Communication
2980
Submission: 2017.05.12
View Adopted: 2019.03.26
The authors are three Turkish nationals who claim the state party violated their rights under articles 6, 7, 9, 19 and 14 of the Covenant.
In an initial complaint, family members of the authors claimed that they were being held incommunicado detention at an unknown location in Turkey and were at risk of being subject to torture. The Committee intervened with interim measures, requesting that the state party take all measures necessary to promptly bring the authors before a judge and give them access to a lawyer. The Committee later rejected the state party’s request to lift interim measures.
The authors were detained as they were considered to be connected with the Gülen movement by Turkish authorities.
In 2017, the authors were residing in Malaysia, however submit that they were unlawfully deprived of their liberty under Malaysian anti-terrorism legislation by individuals acting under the control or instructions of the Turkish authorities. Controlled-circuit TV revealed one of the authors being forced into a car by five unidentified persons in an underground parking garage.
It became clear to the author’s family that the authors were detained in police headquarters in Kuala Lumpur, where they did not have access to a lawyer or to their case files.
In May 2017, the authors were removed to Turkey despite the fact that no extradition hearing had been conducted, and no judicial decision had been made. Upon arriving in Turkey, the authors were held in incommunicado detention at an unknown location.
Complaint
The Committee recalled that with respect to the authors claim of a violation of article 9, that the test for a violation if whether or not the detention was arbitrary – which must be interpreted broadly to include elements of inappropriateness, injustice, lack of predictability and due process of law, as well as elements of reasonableness, necessity and proportionality.
In this case, the Committee found that the state party had not established that the authors were promptly informed of the reasons for their arrest, nor substantiated that their detention was reasonable or necessary. On this basis, the Committee found a violation of article 9(1) and (2) of the Covenant.
Further, the Committee considered that on the evidence provided, it took 11 days before the authors were brought before a judge, and consequently were not promptly brought before a judicial officer, as guaranteed by the Covenant. Additionally, and in light of the findings above regarding article 9(1) and (2), the Committee found that the lack of re-examination of the authors’ continued detention could not be considered as strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, and accordingly found a violation of the authors’ rights under article 9 (3) of the Covenant.
The Committee requested that the state party provide an update outlining measures taken to give effect to the Committee's views within 180 days, or prior to 26 September 2019.
Committee’s assessment 136th session (CCPR/C/136/3):
Committee’s decision: Follow-up dialogue ongoing.