The deprivation of legal assistance at a time critical for the accused violates the right to a fair trial
JUDGMENT
Girişen v. Turkey 13.3.2018 (no. 53567/07)
SUMMARY
Criminal prosecution for undermining the constitutional order due to involvement in a criminal organization following a telecommunication confession. Absence of advocate in the preliminary examination and excessive length of criminal proceedings. Violation of the right to a fair trial.
PROVISIONS
Article 6 § 1
Article 6 § 3 (c)
PRINCIPAL FACTS
The applicant, Deniz Girişen, is a Turkish national who was born in 1979 and is detained in Diyarbakır (Turkey).
The case concerned criminal proceedings brought against him for attempting to undermine the constitutional order of the State.
Mr Girisen was arrested in December 2001 on suspicion of being a member of an illegal organisation, Hizbullah. He confessed his involvement in the organisation to the police but later retracted and stated that he had been tortured into confessing, in particular by electric shocks to his testicles. He repeated his allegations at trial, but, on the basis of his statements to the police, he was ultimately convicted in June 2012 of attempting to undermine the constitutional order of the State and sentenced to over 16 years’ imprisonment. The judgment was upheld in June 2014. The police officers who had allegedly ill-treated him were never prosecuted.
Relying in particular on Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) (right to a fair trial and right to legal assistance of own choosing), Mr Giresen alleged inter alia that his trial had been unfair as he had been denied access to a lawyer at the pre-trial stage and that the length of the criminal proceedings against him had been excessive.
THE DECISION OF THE COURT
Violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) – on account of the denial of legal assistance during the pre-trial stage
Violation of Article 6 § 1 (length of the criminal proceedings)
Just satisfaction: The Court held that the finding of a violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention constituted in itself sufficient just satisfaction in respect of any non-pecuniary damage that may have been sustained by Mr Girişen in that connection. It further awarded him EUR 7,500 for non-pecuniary damage in connection with the duration of the proceedings (echrcaselaw.com editing).
