\nNot awarded<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
68.<\/td>\n352\/18<\/td>\nGen\u00e7 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nZafer GEN\u00c7<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
69.<\/td>\n747\/18<\/td>\nDemir v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nBekir DEM\u0130R<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
70.<\/td>\n2859\/18<\/td>\n\u015eeker v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMustafa \u015eEKER<\/td>\nNot awarded<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
71.<\/td>\n6731\/18<\/td>\nBiliyor v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFatih B\u0130L\u0130YOR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
72.<\/td>\n6769\/18<\/td>\nOlcay v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFatih OLCAY<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
73.<\/td>\n6959\/18<\/td>\nBa\u015f v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMuammer BA\u015e<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
74.<\/td>\n8386\/18<\/td>\nYi\u011fit v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130brahim Y\u0130\u011e\u0130T<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
75.<\/td>\n8903\/18<\/td>\nYa\u015far v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFerhat YA\u015eAR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
76.<\/td>\n8913\/18<\/td>\nTeyran v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130shak TEYRAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
77.<\/td>\n9947\/18<\/td>\n\u00c7amc\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAdem \u00c7AMCI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
78.<\/td>\n9954\/18<\/td>\nGelir v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAhmet G\u00f6ksel GEL\u0130R<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
79.<\/td>\n9957\/18<\/td>\nArslan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMustafa ARSLAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
80.<\/td>\n9965\/18<\/td>\nKaya v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u015eaban KAYA<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
81.<\/td>\n9975\/18<\/td>\nAyer v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nG\u00f6khan AYER<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
82.<\/td>\n9984\/18<\/td>\nT\u00fcrker v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMustafa T\u00dcRKER<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
83.<\/td>\n10286\/18<\/td>\nG\u00fcneyisi v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nEkrem G\u00dcNEY\u0130S\u0130<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
84.<\/td>\n10405\/18<\/td>\nAr\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nBekir Enes ARI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
85.<\/td>\n10618\/18<\/td>\nG\u00f6z\u00fca\u00e7\u0131k v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHakan G\u00d6Z\u00dcA\u00c7IK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
86.<\/td>\n10640\/18<\/td>\nDemir v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHalil \u0130brahim DEM\u0130R<\/td>\nNot awarded<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
87.<\/td>\n10648\/18<\/td>\nBilsel v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMehmet B\u0130LSEL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
88.<\/td>\n10653\/18<\/td>\nTun\u00e7kol v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nKadir TUN\u00c7KOL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
89.<\/td>\n10852\/18<\/td>\nSancar v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nUfuk Sel\u00e7uk SANCAR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
90.<\/td>\n11782\/18<\/td>\n\u00c7ak\u0131r v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130smail \u00c7AKIR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
91.<\/td>\n11892\/18<\/td>\nBalaban v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAyhan BALABAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
92.<\/td>\n12210\/18<\/td>\nTuran v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMustafa TURAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
93.<\/td>\n12314\/18<\/td>\nSarg\u0131n v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nBayram SARGIN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
94.<\/td>\n12602\/18<\/td>\nY\u0131ld\u0131r\u0131m v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nResul YILDIRIM<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
95.<\/td>\n12631\/18<\/td>\nTufan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFatih TUFAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
96.<\/td>\n13397\/18<\/td>\nAbanoz v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nYahya ABANOZ<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
97.<\/td>\n13739\/18<\/td>\n\u015eahin v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAli Kemal \u015eAH\u0130N<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
98.<\/td>\n14817\/18<\/td>\nAcar v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMehmet Cemal ACAR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
99.<\/td>\n15433\/18<\/td>\nKaya v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMehmet KAYA<\/td>\nNot awarded<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
100.<\/td>\n15883\/18<\/td>\n\u00c7elik v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nBilgin \u00c7EL\u0130K<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
101.<\/td>\n16261\/18<\/td>\n\u00c7ak\u0131c\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nBeytullah \u00c7AKICI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
102.<\/td>\n16806\/18<\/td>\n\u00d6zt\u00fcrk v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nErc\u00fcment \u00d6ZT\u00dcRK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
103.<\/td>\n16906\/18<\/td>\nDeniz v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHasan DEN\u0130Z<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
104.<\/td>\n16909\/18<\/td>\nY\u0131ld\u0131r\u0131m v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAhmet YILDIRIM<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
105.<\/td>\n16954\/18<\/td>\nAr\u0131t\u0131k v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAhmet Dervi\u015f ARITIK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
106.<\/td>\n17141\/18<\/td>\nU\u011fur v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130brahim U\u011eUR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
107.<\/td>\n17353\/18<\/td>\nBakar v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSabiha B\u00fc\u015fra BAKAR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
108.<\/td>\n17681\/18<\/td>\nSab\u0131r v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAlaattin SABIR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
109.<\/td>\n17907\/18<\/td>\nKa\u011f\u0131zman v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMustafa Ca\u011fr\u0131 KA\u011eIZMAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
110.<\/td>\n18027\/18<\/td>\nSer\u00e7e v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nRecep SER\u00c7E<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
111.<\/td>\n18051\/18<\/td>\nU\u00e7kan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSedat U\u00c7KAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
112.<\/td>\n18054\/18<\/td>\nBeyaz v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130smail BEYAZ<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
113.<\/td>\n18599\/18<\/td>\nBol v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAkif BOL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
114.<\/td>\n18785\/18<\/td>\nAr\u0131k v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMehmet Ali ARIK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
115.<\/td>\n18799\/18<\/td>\nSar\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nOsman SARI<\/td>\nNot awarded<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
116.<\/td>\n19248\/18<\/td>\n\u00dcnl\u00fc v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHimmet \u00dcNL\u00dc<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
117.<\/td>\n19707\/18<\/td>\n\u00d6z v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nT\u00fcnay \u00d6Z<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
118.<\/td>\n20000\/18<\/td>\n\u00c7am v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nTurgay \u00c7AM<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
119.<\/td>\n20263\/18<\/td>\nUygur v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nRamazan UYGUR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
120.<\/td>\n20379\/18<\/td>\nKayaba\u015f\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMuammer KAYABA\u015eI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
121.<\/td>\n20393\/18<\/td>\nPala v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAlaattin PALA<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
122.<\/td>\n20538\/18<\/td>\nAlt\u0131nkaynak v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u00d6nder ALTINKAYNAK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
123.<\/td>\n20993\/18<\/td>\nCerit v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nYusuf Ulvi CER\u0130T<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
124.<\/td>\n21002\/18<\/td>\n\u00c7elik v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAykut \u00c7EL\u0130K<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
125.<\/td>\n21054\/18<\/td>\nYa\u015far v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nErsan YA\u015eAR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
126.<\/td>\n21066\/18<\/td>\nDin\u00e7 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130smail D\u0130N\u00c7<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
127.<\/td>\n21079\/18<\/td>\nUyar v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nErol UYAR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
128.<\/td>\n21161\/18<\/td>\nY\u0131ld\u0131r\u0131m v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAbdurrahim YILDIRIM<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
129.<\/td>\n21973\/18<\/td>\nYard\u0131mc\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMustafa YARDIMCI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
130.<\/td>\n22008\/18<\/td>\nG\u00f6ksel v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nEmrah G\u00d6KSEL<\/td>\nNot awarded<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
131.<\/td>\n22108\/18<\/td>\nG\u00fcne\u015f v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMurat G\u00dcNE\u015e<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
132.<\/td>\n22134\/18<\/td>\nBal\u0131k v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSinan BALIK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
133.<\/td>\n22237\/18<\/td>\nKo\u00e7 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u00d6zcan KO\u00c7<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
134.<\/td>\n23391\/18<\/td>\nKaplan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nM\u00fcdayi KAPLAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
135.<\/td>\n23626\/18<\/td>\n\u00c7ak\u0131r v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAyhan \u00c7AKIR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
136.<\/td>\n23631\/18<\/td>\nEkiz v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAhmet Y\u0131lmaz EK\u0130Z<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
137.<\/td>\n23635\/18<\/td>\nAtalay v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nNuh Taha ATALAY<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
138.<\/td>\n23646\/18<\/td>\nEker v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130sa EKER<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
139.<\/td>\n23659\/18<\/td>\nYi\u011fit v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u015eenduran Y\u0130\u011e\u0130T<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
140.<\/td>\n23780\/18<\/td>\nDolama\u00e7 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAhmet DOLAMA\u00c7<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
141.<\/td>\n23871\/18<\/td>\n\u00c7am v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nO\u011fuzhan \u00c7AM<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
142.<\/td>\n23882\/18<\/td>\nHalla\u00e7o\u011flu v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nRuhi HALLA\u00c7O\u011eLU<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
143.<\/td>\n23885\/18<\/td>\n\u00dcnal v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMehmet Akif \u00dcNAL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
144.<\/td>\n23897\/18<\/td>\nTun\u00e7 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130brahim Can TUN\u00c7<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
145.<\/td>\n24212\/18<\/td>\nKahraman v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAbdullah KAHRAMAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
146.<\/td>\n24232\/18<\/td>\n\u00d6zg\u00fcl v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAbdulkadir Ceylani \u00d6ZG\u00dcL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
147.<\/td>\n24719\/18<\/td>\nDemir v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nEnes DEM\u0130R<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
148.<\/td>\n24861\/18<\/td>\nKonak v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nG\u00f6khan KONAK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
149.<\/td>\n24894\/18<\/td>\nK\u00f6yl\u00fc v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAhmet Mutlu K\u00d6YL\u00dc<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
150.<\/td>\n25234\/18<\/td>\nY\u00fcksel v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u00d6mer Y\u00dcKSEL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
151.<\/td>\n25292\/18<\/td>\nG\u00f6k\u00e7eg\u00f6z v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFazl\u0131 G\u00d6K\u00c7EG\u00d6Z<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
152.<\/td>\n25294\/18<\/td>\nDemirci v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nErdo\u011fan DEM\u0130RC\u0130<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
153.<\/td>\n25353\/18<\/td>\nSolak v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHasan SOLAK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
154.<\/td>\n25901\/18<\/td>\nKarakaya v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMehmet KARAKAYA<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
155.<\/td>\n26019\/18<\/td>\n\u015een v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMuhammet Ali \u015eEN<\/td>\nNot awarded<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
156.<\/td>\n26335\/18<\/td>\nVural v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nYesari VURAL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
157.<\/td>\n26339\/18<\/td>\nHayal v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFatih HAYAL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
158.<\/td>\n26355\/18<\/td>\nBilici v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nYakup B\u0130L\u0130C\u0130<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
159.<\/td>\n26586\/18<\/td>\n\u00d6z v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nS\u00fcleyman \u00d6Z<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
160.<\/td>\n26914\/18<\/td>\nTa\u015far v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHasan TA\u015eAR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
161.<\/td>\n27017\/18<\/td>\n\u00c7\u0131nar v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nYakup \u00c7INAR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
162.<\/td>\n27025\/18<\/td>\nDiler v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMetin D\u0130LER<\/td>\nNot awarded<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
163.<\/td>\n27053\/18<\/td>\nAkka\u015fo\u011flu v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSelim AKKA\u015eO\u011eLU<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
164.<\/td>\n27056\/18<\/td>\nAslan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAhmet ASLAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
165.<\/td>\n27062\/18<\/td>\nUy\u011fun v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSerkan UY\u011eUN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
166.<\/td>\n27074\/18<\/td>\nOlur v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMurat OLUR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
167.<\/td>\n27123\/18<\/td>\nKo\u00e7ak v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nErsin KO\u00c7AK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
168.<\/td>\n27220\/18<\/td>\nTufan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nM\u00fcr\u015fit TUFAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
169.<\/td>\n27723\/18<\/td>\nAksoy v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMurat AKSOY<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
170.<\/td>\n27766\/18<\/td>\nAyd\u0131n v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMustafa Suat AYDIN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
171.<\/td>\n27827\/18<\/td>\nCan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nKadir CAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
172.<\/td>\n27895\/18<\/td>\nArslan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMuhsin ARSLAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
173.<\/td>\n28584\/18<\/td>\nKanta\u015f v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nRecep KANTA\u015e<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
174.<\/td>\n28595\/18<\/td>\nAkp\u0131nar v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMustafa AKPINAR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
175.<\/td>\n28613\/18<\/td>\nAl\u0131c\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nL\u00fctfi ALICI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
176.<\/td>\n28734\/18<\/td>\nAk\u00e7in v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nOsman AK\u00c7\u0130N<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
177.<\/td>\n29382\/18<\/td>\n\u00c7olak v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nEy\u00fcp \u00c7OLAK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
178.<\/td>\n29399\/18<\/td>\nKaba v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nUfuk KABA<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
179.<\/td>\n29593\/18<\/td>\nY\u00fccel v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMetin Y\u00dcCEL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
180.<\/td>\n29766\/18<\/td>\nAkdo\u011fan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSeyit Ahmet AKDO\u011eAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
181.<\/td>\n30463\/18<\/td>\nSayhan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u00c7a\u011flar SAYHAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
182.<\/td>\n30500\/18<\/td>\nKurnaz v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nVeli KURNAZ<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
183.<\/td>\n30504\/18<\/td>\nYaprak v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAhmet YAPRAK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
184.<\/td>\n30507\/18<\/td>\nSaribay v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHuseyin SAR\u0130BAY<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
185.<\/td>\n36939\/18<\/td>\nKunt v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nEmre KUNT<\/td>\nNot awarded<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
186.<\/td>\n37745\/18<\/td>\nBalka\u015f v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSerdar Resul BALKA\u015e<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
187.<\/td>\n39195\/18<\/td>\n\u00c7evik v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAbdullah \u00c7EV\u0130K<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
188.<\/td>\n39434\/18<\/td>\nKu\u015f v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMetin KU\u015e<\/td>\nNot awarded<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
189.<\/td>\n39460\/18<\/td>\nDemirhan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nKadir DEM\u0130RHAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
190.<\/td>\n39519\/18<\/td>\nKocaba\u015f v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nTimur KOCABA\u015e<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
191.<\/td>\n39678\/18<\/td>\nDuysak v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nRa\u015fit DUYSAK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
192.<\/td>\n39710\/18<\/td>\n\u00d6zdemir v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nVeysel \u00d6ZDEM\u0130R<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
193.<\/td>\n39764\/18<\/td>\nG\u00fcler v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHakan G\u00dcLER<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
194.<\/td>\n39844\/18<\/td>\nYakar v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nTamer YAKAR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
195.<\/td>\n40324\/18<\/td>\nErdo\u011fan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nYunus ERDO\u011eAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
196.<\/td>\n40525\/18<\/td>\nKo\u00e7yi\u011fit v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMustafa KO\u00c7Y\u0130\u011e\u0130T<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
197.<\/td>\n40601\/18<\/td>\n\u015eahpaz v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130smail \u015eAHPAZ<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
198.<\/td>\n40844\/18<\/td>\nMetin v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSelahaddin MET\u0130N<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
199.<\/td>\n41593\/18<\/td>\nG\u00fcltekin v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAdem G\u00dcLTEK\u0130N<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
200.<\/td>\n42247\/18<\/td>\nSevin\u00e7 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nH\u00fcseyin SEV\u0130N\u00c7<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
201.<\/td>\n42591\/18<\/td>\nDemir v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMehmet DEM\u0130R<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
202.<\/td>\n42673\/18<\/td>\nKural v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSuat KURAL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
203.<\/td>\n42857\/18<\/td>\nDilcio\u011flu v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMetin D\u0130LC\u0130O\u011eLU<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
204.<\/td>\n42872\/18<\/td>\nG\u00fclten v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMesut G\u00dcLTEN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
205.<\/td>\n42887\/18<\/td>\nK\u00f6ro\u011flu v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMehmet K\u00d6RO\u011eLU<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
206.<\/td>\n43671\/18<\/td>\nCeran v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nYavuz CERAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
207.<\/td>\n43712\/18<\/td>\nDurdu v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAyd\u0131n DURDU<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
208.<\/td>\n43979\/18<\/td>\nK\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nM\u00fcrsel K\u00dc\u00c7\u00dcK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
209.<\/td>\n44657\/18<\/td>\nTokyay v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMehmet Zafer TOKYAY<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
210.<\/td>\n44761\/18<\/td>\nOlcabay v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nDo\u011fan OLCABAY<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
211.<\/td>\n44807\/18<\/td>\nDemir v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nBilal DEM\u0130R<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
212.<\/td>\n44960\/18<\/td>\nKele\u015f v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMurat KELE\u015e<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
213.<\/td>\n45545\/18<\/td>\n\u015eahin v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130lker \u015eAH\u0130N<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
214.<\/td>\n46168\/18<\/td>\nAltundal v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nZeki Osman ALTUNDAL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
215.<\/td>\n47328\/18<\/td>\nY\u0131ld\u0131z v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHakan \u015einasi YILDIZ<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
216.<\/td>\n48106\/18<\/td>\n\u00c7elik v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAhmet \u00c7EL\u0130K<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
217.<\/td>\n48214\/18<\/td>\n\u00dcz\u00fcmc\u00fc v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nErcan \u00dcZ\u00dcMC\u00dc<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
218.<\/td>\n48726\/18<\/td>\nTu\u011fberk v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMurat TU\u011eBERK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
219.<\/td>\n48731\/18<\/td>\nKervanc\u0131o\u011flu v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMahmut KERVANCIO\u011eLU<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
220.<\/td>\n48917\/18<\/td>\n\u00dcrnez v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nH\u00fcseyin \u00dcRNEZ<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
221.<\/td>\n49399\/18<\/td>\nKans\u0131z v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nCihan KANSIZ<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
222.<\/td>\n49835\/18<\/td>\nAkbulut v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMurat AKBULUT<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
223.<\/td>\n49840\/18<\/td>\nAte\u015f v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAziz ATE\u015e<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
224.<\/td>\n49848\/18<\/td>\n\u015eanl\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSava\u015f \u015eANLI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
225.<\/td>\n49849\/18<\/td>\nKandemir v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHalit KANDEM\u0130R<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
226.<\/td>\n50974\/18<\/td>\nTekten v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMurat Tuncay TEKTEN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
227.<\/td>\n52160\/18<\/td>\n\u015eim\u015fek v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFerhat Fevzi \u015e\u0130M\u015eEK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
228.<\/td>\n52386\/18<\/td>\nKafes v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nCemil KAFES<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
229.<\/td>\n52502\/18<\/td>\nFidan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nH\u00fcseyin F\u0130DAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
230.<\/td>\n52966\/18<\/td>\n\u00c7abuk v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMustafa \u00c7ABUK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
231.<\/td>\n53385\/18<\/td>\nK\u00f6rsulu v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nErdal K\u00d6RSULU<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
232.<\/td>\n53443\/18<\/td>\n\u00c7elik v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSuat \u00c7EL\u0130K<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
233.<\/td>\n53772\/18<\/td>\nTetik v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nNedim TET\u0130K<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
234.<\/td>\n54954\/18<\/td>\nKaraduman v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMurat KARADUMAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
235.<\/td>\n57185\/18<\/td>\nKarhan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMuhammet KARHAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
236.<\/td>\n57929\/18<\/td>\nEro\u011flu v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u00dcnal ERO\u011eLU<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
237.<\/td>\n58133\/18<\/td>\nBa\u011fc\u0131 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMustafa BA\u011eCI<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
238.<\/td>\n58217\/18<\/td>\nKara v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nH\u00fcseyin KARA<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
239.<\/td>\n58232\/18<\/td>\nGedemenli v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSait GEDEMENL\u0130<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
240.<\/td>\n58254\/18<\/td>\nYa\u015fa v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nYa\u015far YA\u015eA<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
241.<\/td>\n58577\/18<\/td>\nAyd\u0131n v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130smail AYDIN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
242.<\/td>\n58911\/18<\/td>\n\u015eahin v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nK\u00f6ksal \u015eAH\u0130N<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
243.<\/td>\n59028\/18<\/td>\n\u00d6zturk v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHamza \u00d6ZT\u00dcRK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
244.<\/td>\n59384\/18<\/td>\n\u00c7akar v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nZafer \u00c7AKAR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
245.<\/td>\n525\/19<\/td>\nZor v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nC\u00fcneyt ZOR<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
246.<\/td>\n1200\/19<\/td>\nSilah\u015f\u00f6r v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u015eaban S\u0130LAH\u015e\u00d6R<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
247.<\/td>\n1686\/19<\/td>\n\u015eahin v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHalil \u0130brahim \u015eAH\u0130N<\/td>\nNot awarded<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
248.<\/td>\n1933\/19<\/td>\nY\u0131lmaz v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nTar\u0131k YILMAZ<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
249.<\/td>\n2196\/19<\/td>\nSa\u011flam v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nLevent SA\u011eLAM<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
250.<\/td>\n2735\/19<\/td>\nSezer v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nYasir SEZER<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
251.<\/td>\n2762\/19<\/td>\nTorunler v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u00c7a\u011flar TORUNLER<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
252.<\/td>\n3441\/19<\/td>\nPala v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFahrettin PALA<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
253.<\/td>\n3452\/19<\/td>\nY\u00fccel v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMurat Y\u00dcCEL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
254.<\/td>\n3459\/19<\/td>\n\u00dclkemen v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSinan \u00dcLKEMEN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
255.<\/td>\n3770\/19<\/td>\nKayacan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFevzi KAYACAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
256.<\/td>\n4299\/19<\/td>\nB\u00fclb\u00fcl v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHalil B\u00dcLB\u00dcL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
257.<\/td>\n4357\/19<\/td>\n\u00c7elebi v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nBekir \u00c7ELEB\u0130<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
258.<\/td>\n4405\/19<\/td>\nKo\u00e7ak v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFatih KO\u00c7AK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
259.<\/td>\n4918\/19<\/td>\n\u015eim\u015fek v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nDo\u011fan \u00d6zg\u00fcr \u015e\u0130M\u015eEK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
260.<\/td>\n4991\/19<\/td>\n\u0130stek v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHakan \u0130STEK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
261.<\/td>\n5135\/19<\/td>\nTopuz v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAyhan TOPUZ<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
262.<\/td>\n5418\/19<\/td>\nK\u00f6rpe v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nErol K\u00d6RPE<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
263.<\/td>\n5494\/19<\/td>\nBulut v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nBurhanettin BULUT<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
264.<\/td>\n5498\/19<\/td>\nEkinci v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nYasin EK\u0130NC\u0130<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
265.<\/td>\n5713\/19<\/td>\nA\u00e7\u0131kg\u00f6z v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSeyfettin A\u00c7IKG\u00d6Z<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
266.<\/td>\n6468\/19<\/td>\n\u00d6zduran v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nHasan \u00d6ZDURAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
267.<\/td>\n7254\/19<\/td>\n\u00d6zcel v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nAli \u00d6ZCEL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
268.<\/td>\n7281\/19<\/td>\nUysal v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nBak\u0131t UYSAL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
269.<\/td>\n7302\/19<\/td>\nT\u00fcrkmen v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130brahim T\u00dcRKMEN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
270.<\/td>\n7442\/19<\/td>\nKu\u015f v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nDavut Murat KU\u015e<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
271.<\/td>\n7480\/19<\/td>\nToprak v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\n\u0130lhan TOPRAK<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
272.<\/td>\n8720\/19<\/td>\nSekmen v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nB\u00fcnyamin SEKMEN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
273.<\/td>\n9324\/19<\/td>\nBartan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nNihat Murat BARTAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
274.<\/td>\n9355\/19<\/td>\nBarin v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMehmet Ali BAR\u0130N<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
275.<\/td>\n9466\/19<\/td>\nUsta v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMehmet USTA<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
276.<\/td>\n9704\/19<\/td>\nGerez v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nSalih Mesut GEREZ<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
277.<\/td>\n9818\/19<\/td>\nSa\u011fd\u0131\u00e7 v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nYasin SA\u011eDI\u00c7<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
278.<\/td>\n10535\/19<\/td>\nYaslan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nBar\u0131\u015f YASLAN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
279.<\/td>\n10593\/19<\/td>\nTopal v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nYasemin TOPAL<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
280.<\/td>\n10619\/19<\/td>\nAsan v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nEnes ASAN<\/td>\nNot awarded<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
281.<\/td>\n10954\/19<\/td>\nErdin v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nCevat ERD\u0130N<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
282.<\/td>\n11075\/19<\/td>\nVars\u0131n v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nMurat VARSIN<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
283.<\/td>\n18561\/19<\/td>\nUlusoy v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nFatih ULUSOY<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
284.<\/td>\n22762\/19<\/td>\nKaya v. T\u00fcrkiye<\/td>\nOsman KAYA<\/td>\nAwarded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n