KOKSAL v. TURKEY - 70478/16 (press release - inadmissible application : dismissal of Turkish civil servants after the attempted coup d’etat) [2017] ECHR 513 (12 June 2017)

judgment , any individua l coul d submi t a complain t unde r th e Conventio n t o th e European Court. Civi l servant s affected b y th e relevan t measure s thu s ha d th e possibilit y o f referrin g thei r case s to th e commissio n withi n 0 day s fro m a dat e t o b e announced b y th e Prim e Ministe r b y 3 Jul y at th e lates t (si x month s after th e entr y int o forc e o f th e Legislativ e Decree) . Th e burde n o f proo f as t o th e effectivenes s o f thi s remed y woul d the n b e o n th e responden t State. Principa l facts Th e applicant, Gökha n Köksal , i s a Turkis h nationa l wh o wa s bor n i n 8 and live s i n Ankara . He was a teache r at th e “107 Malazgirt ” primar y schoo l i n Erzuru m (Turkey) . O n 5 Jul y 6 h e was suspende d fro m hi s dutie s i n th e contex t o f measure s take n after a stat e o f emergenc y ha d been declare d o n 1 Jul y 2016. O n 1 Septembe r 6 h e wa s dismisse d fro m hi s post , pursuan t t o Legislativ e Decre e no . concernin g th e dismissa l o f 50,87 civi l servant s wh o wer e regarde d as belonging , affiliated or relate d t o terroris t organisation s o r t o organisations , structure s o r group s whic h ha d bee n foun d by th e Nationa l Securit y Counci l t o engag e i n activities harmfu l t o th e State . Th e Legislativ e Decree provide d tha t thos e dismisse d coul d neve r b e reinstate d as civi l servant s and thei r passport s were cancelled . O n 8 Septembe r 6 M r Köksa l lodge d an individua l appeal wit h th e Constitutional Cour t t o challeng e hi s dismissal . Th e appeal i s stil l pending . I n th e meantime , Legislativ e Decree no . 5 o n th e establishmen t o f th e commissio n fo r th e revie w o f measure s take n i n connection wit h th e stat e o f emergenc y ha s bee n enacte d o n Januar y 7 b y th e Cabine t and publishe d on 2 Januar y 7 i n th e Officia l Gazette. Complaints , procedur e and compositio n o f th e Court Th e application wa s lodge d wit h th e Europea n Cour t o f Human Right s o n Novembe r 2016. Relyin g o n Articl e 6 §§ , 2 and 3 (a ) o f th e Europea n Conventio n o n Human Rights , M r Köksal complaine d o f a violatio n o f hi s righ t o f access t o a court , hi s righ t t o b e presume d innocen t and his righ t t o b e informe d promptl y o f th e accusation against him . Relyin g o n Articl e 7 (n o punishment withou t law) , h e complaine d tha t h e ha d bee n dismisse d o n th e basi s o f acts whic h di d not constitut e an offenc e at th e tim e the y wer e committed . M r Köksa l also argued tha t h e sustained breache s o f hi s right s and freedom s unde r Article s (righ t t o respec t fo r privat e and famil y life) , 10 (freedo m o f expression) , 1 (freedo m o f assembly and association), 3 (righ t t o an effectiv e remedy) and 4 (prohibitio n o f discrimination). Th e decisio n wa s give n b y a Chambe r o f seven , compose d as follows: Rober t Span o (Iceland) , Presiden t , Led i Biank u (Albania), Işıl Karakaş (Turkey), Nebojš a Vučinić (Montenegro), Valeri u Griţco (th e Republi c o f Moldova), Jo n Fridri k Kjølbr o (Denmark), Stéphani e Mourou-Vikström (Monaco) , Judge s , and also Stanle y Naismit h , Sectio n Registrar. Decisio n o f th e Court Afte r th e lodgin g o f th e application, Legislativ e Decre e no . , adopted o n 2 Januar y 7 and publishe d i n th e Officia l Gazett e o n 3 Januar y , provide d fo r th e setting-u p o f a commission whic h woul d hav e th e task , i n particular , o f adjudicating upo n appeals against measure s adopted directl y b y Legislativ e Decree s issue d i n th e contex t o f th e stat e o f emergency , includin g the dismissal s o f civi l servants . Civi l servant s affected b y th e relevan t measure s thu s ha d th e possibility o f referrin g thei r case s t o th e commissio n withi n 0 day s fro m th e dat e t o b e fixe d b y th e Prime Ministe r b y 3 Jul y 7 at th e lates t (si x month s after th e entr y int o forc e o f th e Legislativ e Decree ) . Th e commission’ s decision s coul d the n b e appealed against befor e th e administrative court s . The executiv e ha d thu s pu t an en d t o th e controvers y about th e jurisdictio n o f th e nationa l court s as regard s th e judicia l revie w o f measure s take n unde r Legislativ e Decree s issue d durin g a stat e of emergenc y and ha d designate d th e administrative court s t o hea r administrative appeals against the commission’ s decisions . Th e administrative courts ’ decision s i n tur n coul d b e challenge d befor e the Constitutiona l Cour t b y individua l petition . Whe n tha t highes t cour t ha d examine d a cas e and given judgment , any individua l coul d also, i f nee d be , submi t a complain t unde r th e Conventio n t o the Europea n Court . M r Köksa l thu s ha d a ne w remed y whic h woul d enabl e hi m t o giv e th e domestic authorities an opportunit y t o provid e redres s fo r th e alleged violatio n o f th e Conventio n provisions at nationa l level. Th e Legislativ e Decre e ha d thu s bee n adopted wit h th e aim o f remedyin g a large-scal e problematic situatio n resulting , no t onl y fro m shortcoming s i n th e decision-makin g proces s i n respec t o f the impugne d measures , as indicate d b y th e Venic e Commissio n i n it s opinio n no . 865/201 3 , bu t also fro m th e uncertaint y about judicia l revie w o f thos e measures . I n thos e circumstances , th e Court foun d tha t i t wa s justifie d t o mak e an exceptio n t o th e genera l principl e tha t th e conditio n of exhaustio n o f domesti c remedie s mus t b e assessed at th e tim e whe n th e application i s lodged . It wa s therefor e fo r th e victi m o f an alleged Conventio n violatio n t o tes t th e limit s o f thi s ne w remedy. Th e remed y introduce d b y Legislativ e Decre e no . 5 constitute d i n principl e an accessible remedy and th e Cour t ha d n o reaso n t o believ e tha t i t wa s no t capabl e o f providin g appropriate redres s for M r Köksal’ s Conventio n complaint s o r tha t i t di d no t offe r a reasonabl e chanc e o f success . Even thoug h th e commissio n i n questio n was , strictl y speaking , a non-judicia l organ , it s decisions nevertheles s remaine d subjec t t o judicia l review . Th e Cour t emphasised , however , tha t this conclusio n di d no t prejudge , i f necessary , a possibl e re-examinatio n o f th e questio n o f the effectivenes s and realit y o f th e remed y introduce d b y Legislativ e Decre e no . , bot h i n theor y and i n practice , i n th e ligh t o f th e decision s t o b e give n b y th e commissio n and domesti c courts , subject t o th e effectiv e enforcemen t o f thos e decisions. Th e dat e o n whic h th e commissio n woul d star t t o receiv e appeals fro m civi l servant s affected b y the measure s complaine d o f wa s t o b e announced b y th e Prim e Ministe r b y 3 Jul y 7 at th e lates t . I n any event , th e burde n o f proo f concernin g th e effectivenes s o f thi s remed y woul d the n b e o n the responden t State . I n addition, th e Cour t retaine d it s jurisdictio n fo r th e ultimat e revie w o f any complain t b y applicants, who , i n accordance wit h th e subsidiarit y principle , ha d exhauste d the available domesti c remedies. I n conclusion , as M r Köksa l ha d complaine d o f a violatio n o f hi s Conventio n right s as a resul t o f his dismissal , h e shoul d hav e use d tha t remed y i n accordance wit h Articl e 5 § o f th e Convention . The application wa s thu s dismisse d fo r failur e t o exhaus t domesti c remedie s pursuan t t o Articl e 5 §§ 1 and 4 o f th e Convention. Th e decisio n i s availabl e onl y i n French. Articl e 7 § 3 o f Legislativ e Decre e no . 5 and Articl e 1 o f it s transitiona l provisions Articl e 1 § 1 o f Legislativ e Decre e no . 3 Opinion no . 865/201 o f th e Europea n Commissio n fo r Democrac y and La w (th e “Venic e Commission” ) o n Legislativ e Decree s nos . 667- 6 issue d durin g th e state o f emergenc y after th e attempted coup d’éta t o f 5 Jul y 4 Articl e 7 § o f Legislativ e Decre e no . 5 and Articl e 1 o f it s transitiona l provisions. Thi s pres s releas e i s a documen t produce d b y th e Registry . I t doe s no t bin d th e Court . Decisions, judgment s and furthe r informatio n about th e Cour t ca n b e foun d o n www.echr.coe.in t . T o receive th e Court’ s pres s releases , pleas e subscrib e here : www.echr.coe.int/RSS/e n o r follo w u s o n Twitter BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII