Article 6 European Convention on Human Rights (Right to a Fair Trail) / The Case of Çamlar v. Turkey
AİHS Madde 6 (Adil Yargılanma Hakkı) / Çamlar ve Türkiye Davası
Batuhan DENİZ
The applicant Adnan Levent Çamlar was sentenced to criminal proceedings in the United Kingdom. Diamorphin was found in him bag. Diamorphine is a drug sold by forensic control. He was therefore charged with “Drug Trafficking Crime”. The Royal Court then requested the applicant’s acquittal as a result of witnessing and examining the evidence. The prosecutor in the trial, some individuals on charges of illegal drug trafficking by establishing a criminal organization has presented the indictment to Izmir Security Court in Turkey. The public prosecutor stated that the applicant had been involved in the crime of illegal drug trafficking without making any accusations against the applicant. The applicant had been found guilty of illegal drug smuggling as a result of only listening to the witness. The Izmir Security Court did not take into account the applicant’s submissions and upheld the sentence. The case was then brought to appeal and the applicant applied to the Court on the ground of a violation of the fair trial. As a result, the court found the applicant justified and awarded a total of EUR 8,000 in respect of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage.
Art. 6 ECHR, Right to a Fair Trial, Criminal Proceedings, Impartial Tribunal, Independent Tribunal.
Başvurucu Adnan Levent Çamlar, Birleşik Krallıkta ceza yargılamasına mahkûm edilmiştir. Valizinde bulunan eşyalarda adli kontrol ile satılan ‘Diamorfin’ adlı ilaca rastlanmıştır. Bu nedenle Uyuşturucu Kaçakçılığı Suçu ile suçlanmıştır. Ardından Kraliyet Mahkemesi, tanık dinlenmesi ve delillerin incelenmesi sonucu başvurucunun beraatını istemiştir. Türkiye’deki yargılamada ise savcı, bazı şahısların bir suç örgütü kurarak yasadışı uyuşturucu ticareti yaptığı suçlamasıyla İzmir Güvenlik Mahkemesi’ne iddianamesini sunmuştur. Cumhuriyet Savcısı, başvurucu aleyhinde herhangi bir suçlama yapmaksızın yasadışı uyuşturucu kaçakçılığı suçuna başvurucunun da dâhil olduğunu belirtmiştir. İlgili suçlamada sadece tanık dinlemeleri sonucu başvuranın yasadışı uyuşturucu kaçakçılığı suçu sabit bulunmuştur. İzmir Güvenlik Mahkemesi başvurucunun beyanlarını dikkate almamış ve cezasını onamıştır. Daha sonra dava temyize götürülmüş ve Başvurucu adil yargılanmanın ihlali gerekçesi ile AİHM’e başvurmuştur. Sonuç olarak mahkeme başvurucuyu haklı bulmuş, maddi ve manevi tazminat olarak toplam 8bin € ya hükmetmiştir.
AİHS md. 6, Adil Yargılanma Hakkı, Cezai Takibat, Tarafsız Mahkeme, Bağımsız Mahkeme.
1. The case of Çamlar v. Turkey 28226/04)
The applicant Turkish citizen Adnan Levent Çamlar was born in 1965 and lives in London.
On 29 April 1997 the applicant was arrested in London on suspicion of trafficking of illegal drugs.
On the same day he was placed in police custody and where he was informed that he would be charged with importation of a controlled drug, namely diamorphine.
The applicant said that he sold imported clothes and that his partners were not aware of drug trafficking.
On 15 September 1998, after having heard witness statements and evaluated all relevant evidence, the Crown Court acquitted the applicant of all charges and ordered his release.
On 16 June 1997, The public prosecutor issued an indictment.
Unspecified date in 1997, The Magistrates' Court decided to arrest the applicant.
On 20 September 1999, The applicant went back to Turkey; he was placed in detention on remand the following day.
On 30 September 1999, The applicant submitted his statements before the court and denied his involvement in the trafficking of illegal drugs. The applicant further requested to have certain witnesses.
On 27 March 2003, The İzmir State Security Court found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced him to twenty four years’ imprisonment and a fine.
On 4 March 2004, The Court of Cassation upheld the judgment of the İzmir State Security Court.
On June 2005, Following the entry into force of the new Criminal Code the applicant requested the reassessment of his case and the application of the more favourable clauses in the new Code.
On 16 December 2005, The İzmir Assize Court reduced the applicant’s sentence to twenty years’ imprisonment and decreased the amount of the fine.
On 3 July 2008, The İzmir Assize Court sentenced the applicant to twenty years and ten months of imprisonment a fine pursuant to Article 188 of the Criminal Code.
On 9 April 2009, Finally, the higher court upheld the judgment of the İzmir Assize Court with a minor procedural correction.
