Case of İlerde and Others v. Türkiye (Applications nos. 35614/19 and 10 others)

A selection of key paragraphs can be found below the judgment.


188. Having regard to its above findings in respect of the applicants Ahmet İlerde (see paragraph 177 above), Ruhi Hallaçoğlu (see paragraph 178 above), Davut Tek (see paragraph 179 above), Aşkın Şanlı (see paragraph 180 above), Kemalettin Erel (see paragraph 181 above), Harun Altun (see paragraph 184 above), Kahraman Yıldırım (see paragraphs 185- 186 above) and Deniz Aktaş (see paragraph 187 above), who had less than 3 sq. m of living space during the periods specified above, the Court notes that a strong presumption of a violation of Article 3 arises.

Accordingly, the question to be answered is whether there were factors capable of rebutting that presumption (see paragraph 169 above). As to the first of those factors, which need to be cumulatively met, the Court notes that the periods of detention during which those applicants had insufficient personal space were of a considerably long duration. Such periods cannot be considered “short, occasional and minor”, and cannot therefore rebut the presumption of a violation of Article 3 (see Muršić, cited above, §§ 151-52, where even a significantly shorter period of 27 days could not be used to rebut the presumption; Nikitin and Others v. Estonia, nos. 23226/16 and 6 others, § 188, 29 January 2019; and Petrescu v. Portugal, no. 23190/17, § 106, 3 December 2019). It follows that there is no need to examine the remaining factors.

189. The Court finds that the conditions of those applicants’ detention subjected them to hardship going beyond the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention. There has accordingly been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention.


De versie van de browser die je gebruikt is verouderd en wordt niet ondersteund.
Upgrade je browser om de website optimaal te gebruiken.