The ECHR demands the immediate release of Osman Kavala and declares his conviction incompatible with the European Convention.

The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights found serious violations of freedom, fair trial, freedom of expression, and freedom of association in the case of Turkish activist Osman Kavala, who has been incarcerated without interruption since 2017. The Court states that Turkey must release him as soon as possible and eliminate the consequences of his aggravated life imprisonment sentence.

The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights has requested Turkey to release Osman Kavala at the earliest possible date and to eliminate the consequences of his conviction, after finding, by 15 votes to 2, multiple violations of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court decided that his detention was arbitrary, that the criminal trial was affected by serious deficiencies regarding the independence and impartiality of the courts, and that the measures taken against him primarily aimed at punishing and silencing a human rights defender.

In short

1. The Grand Chamber of the ECHR found violations of freedom of expression, freedom of association, the right to liberty, the right to a fair trial, and the prohibition of using restrictions on rights for purposes other than those permitted by the Convention.

2. The Court decided that Turkey must release Osman Kavala as soon as possible and take measures to eliminate the consequences of his conviction, which must be considered null from the perspective of the Convention.

3. Kavala has been deprived of his liberty without interruption since October 18, 2017, and was sentenced in 2022 to aggravated life imprisonment for charges related to the protests in Gezi Park.

4. The ECHR concluded that the criminal procedure represented a "flagrant denial of justice" and that the measures against Kavala aimed to punish him for his role in the Gezi protests and for the opinions expressed as a human rights defender.

5. The Grand Chamber's decision is final, and its execution will be supervised by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.

Osman Kavala, a businessman and human rights defender known for his involvement in non-governmental organizations and initiatives regarding culture, historical reconciliation, the environment, and civil society, has been in detention since October 2017. He was initially suspected in connection with the Gezi Park protests of 2013 and the attempted coup in July 2016, with Turkish authorities claiming that he attempted to overthrow the government and the constitutional order.

In April 2022, Istanbul's 13th Criminal Court sentenced him for charges related to Gezi Park to aggravated life imprisonment and ordered his continued detention. The decision was upheld by the appeals court in December 2022 and by the Court of Cassation in September 2023.

The new ruling from Strasbourg concerns events following the first ECHR decision in 2019 and confirms the conclusions already drawn by the Court in two previous rulings. In December 2019, the ECHR found that the suspicions justifying the initial arrest and continued detention were not reasonable and requested Kavala's release.

After Turkey did not execute that ruling, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe initiated a special procedure regarding the non-execution of an ECHR ruling. In July 2022, the Court concluded that Turkey had not fulfilled its obligation to respect the previous decision.

The case now resolved by the Grand Chamber analyzes what happened after those rulings and whether the new conviction and continued detention could be considered compatible with the Convention.

Regarding freedom of expression and the freedom of assembly and association, the Court analyzed the activities for which Kavala was accused and concluded that participation in public debate, supporting civil society initiatives, advocacy activities, and support for peaceful demonstrations in Gezi Park fell within the scope of rights protected by the Convention.

However, Turkish courts treated these activities as elements of a very serious crime without demonstrating Kavala's direct participation in the acts of violence committed by others. The ECHR considered that the criminal liability imposed under these conditions was clearly disproportionate and arbitrary.

The Court also found that Turkish criminal law was interpreted in an unpredictable manner, extending the scope of crimes beyond the limits that would allow a person to foresee the legal consequences of their behavior. For this reason, the conviction for activities that pertained to expression and civic participation did not provide the minimum protection against arbitrary interventions required by the Convention.

Regarding the fair trial, the Grand Chamber identified serious deficiencies both in the way the procedure was conducted and in terms of the independence and impartiality of the courts. The conviction was based, according to the Court, largely on contextual inferences and insufficiently individualized evidence, instead of a direct demonstration of Kavala's responsibility for the acts for which he was convicted.

The ECHR placed these issues in a broader context regarding the functioning of the judicial system in Turkey. The Court stated that there are structural deficiencies that affect guarantees of independence and impartiality and can facilitate direct or indirect influence of the executive power over judicial decisions, especially in cases with a sensitive political dimension.

These findings led to the conclusion that Kavala's essential right to a fair trial was affected.

The Grand Chamber reached a similarly severe conclusion regarding detention. The entire period of deprivation of liberty following the December 2019 ruling was considered arbitrary, as it was not based on reasonable grounds pursuing one of the legitimate purposes recognized by the Convention.

The Court also found that the authorities acted in bad faith, seeking other grounds for maintaining detention and avoiding the effects of the previous ruling. Neither the execution of the subsequently pronounced sentence could transform the detention into a legitimate one, as the conviction was the result of a procedure that the ECHR qualified as a flagrant denial of justice.

One of the most important findings concerns Article 18 of the Convention, which prohibits states from using permitted restrictions on rights for purposes other than those for which they were intended. The Court concluded that the criminal proceedings, detention, and conviction were predominantly motivated by a hidden purpose.

According to the Grand Chamber, that purpose was to punish Kavala for his role in the Gezi Park protests and for expressing his opinions as a human rights defender and to silence him. The fact that detention continued despite a previous acquittal at the national level and two binding ECHR rulings was considered a particularly serious challenge to the essential guarantees of the rule of law.

The Court separately found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention, which prohibits inhuman or degrading treatment. The issue was the sentence of aggravated life imprisonment without the existence of a review mechanism that would allow for the prospect of release.

The ECHR established that such a punishment, without the possibility of review, is incompatible with the Convention.

The most important legal consequence of the ruling concerns the measures that Turkey must now take. The Grand Chamber stated that keeping Kavala in detention after the new ruling would represent a continuation of the already established violations, especially of the right to liberty.

Turkey must therefore ensure his release at the earliest possible date. The wording is mandatory under Article 46 of the Convention, which requires states to execute the final rulings of the Court.

However, the Grand Chamber went further than simply requesting release. Turkey must take all appropriate measures as soon as possible to eliminate the consequences of the conviction and to effectively remedy the violations.

The Court specifies in the summary of the ruling that, from the perspective of the Convention, the criminal conviction must be considered null. This does not mean that the ECHR formally annuls a ruling of a national court through the mechanism of Turkish law, but establishes the state's obligation to eliminate its effects so that the violations of the Convention cease effectively.

The Court also insisted on the execution of the rulings of the Turkish Constitutional Court. Their non-compliance can, according to the ECHR, compromise the effectiveness of the internal individual complaint mechanism and can undermine the constitutional order by depriving individuals of the concrete application of recognized rights.

The ruling has a broader dimension than Kavala's individual situation. The Grand Chamber states that the case illustrates a systemic problem and places it in a context marked by the detention and prosecution of political opponents, human rights defenders, and journalists based on crimes interpreted very broadly.

This finding makes the case relevant for the broader assessment of the rule of law in Turkey. The Court does not draw a general conclusion that all Turkish judicial procedures lack independence, but identifies structural deficiencies that can particularly affect cases with political stakes.

The ruling is final as it was pronounced by the Grand Chamber, composed of 17 judges. The result regarding the main violations and the measures requested from Turkey was adopted by 15 votes to 2.

The ECHR awarded Kavala 70,000 euros for moral damage and 43,342.57 euros for legal costs. Two judges issued separate opinions in disagreement with the majority.

The execution of the ruling will be supervised by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. This is the body that monitors whether states have taken the necessary individual and general measures to comply with the final rulings of the ECHR.

In Kavala's case, this mechanism has special importance as the procedure for non-execution of a ruling has already been used previously. The new decision of the Grand Chamber confirms that the measures taken by Turkey after the first ruling did not eliminate the violations but continued the situation that the Court considered incompatible with the Convention.

Osman Kavala has been in detention without interruption since October 18, 2017. The ECHR requested for the first time his release in the ruling from December 2019, and in 2022 found, in a special infringement procedure, that Turkey had not executed that decision.

The aggravated life imprisonment sentence was pronounced in April 2022 in connection with the Gezi Park protests and became final after the decisions of the appeals court and the Court of Cassation.

The Grand Chamber's ruling of August 25, 2026, is final and establishes both his release at the earliest possible date and the elimination of the consequences of the conviction. The Court considers that the case highlights structural issues regarding the independence and impartiality of the judicial system in politically sensitive cases.

https://2eu.brussels/ro/news/cedo-cere-eliberarea-imediata-a-lui-osman-kavala-si-declara-condamnarea-sa-incompatibila-cu-conventia-europeana