INFORMATION NOTE No. 30 on the case-law of the Court May 2001

INHUMAN TREATMENT
Alleged ill-treatment in police custody: admissible.
OKKALI - Turkey (N° 52067/99)
Decision 15.5.2001 [Section I]
In 1995 the applicant, then aged twelve, was handed over to the police by his employer,
who accused him of having stolen a sum of money from him. At the police station the
applicant was questioned by Superintendent I.D. and Constable M.Y. One hour after
taking him to the police station, the employer returned with the applicant’s father, with
whom he had agreed a friendly settlement. The employer withdrew the complaint he had
lodged against the applicant. The applicant’s father signed a statement confirming that his
son was in good health on being returned to him. However, once they arrived home, the
applicant admitted that he had been beaten by the police officers who had questioned
him. His father accordingly took him to hospital, where the presence of bruises was
noted. The applicant was kept under observation in the paediatrics department. His father
lodged a complaint with the public prosecutor against I.D. and the officers under his
orders. The public prosecutor interviewed the applicant when he was discharged from
hospital. The applicant was then examined by two experts from the Institute of Forensic
Medicine. It was noted in their medical reports that he had a large number of bruises and
had sustained a muscle injury to his left forearm. The public prosecutor interviewed I.D.,
who denied that he had ill-treated the applicant. M.Y., when questioned, also denied that
the applicant had been ill-treated. Other officers from the police station were summoned
for questioning; their statements were favourable to I.D. The final medical report that was
drawn up confirmed the previous reports and noted the presence of other haematomas
and bruises on the applicant’s body. The public prosecutor committed I.D. and M.Y. for
trial in the Assize Court, in accordance with the Criminal Code, on a charge of extraction
of confessions by public officials through the use of torture. The court acknowledged that
the police officers had beaten the applicant, but amended the legal classification of the
offence to "assault and ill-treatment". It imposed the minimum penalty on them: three
months’ imprisonment and three months’ suspension from duties. Those penalties were
reduced to two months and fifteen days on account of the defendants’ good conduct
during the trial, as provided for by the Criminal Code. The Assize Court then commuted
the penalties to fines before ordering a stay of execution, since the defendants did not
have a criminal record and the judges were satisfied that they would "hesitate" before
reoffending. The Court of Cassation allowed an appeal on points of law by the
applicant’s lawyer and set aside the judgment on the ground that the offence had been
given the wrong legal classification. After re-examining the case file, the Assize Court
held that the offence should be classified as "extracting confessions". It again imposed
the minimum penalties: one year’s immediate imprisonment and three months’
suspension from duties. Those penalties were reduced to ten months’ imprisonment and
two months and fifteen days’ suspension from duties for the same reasons as before. The