Events
E, who is a close relative of the applicants.S. on 1/6/2013, she participated in the part of the show known to the public as Gezi Park actions that was held in Ankara. E.S. one of the law enforcement officers who intervened in the demonstration was injured when a bullet from his gun hit his head, and he died on 14/6/2013 in the hospital where he was taken. An investigation has been launched immediately by the Ankara Public Prosecutor’s Office (Chief Prosecutor’s Office) in connection with the incident.
E.S.the bullet core obtained during the autopsy of police officer A.Sh.upon determination that the weapon was thrown from the Prosecutor General’s Office in self-defense was charged with murder by unintentionally exceeding the limit A.Sh.he has requested the arrest of. The Ankara Magistrate’s Court rejected the request to arrest the suspect and ruled that judicial control be exercised over him.
Ankara Heavy Criminal Court A. In the public case filed by the Prosecutor General’s Office.Sh.he has decided to have n arrested. The court will next hear A.Sh.he sentenced Yi to 7 years, 9 months and 10 days in prison for possible premeditated murder, and the judge decided to continue his detention. After the decision was overturned by the Supreme Court, it was decided that the public case of the Supreme Court should be transferred to the Aksaray High Criminal Court on security grounds. After that, the Ankara High Criminal Court A.Sh.he has decided to evacuate.
Aksaray High Criminal Court A.Sh.to be sentenced to 1 year 4 months 20 days in prison for murder by exceeding the limit in self-defense and to convert the prison sentence into a judicial fine, A.Sh. he has decided to continue the judicial control measure regarding the ban on his departure abroad.
After the applicants appealed the decision, the Court of Cassation decided to overturn the decision in terms of the amount of the fine. Aksaray High Criminal Court on the decision to overturn, A.Sh.he ruled that he should be sentenced to 2 years and 1 month in prison for murder by exceeding the limit by installment in self-defense and that the prison sentence be converted into a judicial fine, the decision was upheld by the Supreme Court.
Claims
The applicants alleged that the procedural dimension of the right to life had been violated due to the fact that no effective criminal investigation had been conducted into the death incident caused by the use of force by the security forces.
Evaluation Of The Court
In the concrete case, the examination and autopsy of the dead was carried out by the Prosecutor General’s Office. The Ankara Provincial Police Directorate has provided the identification information and the weapon of the suspected police officer to the judicial authorities within a reasonable period of 11-12 days. Jul also sent all the camera footage he had provided about the incident to the Prosecutor General’s Office.
Again, the public prosecutor personally conducted a crime scene investigation accompanied by an expert witness six days after the incident. The Prosecutor General’s Office has obtained all the detectable images of the time of the incident from the security cameras, MOBILE cameras, news agencies and RTÜK in all private and public buildings located at the scene. jul. During the investigation phase, these images were examined by software hardware and image review experts selected from the list of the Ankara Justice Commission and an expert report was prepared.
The Prosecutor General’s Office has applied for the statements of many witnesses, such as citizens, police officers, news agency officials, to clarify the circumstances of the incident.
Expert reports on the clarified images of the moment of the incident were provided during the trial stages. jul. The video recordings obtained by the investigating authority and presented by the applicants at the time of the incident were personally monitored by the Court Jul. In the light of all this information, it has been evaluated that all necessary steps have been taken by the judicial authorities to clarify the circumstances of the incident during the investigation and trial stages and to collect evidence in order to identify those responsible. Twenty-four days after the incident was committed by the Prosecutor General’s Office and within a reasonable period of time after the circumstances of the incident have been determined in general terms, A.Sh. after his statement was taken, he was referred to the Magistrate’s Court with a request to be arrested.
At the investigation stage, one of the applicants was present and rested during the examination of the dead, and during the autopsy process, a forensic expert doctor was present as an observer at the request of the applicants, and a camera recording was made. Again, one of the applicants and the applicants’ deputies were present at the crime scene examination conducted by the public prosecutor, and the statements of the witnesses they requested to be listened to were taken by the Public prosecutor during the crime scene examination.
The Ankara Heavy Penal Court and a fair trial to be made of proceedings at a safe that cannot be performed under appropriate conditions where the data is located, applicants and/or their attorneys in the case of Aksaray is posted and was present at the hearing of the proceedings before the Assize Court at the hearing the defendant personally, they could ask the question, they obtain the specific presenting expert reports to the court, where they were judged by this report Aksaray Criminal Court of the Supreme Court 5. The transplant of the Criminal Division of the case when deciding on the justification offered, considering the Proceedings of the Ankara Heavy Penal Court a fair trial by an experienced and serious security problem can not be carried out and evaluated an environment that is located 2.5 hours from Aksaray to Ankara, which are easy to reach decision applicants to the extent that is necessary to judge the transplant is unable to obtain the participation is not to say that is not why.
As a result of the examination conducted in terms of the principle of reasonable speed of the investigation, which was completed in a total of 5 years and 9 months, it was found that the investigation stage was completed in a short time and close to 1.5 months. As for the trial stage, it was understood that the periods for reviewing the conviction decisions by the Supreme Court on appeal three times totaled 2 years and 8 months. It has been assessed that the said review period should be considered a reasonable period of time. Appellate review of the trial phase of the trial, many of the studies in terms of the period outside, around three years, the operation is executed, the applicants are represented by a large number of proxy throughout the entire trial, where the parties and their attorneys in the proceedings by taking many times the word is heard, and the fair conduct of the Proceedings of the court’s lack of independence and impartiality in relation to the applicants due to the persistent objections made by the judge from the case, it is observed that shrank. In addition to these issues in terms of various security issues are experiencing both sides of the case during the trial, the case in question it is decided to transplant because of security issues, many expert report should be provided for clarifying the occurrence of the event given the fact that The Shape of this that should be considered as a reasonable period of time were assessed.
It has been concluded that there is no situation that undermines the effectiveness of the trial in the review regarding the need for the investigation to be conducted independently and impartially.
Finally, as a result of the examination of the images belonging to the before and after the moment of the incident by the Constitutional Court and the images related to the moment of the incident, the Aksaray High Criminal Court reached, A.Sh.the allegation that he separated from the other police officers he was in and ran over the demonstrators was not refuted by explaining the reason specifically in the decision, witness F.He.s statement of demonstrators trying to fight off the attack by kicking the defendant’s confirmed with the crowd faces in the stones that hit when fired into the air in order to stimulate the effect of avoidance of stones with the fear reflex and pain who don’t hit with the position of the arm above the shoulder level change as a result of a snapshot of the target by considering the time of the incident and police officers to break up with a point that would require the acceptance that does not fire could not be determined.
A.Sh.he had difficulty retreating, getting stuck in the place where the police group, including n, was located, A.Sh.a group of forty demonstrators was subjected to constant stone fire, during which he fired a bullet into his weapon by pointing the barrel of his weapon at the ground, and three shots into the air lasted a total of 1 second, during all three shots, he held his gun above the head area, before and during the shots.Sh.he was subjected to intense stone fire, did not have any protective clothing or shields on him, jumped back and to the side in order to escape, while his hand holding a gun trembled from the wrist, the intensity of the attack and the size of the demonstrations, police demonstrations prior experiences of the event as a whole is protected-when the specific conditions of the event – it is appointed by the Ankara Heavy Penal Court convictions and all resulting the qualification of the crime, depending on the findings of a comprehensive, objective and impartial analysis that is not based on, and detained for about 14 months is commensurate with the defendant on trial is not able to assess whether the result of criminal fines dominated. In the concrete application, it was concluded that the judicial authorities’ discretion regarding the circumstances of the incident, the definition of the nature of the crime and the type and amount of the final sentence imposed should be respected.
The Constitutional Court has decided that the procedural dimension of the right to life has not been violated on the grounds described.
You can read our other articles and petition examples by clicking here