issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 312 (2019)
17.09.2019
Judgments of 17 September 2019
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing ten judgments1:
one Chamber judgment is summarised below; a separate press release has been issued for another
Chamber judgment in the case of Akdağ v. Turkey (application no. 75460/10);
one separate press release has also been issued for a Committee judgment in the case of Iovcev and
Others v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia (no. 40942/14);
the seven other Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been submitted to the
The judgment below is available only in French.
Avşar and Tekin v. Turkey (applications nos. 19302/09 and 49089/12)
The applicants, Abdulkerim Avşar and Abdulkerim Tekin, are Turkish nationals who were born in
1973 and 1967 respectively. After being sentenced to life imprisonment for terrorist offences and
attempted territorial separatism respectively, they each asked to be transferred to a prison nearer
their family home.
At the time of lodging his application, Mr Avşar was being held in the F-type prison in Kırıkkale,
whereas his family lived in Diyarbakır. His mother, who was suffering from Parkinson’s disease, was
unable to travel. In June 2008 Mr Avşar’s lawyer asked the Ankara Directorate General of Prisons to
transfer his client to a prison in the province of Diyarbakır. Mr Avşar twice applied to the Directorate
General of Prisons attached to the Ministry of Justice for the same purpose. The Ministry of Justice
refused his requests. In December 2008 Mr Avşar wrote to the Kırıkkale post-sentencing judge
challenging the Directorate General’s refusal to allow his request for a transfer. The judge rejected
his application on the grounds that he did not have jurisdiction to rule on the matter. Mr Avşar
appealed against the judge’s decision. The Kırıkkale Assize Court dismissed the appeal and decided
to refer the request to the Ministry of Justice. On 25 May 2018 Mr Avşar was transferred to
Diyarbakır T-type prison.
At the time of lodging his application, Mr Tekin was being held in the F-type prison in Kırıkkale,
whereas his family lived in a village near Siirt. In November 2011 Mr Tekin applied to the Ministry of
Justice to be transferred closer to his family. The Ministry refused his application on the grounds that
the prisons to which he had asked to be transferred had reached full capacity. Mr Tekin applied to
the Kırıkkale post-sentencing judge challenging that decision. In April 2012 the judge found that the
refusal by the Ministry had not been unlawful. Mr Tekin appealed to the Kırıkkale Assize Court,
which dismissed his appeal. On 22 August 2016 Mr Tekin informed the Court’s Registry that he had
been transferred to a prison some 1,500 km away from Siirt.
1
Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a Chamber
judgment’s delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a
panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and
deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the
Convention, judgments delivered by a Committee are final.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution
