- The hearing regarding Osman Kavala’s second application will be held tomorrow at the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
- MLSA emphasized in its third-party opinion that the Kavala file goes beyond an individual violation and that ECHR judgments are systematically rendered ineffective in Turkey.
- MLSA Co-Director Veysel Ok drew attention to the importance of the case, saying, “The Osman Kavala application is one of the most critical files in terms of freedom of expression and personal liberty in Turkey.”
MLSA — The application of Osman Kavala will be heard tomorrow at the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). In its third-party opinion submitted to the Grand Chamber, the Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA), whose participation in the case as a third party was accepted, stated that the Kavala file is “one of the most evident examples of the conscious and systematic neutralization of ECHR judgments.”
The opinion submitted by MLSA to the Court has been communicated to the parties. At the hearing to be held tomorrow, the parties and third parties are expected to make statements within the framework of these opinions.
MLSA Co-Director Veysel Ok emphasized the importance of participation in the case, stating, “The Osman Kavala application is one of the most critical files in Turkey in terms of freedom of expression and personal liberty. For this reason, we find it important that the opinion we submitted as a third party be taken into consideration in the Court’s evaluation.”
In its third-party opinion, MLSA emphasized that the Kavala file is not only an individual violation but points to a structural problem concerning the European Convention on Human Rights system. The opinion stated that the ECHR’s violation judgment dated Dec. 10, 2019 did not only give rise to an obligation of release, but also made all judicial processes based on the same facts legally questionable. Despite this, it was stated that judicial proceedings based on similar facts have been continued with different accusations against Kavala.
MLSA stated that ECHR judgments in Turkey are “formally recognized but not implemented in practice.” It was noted that domestic courts either do not take ECHR judgments into account at all or render them ineffective. The association stated that the continuation of Kavala’s detention and conviction results in the neutralization of previous ECHR judgments. It was emphasized that this situation is not unique to this file but is part of a broader practice in political cases.
MLSA also recalled that, according to ECHR case law, the continuation of proceedings based on the same facts constitutes new violations. The opinion stated that Kavala’s deprivation of liberty keeps discussions of arbitrariness and hidden purpose on the agenda.
Why is the file before the Grand Chamber?
Osman Kavala has been in prison since 2017 on the allegation that he attempted to overthrow the government by organizing the Gezi Protests. Despite the ECHR’s 2019 violation judgment, he remains in prison. In his first application, the ECHR ruled that his detention violated the right to liberty and security as well as freedom of expression and association, and that the detention was carried out with political motives.
After Turkey did not implement this decision, the file was brought to the agenda of the Committee of Ministers, and then, through the infringement procedure, it was brought again before the Grand Chamber. The Grand Chamber ruled that Turkey violated its obligation to implement ECHR judgments. Despite this, Kavala was not released, and the 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation upheld the aggravated life imprisonment sentence given in September 2023.
After this decision became final, Kavala applied to the ECHR again on the grounds that his right to a fair trial and his freedom of expression and association were violated. The Court communicated the application to Turkey in 2024.
The ECHR’s Second Section, composed of seven judges, relinquished jurisdiction over the application on the grounds that it contained a “significant issue” in terms of the application of the Convention and referred the case to the Grand Chamber, composed of 17 judges, for a final decision.
Legal experts point out that if the Grand Chamber also finds a violation in this application, Turkey’s defense—that Kavala is now in the “status of a convicted person” and that the requirements of previous violation judgments have been fulfilled—will lose its validity.
