Communicated on 8 January 2019<\/p>\n
SECOND SECTION<\/p>\n
Application no.58080\/11
\nBar\u0131\u015f \u0130NAN
\nagainst Turkey
\nlodged on 12 August 2011<\/p>\n
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE<\/p>\n
The application mainly concerns the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings due to the systemic restriction imposed on the applicant\u2019s right of access to a lawyer during the pre-trial stage pursuant to Law no.\u00a03842 and the subsequent use by the trial court of statements taken in the absence of a lawyer (see Salduz v. Turkey [GC], no.\u00a036391\/02, ECHR 2008, and Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos.\u00a050541\/08 and 3\u00a0others, 13\u00a0September 2016).<\/p>\n
The application also concerns the use of the evidence obtained from the applicant and the co-defendants under alleged duress during the preliminary investigation stage (see, HakanDuman v. Turkey, no.\u00a028439\/03, 23 March 2010 and in respect of the co-defendants Erkapic v. Croatia, no. 51198\/08, 25 April 2013; \u00d6merG\u00fcner v. Turkey, no. 28338\/07<\/a>, 4 September 2018; Mehmet Duman v. Turkey, no. 38740\/09, 23 October 2018; and compare Dominka v. Slovakia, (dec.) no. 14630\/12, \u00a7\u00a7 28-36, 3 April 2018).<\/p>\n It further pertains to the applicant\u2019s alleged inability to examine or have examined the witnesses against him (see,Schatschaschwili v. Germany [GC], no. 9154\/10, \u00a7\u00a7 100-131, ECHR 2015; Huseyn and Others v.\u00a0Azerbaijan, nos. 35485\/05 and 3 others, 26 July 2011, and compare G\u00f6kbulut v. Turkey, no. 7459\/04, 29 March 2016).<\/p>\n Finally, it also concerns the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings against the applicant on account of the dismissal of the applicant\u2019s lawyer\u2019s request for adjournment of the hearing before the Court of Cassation on 16 February 2011 (see,Han\u017eeva\u010dki v. Croatia, no.\u00a017182\/07, \u00a7\u00a718-29, 16 April 2009).<\/p>\n QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES<\/p>\n 1.\u00a0\u00a0Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against himself, in accordance with Article\u00a06 \u00a7\u00a01 of the Convention? In particular, has there been a breach of Article\u00a06 \u00a7\u00a03\u00a0(c) of the Convention, as a result of the lack of legal assistance available to the applicant during the preliminary investigation (see Salduz v. Turkey[GC], no. 36391\/02, ECHR 2008; Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 50541\/08 and 3 others, 13 September 2016; Beuze v. Belgium [GC], no. 71409\/10<\/a>, 9 November 2018)?<\/p>\n 2.\u00a0\u00a0Did the use of evidence allegedly obtained from the applicant and the co-defendants under duress and in the absence of a lawyer violate the applicant\u2019s right to a fair hearing (see, HakanDuman v. Turkey, no.\u00a028439\/03, 23 March 2010 and in respect of the co-defendants Erkapic v.\u00a0Croatia, no. 51198\/08, 25 April 2013; \u00d6merG\u00fcner v. Turkey, no.\u00a028338\/07<\/a>, 4 September 2018; Mehmet Duman v. Turkey, no. 38740\/09, 23 October 2018; and compare Dominka v. Slovakia, (dec.) no. 14630\/12, \u00a7\u00a7 28-36, 3 April 2018)?<\/p>\n 3.\u00a0\u00a0Was the applicant provided with an adequate opportunity to exercise his defence rights within the meaning of Article 6 \u00a7 3 (d) of the Convention, in particular in respect of the evidence given by Y.P., S.E., Y.D., S.K., M.D., E.T., D.I., K.B., H.M., Y.A., A.H.P., I.\u00c7., K.B., within the context of another set of proceedings? If not, has there been a breach of the applicant\u2019s right to a fair trial provided for by Article 6 \u00a7\u00a7 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention due to his inability to examine or have examined those witnesses (see, Schatschaschwili v. Germany [GC], no. 9154\/10, \u00a7\u00a7 100-131, ECHR 2015, and compare G\u00f6kbulut v. Turkey, no. 7459\/04, 29 March 2016)?<\/p>\n 4.\u00a0\u00a0Has there been a violation of Article 6 \u00a7 1 of the Convention on account of dismissal of the applicant\u2019s lawyer\u2019s request for adjournment of the hearing of 16 February 2011 (see Han\u017eeva\u010dki v. Croatia, no. 17182\/07, \u00a7\u00a718-29, 16 April 2009)?<\/p>\n The Government are invited to submit copies of all the relevant documents concerning the applicant\u2019s case, including but not limited to the minutes of all the hearings, documentary evidence against the applicant and the reasoned judgment of the trial court, the applicant\u2019s and his lawyer\u2019s written submissions both before the trial court and before the Court of Cassation.<\/p>\n