06.03.2008 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Fact Finding Mission report on the visit to Imralý High-Security Closed Prison, the case of Abdullah Öcalan (material conditions and regime, contact with the outside world, discipline, medical aspects, recommendations and conclusions) ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 19 to 22 May 2007 [CPT/Inf (2008) 13]") [ID 22674]

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2008) 14]

06.11.2007 - Source: European Commission

Prison conditions ("Turkey 2007 Progress Report [SEC(2007) 1436]") [ID 22354]

"The improvement of the physical infrastructure of prisons as well as the training of staff continued. As concerns high-security F-type prisons, a circular was issued to address previously identified shortcomings of the communal activities for inmates. Prisons are subject to regular inspection visits by the Penal Institutions and Detention Houses Monitoring Boards, and visits of UN bodies and the Council of Europe Committee for the Prevention of Torture.

However, outstanding problems in prisons include: overcrowding, lack of consistent implementation of provisions regarding communal activities, restrictions on prisoners’ correspondence, and inadequate health/psychiatric resources. Furthermore, civil and military prisons are not open to monitoring by independent national bodies, pending the ratification of the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture.

Provisions regarding the application of solitary confinement for persons sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment remain in force."

Document(s): Open document

06.03.2007 - Source: US Department of State

Prison and detention center conditions (as of 2006) ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2006") [ID 19005]

"Prison conditions generally improved but facilities remained inadequate. Underfunding, overcrowding, and insufficient staff training were problems.

According to the medical association, there were insufficient doctors, and psychologists were available only at some of the largest prisons. Several inmates claimed they were denied appropriate medical treatment for serious illness.

Despite the existence of separate juvenile facilities, at times juveniles and adults were held in adjacent wards with mutual access. Observers reported that detainees and convicts occasionally were held together. Occasionally inmates convicted for nonviolent, speech related offenses were held in high-security prisons.

The government permitted prison visits by representatives of some international organizations, such as the CPT; however, domestic nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) did not have access to prisons. Domestic human rights organizations and activists reported that Prison Monitoring Boards, composed of government officials and private individuals, were ineffective. The CPT visited in 2004 and conducted ongoing consultations with the government."

Document(s): Open document

13.02.2007 - Source: Amnesty International

No adequate medical treatment, in particular psychiatric treatment, in prisons ("Stellungnahme vom 13.2.2007 an VG Schwerin - 7 A 1348/05 As -") [ID 19362]

Expert opinion in German issued by administrative court Schwerin

Document(s): Open document

01.2007 - Source: Human Rights Watch

Torture and ill-treatment in police stations ("World Report 2007") [ID 19010]

"Reports of torture and ill-treatment remain much lower than in the mid-1990s. However, during the March disturbances in Diyarbakır, hundreds of people were detained and allegedly tortured, including approximately two hundred children. Almost all those detained during this time reported being beaten, stripped of their clothes, hosed with cold water, or deprived of food."

Document(s): Open document

08.11.2006 - Source: European Commission

Prison system and conditions (cases of ill-treatment by prison staff; lack of communal activities; solitary confinement regime) ("Turkey 2006 Progress Report") [ID 19682]

"With regard to the prison system, Turkey has adopted regulations to implement the 2004 legislative reforms in this area. Physical infrastructure has also continued to be improved and training is being strengthened.

Outstanding problems in prison facilities include a lack of communal activities, limited interaction between custodial staff and prisoners, inadequate health-care and psychiatric resources as well as cases of overcrowded prison cells.

Cases of ill-treatment by prison staff have been reported. Civil and military prisons are not open to independent monitoring, pending the ratification of the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture (OPCAT).

The application of a solitary confinement regime to prisoners sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment is too extensive. Such a regime needs to be applied for as short a time as possible and be based on an individual risk assessment of the prisoner concerned."

Document(s): Open document

10.2006 - Source: Amnesty International

Man sentenced to lifelong imprisonment after possibly unfair trial in 1996; he is still in detention, although no evidence was found against him; he was reportedly tortured in detention ("Briefe gegen das Vergessen - Türkei") [ID 17727]

Document(s): Open document

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Torture and other forms of ill-treatment in police/gendarmerie custody ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18630]

"[...] The CPT`s delegation interviewed scores of persons who were, or had recently been (i.e. during the year 2005), in police/gendarmerie custody. The great majority of those persons stated that they had not been physically ill-treated whilst in custody; several of them spontaneously emphasised the contrast with the severe ill-treatment they had experienced during previous periods of custody some years ago. More specifically, the only direct allegation received by the delegation of resort to suspension by the arms and electric shocks dated back to mid 2004 (and concerned the Anti-Terror Department at Adana Police Headquarters).

This positive development was confirmed during the delegation`s discussions with various other interlocutors, such as public prosecutors, State doctors entrusted with the medical examination of persons in police/gendarmerie custody, and representatives of Bar Associations and local branches of the Human Rights Association. They all tended to confirm, in their different ways, that torture was now exceptional and that there had been a very significant decrease in recent years in the number of cases of other forms of physical ill-treatment of persons in custody.

[...] However, the picture which emerges from the information gathered by the CPT`s delegation is not entirely reassuring. The delegation did receive, in each of the three Provinces visited, several allegations of recent physical ill-treatment during police/gendarmerie custody, in a few cases of a serious nature. Further, a number of complaints were heard of physical ill-treatment at the time of apprehension and/or in the context of public demonstrations; indeed, there would appear to be a continuing problem of the disproportionate use of force on such occasions. Medical evidence consistent with some of the above-mentioned allegations was found in the end-of-custody medical reports and/or in medical reports drawn up on entry into prison. Further, in several cases, medical members of the delegation observed themselves injuries consistent with allegations made.

It should also be noted that some persons interviewed alleged ill-treatment of a psychological nature, such as threats of physical ill-treatment or to take into custody other members of the detained person`s family, not to mention verbal abuse.

[...] The most serious allegations of recent physical ill-treatment received by the delegation concerned the squeezing of genitals, combined with severe beatings, of certain detained persons at Beyoğlu District Police Headquarters (Law & Order Department), the Gayrettepe part of İstanbul Police Headquarters (Robbery Department), and Van Police Headquarters (Theft Department). The ill-treatment allegedly took place in the "identification rooms" or the "detention area" of the police departments concerned. The delegation visited the respective police facilities - the configuration of which fully met the detainees` description - and was able to verify from the custody registers the presence on the alleged dates of the individuals concerned.

Special reference should be made to a person interviewed by the delegation three days after his custody at Beyoğlu District Police Headquarters. On examination by a medical member of the delegation, he was found to bear the following lesions: pathological mobility of the nose bone, indicative of a fracture; presence of three crusts 0.5 to 1 cm diameter, at the base of the nose; periorbital haematoma to the right eye; partial luxation of an upper incisor; hypersensitivity to palpation of the processi spinosi L4 and L5, indicative of injury. Movement such as walking seemed particularly difficult and painful. These injuries were consistent with the allegations made.

The information gathered during the CPT`s December 2005 visit would indicate that the curve of ill-treatment by law enforcement officials remains on the decline. However, there are clearly no grounds for complacency, all the more so as reports continue to appear of ill-treatment by law enforcement officials in different parts of the country. [...]

It should also be noted that more than one person interviewed by the delegation alleged that they had been taken by law enforcement officials to a forest area and threatened (e.g. a gun pointed to the head); according to certain of the delegation`s interlocutors, there was an increase in such instances of ill-treatment being inflicted outside of law enforcement establishments. The CPT has itself seen a number of reports of persons being apprehended and ill-treated in an isolated place."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Safeguards against torture and ill-treatment: Obligation to notify without delay a relative of the detained person ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18631]

"The obligation to notify without delay a relative of the detained person was, as a rule, being complied with. In most cases, the notification was made shortly after deprivation of liberty and, in some cases, the detained person was given the opportunity himself to speak to his relatives. Moreover, the procedures related to the notification were properly recorded in the custody follow-up form (including the name and signature of the official giving the notification, the date and time at which notification was given, and the signature of the detained person confirming the fact that detention had been notified). However, in a few cases, allegations of delays in notification were received, as well as of absence of feedback to the detainee (whether notification had indeed been made or when)."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Safeguards against torture and ill-treatment: Right of access to a lawyer ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18632]

"As already indicated, all criminal suspects have, as from the outset of custody, the right of access to a lawyer (including free legal assistance, private detainee-lawyer consultations and the possibility for lawyers to be present when statements are taken). The appointment of a lawyer has long been obligatory if the suspect is a minor. This obligation to appoint a lawyer has now been extended to all persons detained who are suspected of an offence punishable by a maximum sentence of at least five years imprisonment.

The information gathered during the December 2005 visit confirmed that there had been a significant increase in the number of persons enjoying access to a lawyer whilst in police custody, including in cases where the assistance of a lawyer was not obligatory. In fact, most criminal suspects had received the visit of a lawyer during their period of custody (contrary to the situation observed during earlier visits, when access to a lawyer was the exception, not the rule). Not surprisingly, this had led to an exponential increase in requests for legal aid, which were taken care of by the local Bar Associations.

However, the delegation heard allegations to the effect that law enforcement officials still do on occasion delay access to a lawyer, so as to enable the person detained to be informally questioned without the presence of a lawyer, prior to the taking of a formal statement (in the lawyer`s presence)."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Safeguards against torture and ill-treatment: "Suspects Rights Form" (SRF) ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18633]

"A "Suspects Rights Form" (SRF) reflecting the latest legal situation was in use in the three Provinces visited. However, many detained persons claimed they had been informed of their rights only some time after having been brought to the detention facility, often after an initial "informal" questioning session. It was also clear that a copy of the signed SRF was frequently not given to detained persons, despite the requirement in the Regulation on Apprehension that this be done."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Safeguards against torture and ill-treatment: System for the medical examination of persons in police/gendarmerie custody ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18634]

"The provisions of the revised Regulation on Apprehension concerning the system for the medical examination of persons in police/gendarmerie custody are consistent with the CPTs previous recommendations on this subject. In particular, it is spelt out that the examination must take place in the absence of law enforcement officials, unless the doctor requests their presence in a particular case; further, emphasis is placed on ensuring the confidentiality of the report sent to the public prosecutor. The CPT also welcomes the stipulation that the doctor should immediately notify the public prosecutor if he makes any findings indicative of the offences of torture or ill-treatment.

[...] The December 2005 visit offered another opportunity to review the operation of the system; for this purpose, the delegation heard the accounts of numerous persons who were (or had recently been) in custody, interviewed doctors called upon to examine detainees as well as police/gendarmerie officers, and examined medical reports drawn up following such examinations.

As regards the issue of the confidentiality of the medical examinations, the information gathered indicates that it is still far from being guaranteed. Most detained persons claimed that they had been examined in the presence of law enforcement officials, and such a practice was openly acknowledged by medical staff at Van State Hospital. Similarly, the requirement that the report be transmitted to the prosecutor in a closed and sealed envelope was often not being complied with.

From the information gathered it would also appear that detained persons were still usually medically examined with their clothes on and that, in most cases, the medical findings were limited to "No signs of physical ill-treatment/injuries". The poor quality of the medical reports drawn up after these examinations, and the obstacles this raised in the context of legal proceedings in respect of allegations of ill-treatment, was highlighted by one senior public prosecutor met by the delegation during the visit."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Safeguards against torture and ill-treatment: Procedures for monitoring the situation in law enforcement establishments ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18635]

"The CPT has repeatedly emphasised the importance of maintaining the vitality of procedures for monitoring the situation in law enforcement establishments and, in the report on the March 2004 periodic visit, called for "more robust on-the-spot checks".

The information gathered by the CPT`s delegation in December 2005 indicates that public prosecutors are carrying out frequent, unannounced, inspection visits to law enforcement facilities, and that on these occasions they do interview detained persons in private. Reports on these visits were sent to both the Provincial Chief Prosecutor and the Ministry of the Interior.

[...] The provincial and sub-provincial human rights boards established in 2001 also have as one of their duties to monitor the situation in law enforcement establishments (cf. Article 12 of the 2003 Regulation setting out the board`s duties and working principles), and the CPT had received reports to the effect that certain of the boards had already begun to carry out on-site visits to such establishments. However, the Committee`s delegation did not find any evidence of visits by human rights boards in Adana, İstanbul or Van.

The delegation raised this question with the Vice Governor of the İstanbul Province, to whom the task of chairing the provincial board had been delegated. He confirmed that the İstanbul Provincial Human Rights Board had not carried out any visits to law enforcement establishments during 2005. In this connection, he expressed the view that if the board began to organise such visits, this could be interpreted as a lack of confidence in the work of the public prosecutors and representatives of the Governor`s Office who already visited law enforcement establishments on a regular basis."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Conditions of detention in the law enforcement establishments Adana Police Headquarters, İstanbul Police Headquarters, Beyoğlu District Police Headquarters in İstanbul, Sirkeci Police Station, Eminönü District in İstanbul, Van Police Headquarters, Provincial Gendarmerie Headquarters in Van ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18733]

"[...] Conditions of detention in the law enforcement establishments visited in December 2005 were on the whole adequate for the periods of custody involved and, in some cases, could be described as very good. Most cells were sufficiently large for the intended level of occupancy, were equipped with a means of rest (plinths or benches), and had adequate artificial lighting; a number of them also benefited from access to natural light. Further, the custody facilities were generally clean and well ventilated. However, conditions in the cells on the ground floor of Sirkeci Police Station, attached to Eminönü Police Headquarters in İstanbul, were not satisfactory and in particular were poorly lit.

In most of the establishments visited, persons staying overnight in custody were provided with a mattress. However, there were exceptions, for example, the previously-mentioned Sirkeci Police Station (including in the law and order department located upstairs in that station); further, the approach followed in certain establishments of applying a thin felt-type covering to wooden plinths is not satisfactory.[...]

Reference should also be made to a large-scale law enforcement operation that was organised in Van in May 2005, and which led to some 54 demonstrators being detained for 48 hours at the Provincial Gendarmerie Headquarters. This resulted in up to nine persons being held in 6 m² cells."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Persons detained by police provided with food ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18734]

"As in the past, persons detained by the police were provided with food (bread, cheese, tomatoes), if necessary free of charge. However, persons could be held for prolonged periods (up to four days) and only receive the same cold food throughout their custody; no hot meals were provided. In addition, many persons met by the delegation alleged that they had not received food or water for hours after their apprehension. On a more positive note, at the Provincial Gendarmerie Headquarters in Van, detained persons were provided with the food prepared by the central kitchen."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Improvements to interrogation and identification facilities in law enforcement establishments ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18735]

"Progress continues to be made as regards improvements to interrogation/identification facilities; no highly intimidating rooms of the kind discovered during earlier visits were seen in December 2005. Certain facilities previously criticised by the CPT had been brought up to an acceptable standard or taken out of service; the radical improvements made to the interrogation facilities in the Anti-Terror Department at Van Police Headquarters deserve a special mention. The delegation was also impressed by the standard of the interview/statement taking rooms of the Anti-Terror Department at İstanbul Police Headquarters."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Situation in the detention unit for immigration detainees at Istanbul Police Headquarters; new facility for this category of detainees reportedly put in place by the end of 2006 ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18736]

"As already indicated (cf. paragraph 9), the situation observed by the CPT`s delegation in the detention unit for immigration detainees at İstanbul Police Headquarters was the subject of an immediate observation under Article 8, paragraph 5, of the Convention. With a capacity - according to staff - of 90, the unit was holding more than double that figure (147 men and 43 women) on the day of the delegation`s visit. The outrageous overcrowding and general sordidness of the conditions in the facility beggared belief, a state of affairs which is all the more serious in view of the fact that some of the detainees had been held there for more than six months.

[...] Some minor improvements have been made over the years. However, the facts found during the December 2005 visit have highlighted once again the fundamental inadequacy of the existing detention unit; above all, it is too small.

A solution to this long-standing problem might finally be in sight. By letter of 23 February 2006, the Turkish authorities confirmed that a much larger facility for this category of detainee, offering far better conditions, would be brought into service towards the end of 2006, once extensive renovation work at the site concerned (in the Eminönü District) had been completed. [...]

The entry into service of the new facility will in any event not occur for some months. [...]

In their letter of 23 February 2006, the Turkish authorities state that during the transitional period, immediate measures have been taken to improve conditions at the existing facility, including as regards sanitary conditions and the provision of food.

[...] the current situation, in which persons can spend weeks if not months without ever having access to the open air, is inadmissible.

The CPT understands that once the immigration detainees have been transferred, sections of the ground floor and the basement of Building B at the Headquarters will be renovated for the purpose of setting up a central detention unit for the departments located in that building (Narcotics, Organised Crime, etc.)."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Hardly any complaints of ill-treatment of prisoners by staff in Adana F-type prison and Tekirdağ F-type Prisons Nos 1 and 2 ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18737]

"Hardly any complaints were received by the CPT`s delegation of ill-treatment of prisoners by staff of the three F-type establishments visited, namely Adana F-type Prison and Tekirdağ F-type Prisons Nos 1 and 2.

Some allegations were heard of ill-treatment in the course of the transfer of a number of prisoners from Tekirdağ F-type Prison No 1 to other establishments during the early morning of 30 July 2005. At the delegation`s request, the Turkish authorities provided information on this transfer. The CPT welcomes the fact that representatives of the prison monitoring board were invited to be present during this pre-arranged operation, an approach which the Committee has previously recommended in such situations. The Committee notes the assessment report of the five board members concerned, to the effect that proportionate force was used to overcome the resistance put up by the prisoners to their transfer.

More generally, the delegation formed an overall positive impression of the quality of the staff assigned to the above-mentioned F-type establishments. However, it was observed that contacts between custodial staff and prisoners were limited in scope. Positive staff-inmate relations are in the interest of both humane treatment of prisoners and security within the establishments concerned."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Ill-treatment by staff of inmates at Adana E-type Prison ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18738]

"[...] the delegation heard numerous allegations of the ill-treatment by staff of inmates at Adana E-type Prison. These allegations emanated from both prisoners at the establishment and from persons who had previously been held there. The ill-treatment alleged related for the most part to slaps, punches and kicks, as well as verbal abuse; however, some allegations of falaka were also received. NGO representatives met by the delegation in Adana, including members of the Bar Association, also expressed concern about the situation in the E-type Prison. The general picture that emerged was of an establishment in which a very strict code of behaviour was enforced, with any breach - no matter how minor - likely to meet with physical chastisement. [...]

Moreover, Adana E-type Prison was grossly overcrowded at the time of the December 2005 visit, with some 950 prisoners for a capacity of 450. To give an example of the practical effects of this situation, in one unit the delegation found 22 prisoners sharing an upstairs dormitory of some 24 m2, ten of them sleeping on the floor on mattresses.

This is not the first time that allegations of ill-treatment in this establishment have come to the CPT`s attention."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Death of a soldier after severe ill-treatment in the Military Prison in Adana in July 2005 ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18739]

"After the visit, the CPT received reports concerning an ongoing investigation into the death of a soldier in July 2005, which apparently was the result of severe ill-treatment inflicted while he was held in the 6th Army Corps Command Class 1 Military Prison in Adana. The Committee understands that 29 military servicemen have been indicted in relation to this death, and that the investigation file also refers to other cases of alleged ill-treatment in the same prison during 2004 and 2005."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Out-of-unit activities in high-security prisons ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18740]

Please consult the original document for detailed information on out-of-unit activities in Adana F-type Prison and Tekirdağ F-type Prisons Nos 1 and 2

"The CPT has never made any criticism of material conditions of detention in F-type prisons, and the facts found during this most recent visit confirmed that they are of a good standard. However, the Committee has repeatedly stressed the need to develop communal activities for prisoners outside their living units5; it is unfortunately very clear from the information gathered in December 2005 that the situation in this regard remains highly unsatisfactory.

In each of the three F-type prisons visited, the considerable potential of the facilities for activities was far from being fully exploited, a state of affairs openly acknowledged by the staff of the establishments. Admittedly, the continuing reluctance on the part of most prisoners to make use of the workshops was largely responsible for the gross underuse of these particular facilities. However, the very limited possibilities for association (conversation) periods and sport - activities in which an increasing number of prisoners wished to engage - must have another explanation."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Individual confinement of certain categories of prisoners in F-type (high-security) prisons and possible consequences ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18741]

"Certain categories of prisoners are placed in single cells in F-type prisons. They include newly-arrived prisoners undergoing an observation period, prisoners subject to a disciplinary sanction, prisoners segregated for reasons related to maintaining good order within the establishment, and prisoners who have requested to be held apart from others. The CPT`s delegation paid particular attention to the situation of prisoners sentenced to "aggravated life imprisonment" and held in single cells by virtue of Article 25 of the recently-adopted Law on execution of sentences and security measures (LESSM).

The sentence of "aggravated life imprisonment" is applied to prisoners in respect of whom a death sentence has been commuted to life imprisonment, and is also foreseen in the Penal Code for a certain number of crimes. Article 25 of the LESSM sets out the main conditions of execution of such a sentence, the very first being that the prisoner is to be held in an "individual room".

[...] The application of an isolation-type regime is a step that can have very harmful consequences for the person concerned and can, in certain circumstances, lead to inhuman and degrading treatment. The CPT is of the firm view that the imposition of such a regime should be based on an individual risk assessment, not the automatic result of the type of sentence imposed. Support for this position is also to be found in Committee of Ministers Recommendation Rec (2003) 23 on the management of life sentence and other long-term prisoners.

The CPT finds it particularly objectionable - and highly debatable from the standpoint of general legal principles - to apply the provisions of Article 25 of the LESSM to prisoners who, prior to 1 June 2005, shared accommodation with other prisoners and had regular access to communal activities. How can it be cogently argued that a prisoner who on 31 May worked in the prison kitchen and was accommodated with several other inmates in the workers dormitory is nevertheless so dangerous as to justify his segregation from other prisoners the following day?"

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Prison conditions of inmates serving a sentence of "aggravated life imprisonment" in the Adana F-type Prison and in the Tekirdağ F-type Prisons Nos 1 and 2 ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18742]

"The three F-type prisons visited in December 2005 were accommodating a small number of prisoners serving a sentence of aggravated life imprisonment (two in Adana, six in Tekirdağ No 1, one in Tekirdağ No 2), all of whom were being held in single cells. Their only out-of-cell activity, apart from a visit every 15 days and a fortnightly telephone call, was outdoor exercise in the courtyard adjoining their cell - in Adana for one hour per day, in Tekirdağ for two hours (apparently extended from one hour on the day before the delegation`s arrival). The outdoor exercise period was the only time that any contact with another prisoner was allowed; exercise was taken alone, but the prisoner could speak through a window to the prisoner in the cell adjoining the same courtyard. However, the single prisoner serving aggravated life imprisonment in Tekirdağ Prison No 2 was allowed no contact whatsoever with other prisoners, as the Prison Director (unlike his colleague in the No 1 Prison) had understood the law to only permit such a contact with another prisoner serving the same sentence.

The CPT was particularly struck to learn that this very restrictive regime had been applied as from 1 June 2005 (the date of entry into force of the LESSM) to prisoners who had previously been held together with other inmates and enjoyed access to communal activities. The prisoners concerned found this sudden degradation of their situation very difficult to understand and accept, and understandably so.

The Directors of the three prisons each made clear their need for guidance as to the management of these prisoners, which they hoped would be provided in the Regulation on the application of the LESSM due to be issued shortly."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Prisoners in Tekirdağ F-type Prisons Nos 1 and 2 who had been placed in single cells on psychiatric grounds did not receive adequate medical care ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18743]

"In Tekirdağ F-type Prisons Nos 1 and 2, the CPT’s delegation encountered a small number of prisoners who had been placed in single cells on psychiatric grounds. None of them were receiving the care required by their state of health. In this connection it should be noted that neither of the doctors assigned to the establishments had any competence or experience in treating psychiatric disorders, and there were no consultations at the prisons by visiting psychiatrists. The delegation formed the view that the mental state of at least one of the prisoners concerned - held in a single cell in an otherwise completely empty block (C Annex) at Tekirdağ F-type Prison No. 2 - was such that he should be placed in a secure psychiatric establishment.

The CPT emphasised in the report on the March 2004 visit that untreated psychiatric illness in a prison setting leads to ad hoc measures which may easily constitute inhuman and degrading treatment [...]"

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

06.09.2006 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Newly-arrived prisoners denied access to outdoor exercise during the period of observation spent in a single cell ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 14 December 2005 [CPT/Inf (2006) 30]") [ID 18744]

"Reference should also be made to a number of allegations received, in particular at Adana F-type Prison, that newly-arrived prisoners were denied access to outdoor exercise during the period of observation spent in a single cell (which could last for several weeks)."

Document(s): Report
Government response [CPT/Inf (2006) 31]

08.03.2006 - Source: US Department of State

Report on prison conditions ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2005") [#46152], [ID 13515]

"Conditions in many prisons remained poor. Underfunding, overcrowding, and insufficient staff training were problems. Some inmates convicted for nonviolent, speech‑related offenses were held in high-security prisons.

Observers reported that the government made significant improvements in the food provided in the prisons, although there was a lack of potable water in some facilities.

According to the medical association, there were insufficient doctors, and psychologists were available only at some of the largest prisons. Some inmates claimed they were denied appropriate medical treatment for serious illness.

Despite the existence of separate juvenile facilities, at times juveniles and adults were held in adjacent wards with mutual access. Some observers reported that detainees and convicts were sometimes held together.

The government permitted prison visits by representatives of some international organizations, such as the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT); however, domestic nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) did not have access to prisons. The CPT visited in March 2004 and conducted ongoing consultations with the government. Requests by the CPT to visit prisons were routinely granted"

Document(s): Open document

08.12.2005 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Report on torture and ill-treatment by law enforcement agencies and in prisons, procedural safeguards against ill-treatment, conditions of detention and health care for prisoners ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 16 to 29 March 2004 [CPT/Inf (2005) 18]") [#40813], [ID 13521]

Document(s): Report
Report Government response [CPT/Inf (2005) 19] Government response [CPT/Inf (2005) 19]

10.2005 - Source: UK Home Office

Medical treatment during detention ("Country Report - October 2005") [#40563], [ID 13516]

"6.37 As noted in the European Commission 2005 report:

“As regards medical examinations, training in accordance with the Istanbul Protocol for physicians and judicial staff is ongoing and further such training is planned. Currently examinations are routinely conducted, but their quality is not guaranteed throughout the country and full implementation of the Istanbul Protocol is rare. – There is a limited capacity as far as forensic medicine is concerned and most doctors linked to the Forensic Medical Institute are concentrated in Istanbul and other major cities. Although examinations are increasingly conducted outside courthouses, there is a need to speed up the process of transferring them to hospitals and clinics. The fact that these still take place in several different types of location – including forensic clinics, state or university hospitals and local clinics – hampers the achievement of uniform standards. Moreover, it is of concern that the Forensic Medical Institute is not fully independent because of its reporting line direct to the Ministry of Justice.” [71e] (p23)

6.38 The USSD 2004 reported that:

“State-employed doctors administered all medical exams for detainees. Medical examinations occurred once during detention and a second time before either arraignment or release; however the examinations generally were brief and informal. According to the Society of Forensic Medicine Specialists, only approximately 300 of the 80,000 doctors in the country were forensic specialists, and most detainees were examined by general practitioners and specialists not qualified to detect signs of torture. There were forensic medical centres in 27 of 81 provinces. Some former detainees asserted that doctors did not conduct proper examinations and that authorities denied their requests for a second examination” [5c] (Section 1c)

6.39 In its visits to Turkey the CPT (Committee for the Prevention of Torture) found that a majority of the detained persons interviewed in the course of the September 2003 visit alleged that law enforcement officials had been present during the examination. However, “A somewhat different picture emerged from the delegation’s discussions with health care staff in Adana, Diyarbakır and Mersin. They indicated that on the whole it was now possible to ensure the absence of law enforcement officials. However, there were exceptions; for example, staff at Diyarbakır State Hospital stated that, whereas the police had in recent times been displaying a more cooperative attitude, it was still impossible to persuade members of the gendarmerie to leave the examination room.” [13b] (p12)

6.40 The Amnesty International Medical Action Turkey note of 29 March 2004 reported:

“According to the authorities the new protocol was signed by the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Health in October 2003. It allows for the presence of security officials during examinations where the examination room is not secure or if the prisoner is being investigated for or has been convicted of ‘terrorist’ acts. The protocol stipulates that when a security official is present, they should ‘take protective measures at a distance where they cannot hear conversations between the doctor and the patient’.” [12g] (p1)

6.41 The AI medical action note further stated that “According to reports, the new protocol was not circulated to health institutions in Tekirdag until 15 January 2004. The protocol apparently conflicts with new regulations introduced in February 2003 and welcomed by AI which stipulate that security officials should not be present during the medical examination of individuals held in police detention unless the physician requests.” [12g] (p1-2)

6.42 As noted in the Norwegian Country of Origin Information Centre ‘Report of fact-finding mission to Turkey (7-17 October 2004)’ made public in February 2005:

“Another lawyer, Mr. Süleyman Islambay from Konya, showed me an example of such a medical examination report (adli muayenesi or adli tip rappor), which usually confirms that the persons examined do not have any visible signs of ill-treatment. Mr. Islambay told me that these examinations were quite superficial and usually conducted with law enforcement officials present. As far as he could observe (he has clients from the province of Konya), medical examinations are usually carried out during detention and either before arraignment or release – as required by the law. According to Mr. Kutlu medical investigations are only carried out by state-employed doctors, very few of them being forensic specialists and thus qualified to detect signs of torture. This statement was corroborated by Mr. Turan, who added that every medical examination was to be paid for by the detainee himself (6 million TL/about 3,5 Euro per case)… While the provisions relating to the medical examination are observed ‘to a certain extent’ (Süleyman Islambay) in most police-stations, they are ignored in others.” [16] (p13&20)"

Document(s): Open document

10.2005 - Source: UK Home Office

F-Type prisons ("Country Report - October 2005") [#40563], [ID 13517]

"5.122 According to the US State Department report 2002 (USSD), published 31 March 2003:

“Until late 2000, prisons were run on the ward system and most prisoners lived in 30-100 person wards. Under the ward system prisoner’s accused of terrorism and those who shared similar ideological views were incarcerated together. In some cases, the ward inmates indoctrinated and punished fellow prisoners, resulting in gang and terrorist group domination of entire wards…. Between December 2000 and January 2001, the Ministry of Justice moved hundreds of prisoners charged with terrorism or organised crime to small-cell ‘F-type’ prisons. The F-type design more closely resembled prisons found in most developed countries; according to the Government, the F-type prisons were consistent with the Council of Europe’s Committee to Prevent Torture’s recommendations. However human rights groups and prisoners’ groups claimed that prison authorities isolate F-type inmates from each other and controlled prisoners’ access to water, food, electricity, and toilets.” [5a] (p9)

5.123 The IHF report 2004 reported that “Problems concerning the F-type prisons continued in 2003. F-type prisons were criticized for possibly leading to isolation of prisoners and for lack of group activities. Since the introduction of the F-type prison system in 2000, hundreds of people have participated in death fasts against this type of prison. On 20 October [2003], the 10th group of death fast activists went on hunger strike.” [10] (p8)

5.124 The IHF report 2004 continued “With the two deaths in 2003, the number of persons who died because of death fasts protesting the existence of F-Type prisons reached 64. Between the beginning of actions related to F-type prisons and the end of 2003, a total of 113 persons have died for various reasons in relation to the introduction of this prison type.” [10] (p8)

5.125 The USSD 2004 noted that “According to the HRF, six people died during the year [2004] in hunger strikes protesting F-type (small cell) prisons. The Government reported that, since 2000, the President pardoned 189 inmates on hunger strike. As of September [2004], six hunger strikers remained in prison, according to the HRF.” [5c] (Section 1c)

5.126 As recorded in the International Helsinki Federation (IHF) report of June 2005:

“Human rights organizations protested the conditions imposed in prisons, mainly maximum-security facilities (E-Type and F-Type prisons for persons tried or convicted at former State Security Courts). The HRA reported that eleven inmates committed suicide in prisons, and six persons killed themselves by setting fire to themselves, a common form of protest. Another person died due to the so-called ‘death fast’, another form of protest by political prisoners. Nine prisoners died reportedly due to the prevention or neglect of medical treatment, and five others were killed by other inmates. The prevention of the treatment of prisoners with fatal or serious medical condition was a common problem.” [10a] (p6)

5.127 As noted in the USSD 2003:

“Inmates in high-security F-type prisons were permitted to socialize in groups of 10 for up to 5 hours per week. In addition, they were able to participate in communal activities…The Government reported that the President pardoned 172 hunger strikers during the year. Two prisoners on hunger strike died during the year [2003], bringing total deaths to 107 since the start of the strikes in 2000, according to HRF. The Government alleged that terrorist groups forced weaker members to conduct the hunger strikes and threatened family members of those who wanted to quit.” [5d] (p6)

5.128 The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) visited Turkey in March and September 2002 and reported that:

“F-type prisons do possess facilities (workshops, a gymnasium, an outdoor playing field, a library) for communal activities and a legal and regulatory frame work has been adopted which ensures that prisoners can have access to those facilities. However, the development of communal activities has been held back by the reluctance of prisoners held under the Law to Fight Terrorism (who constitute the great majority of the inmate population of F-type prisons) to make use of the above mentioned facilities.” [13a] (p9)

5.129 The CPT also reported its delegation heard no allegations of recent ill-treatment of prisoners in Sincan F-type Prison and, in particular no allegations of ill-treatment during the headcount procedure. The CPT also noted that the Turkish authorities had issued circulars stating that unless medical staff request otherwise, no officials are to be allowed to be present in the examination room and steps are to be taken so that they remain out of earshot when prisoners are receiving medical treatment. [13a] (p11)

5.130 However, the CPT also noted that in respect of Diyarbakir I prison some prisoners had no findings recorded after their medical examination on arrival, despite the fact that they undoubtedly bore injuries or displayed other medical conditions consistent with ill-treatment. [13a] (p12)

5.131 The EC 2005 report recorded that “The Parliamentary Human Rights Investigation Committee published a report on Tekirdag F-type prison in March 2005 and concluded that there were problems with the structure and administration of the prison.” [71e] (p24)"

Document(s): Open document

10.2005 - Source: UK Home Office

Prison Conditions ("Country Report - October 2005") [#40563], [ID 13518]

"5.114 As stated in the European Commission 2005 report:

“With regard to the prison system the major development was the adoption of the new Law on the Execution of Sentences in December 2004. Despite some shortcomings, the Law and its secondary legislation – notably the Law on the Establishment of Probation Centres, adopted in July 2005 – introduces modern concepts such as community service and probation into Turkish law. A regulation on the rules and procedures for visiting convicts and detainees was published in June 2005… A number of rehabilitation, cultural and social and educational activities are ongoing in prisons.” [71e] (p21)

5.115 The EC 2005 report continued:

“According to official sources, in May 2005 there were 58 670 persons in prisons and detention houses. Of these, 31 812 were convicted prisoners and 26 858 were prisoners detained on remand. By May 2005, 14 431 prisoners had been released as a result of changes to the law brought about by the adoption of the new Penal Code. Regarding prison conditions in Turkey, there has been significant progress in recent years, but there is a need to continue expanding best practice to all prisons throughout the country as some remain overcrowded and under-resourced.” [71e] (p24)

5.116 The EC 2005 report further noted that “The prison system has continued to improve although isolation in high security prisons remains a serious problem. The training of enforcement judges has, to date, been inadequate.” [71e] (p139)

5.117 As noted in the International Centre for Prison Studies Prison Brief for Turkey (website information last updated on 9 April 2005), in 2004 the number of establishments/institutions was 503. The official capacity of prison system was 70,994 (at April.2004) while the total prison population (including pre-trial detainees/remand prisoners) totalled 67,772 at March 2004 with 49% pre-trial detainees/remand prisoners (March 2004 – 38.9% untried, 10.2% convicted but not finally sentenced). [78]

5.118 The International Helsinki Federation (IHF) report ‘Human Rights in the OSCE Region’, published on 27 June 2005 reported that:

“Prisons were criticized by human rights organizations and international mechanisms for poor conditions, restricted access to basic services and unjustified punitive measures against defendants and convicts… In the reporting period, the ECtHR [European Court of Human Rights] requested as an interim measure suspension of the imprisonment of several political prisoners who were suffering progressive brain damage as a result of a prolonged ‘death fast’ in prisons.” [10a] (p6)

5.119 The USSD 2004 reported that:

“Conditions in most prisons remained poor, although the Government made significant improvements in the system, and the country’s best prisons maintained high standards. Underfunding, overcrowding, and insufficient staff training remained common problems. The Human Rights Foundation reported that the Government provided insufficient funds for prison food, resulting in poor-quality meals; food sold at prison shops was too expensive for most inmates, and there was a lack of potable water in some prisons. According to the Medical Association, there were insufficient doctors, and psychologists were only available at some of the largest prisons. Some inmates claimed they were denied appropriate medical treatment for serious illness.” [5c] (Section 1c)

5.120 The USSD 2003 reported that “The Government maintained that prisons were staffed with doctors, dentists, psychologists, and teachers, although there were shortages in some areas. According to the Medical Association, there were insufficient doctors, and psychologists were only available at the largest prisons. Some inmates claimed they were denied appropriate medical treatment for serious illness.” [5d] (p5-6)

5.121 The USSD 2004 noted that:

“At any given time, at least one-quarter of those in prison were awaiting trial or the outcome of a trial. Men and women were held separately; most female prisoners were held in the women’s section of a prison. Despite the existence of separate juvenile facilities, at times juveniles and adults were held in adjacent wards with mutual access. According to the Government, detainees and convicts were held either in separate facilities or in separate sections of the same facility. However, some observers reported that detainees and convicts were sometimes held together.” [5c] (Section 1c)"

Document(s): Open document

01.08.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

AI: Report on the reform process; freedom of speech and freedom of press constricted by new turkish penal law; torture still common; health care; violence against women ("Länderkurzinfo der Koordinationsgruppe Türkei der deutschen Sektion") [#34626], [ID 13520]

"Haftbedingungen in F-Typ-Gefängnissen

Die neuen F-Typ-Gefängnisse werden genutzt, um ein System von Einzel- und Kleingruppenisolierung einzuführen. Die Gefangenen sind in Einzel- oder Dreierzellen untergebracht und auch die Höfe vor den Zellen können nur von jeweils höchstens drei Gefangenen genutzt werden. Als gefährlich eingestufte Häftlinge oder solche, gegen die eine Disziplinarstrafe verhängt wurde, werden vollkommen isoliert. Möglichkeiten für Gemeinschaftsaktivitäten waren anfangs überhaupt nicht vorhanden und sind auch jetzt nur für wenige Stunden in der Woche vorgesehen. Wenn auch die Hungerstreiks gegen die F-Typ-Gefängnisse Züge eines Machtkampfes hatten, der von bestimmten politischen Organisationen geführt wurde (und in dem auch inhaftierte Organisationsmitglieder unter Druck gesetzt wurden), sollten die Missstände in den Gefängnissen doch deutlich benannt und Abhilfe gefordert werden. Dazu gehört vor allem, dass die Türkei der Forderung der Kommission zur Verhütung von Folter des Europarates folgt, dass Gefangene sich mindestens acht Stunden täglich außerhalb ihrer Zelle aufhalten und mit anderen Gefangenen zusammentreffen können.

Rechtsanwälte politischer Gefangener berichten amnesty international immer wieder von Fällen von Misshandlungen im Gefängnis und insbesondere bei den Transporten der Gefangenen zum Gericht oder in ein Krankenhaus. Im Jahr 2004 wurden dem Menschenrechtsverein IHD 57 Fälle von Folter und Misshandlung im Gefängnis gemeldet, darüber hinaus gab es neun Todesfälle wegen Verweigerung medizinischer Behandlung (Bilanz des Menschenrechtsvereins der Türkei 2004)."

Document(s): Open document

08.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

AI: Contineous human rights violations; response of administration and government on reports about torture und misstreatment still inconvenient; limitation of the right of expression by constituion and the new penal law ("Memorandum on AI's recommendations to the government to address human rights violations") [#38256], [ID 13519]

"THE NEED FOR GREATER SCRUTINY OF PLACES OF DETENTION

The UN Special Rapporteur on torture has stated that “Regular inspection of places of detention, especially when carried out as part of a system of periodic visits, constitutes one of the most effective preventive measures against torture.”
Amnesty International welcomes recent steps by the government to allow for greater inspection of places of detention. Article 92 of the new CPC requires State Prosecutors to carry out inspections of places of detention – Amnesty International considers such inspections could be an effective and important measure against torture and ill-treatment if the inspections are carried out on both a regular and an ad hoc basis and the subsequent findings and recommendations made public.
Both the Parliamentary Human Rights Commission and the Provincial and Regional Human Rights Boards have both reportedly carried out recent visits to places of detention. While such extra levels of scrutiny are welcome, these bodies are not demonstrably independent or necessarily possessed of the necessary expertise in evaluating places of detention.
At the moment, the only demonstrably independent body which enjoys the right to carry out visits unannounced in Turkey is the European Committee for the Prevention for Torture (CPT) whose findings and recommendations have generated significant change in Turkey regarding detention regulations and an apparently commensurate improvement in patterns of torture and ill-treatment. Amnesty International urges that this right should be granted to other institutions and draws attention to the recommendation of the UN Special Rapporteur on torture that:

…official bodies should be set up to carry out inspections, such teams being composed of members of the judiciary, law enforcement officials, defence lawyers and physicians, as well as independent experts and other representatives of civil society. Ombudsmen and national or human rights institutions should be granted access to all places of detention with a view to monitoring the conditions of detention.

Amnesty International therefore calls on the government to sign and ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture which would mandate the establishment of a system of regular visits undertaken by independent international and national bodies to places where people are deprived of their liberty in order to prevent torture and ill-treatment. The Protocol would require the maintenance, designation or establishment of one or several independent bodies at a national level which would carry out monitoring of places of detention. This could be a function of one of the National Human Rights Institutions when they are created. Amnesty International would like to draw attention to theattached report Preventing Torture at Home – A Guide to the Establishment of National Preventative Mechanisms (AI Index: IOR 51/004/2004) which offers guidelines on the structure, powers and operations of such bodies.
However, scrutiny of places of detention should not be limited to official bodies but should be opened to monitoring by non-governmental organizations. As the UN Special Rapporteur on torture has stated:

Independent non-governmental organizations should be authorized to have full access to all places of detention, including police lock-ups, pre-trial detention centres, security service premises, administrative detention areas and prisons, with a view to monitoring the treatment of persons and their conditions of detention.

This view is reinforced by the statement of the UN Special Representative on Human Rights Defenders on Turkey in which she makes clear that “…access to information and to places of detention and prisons must be a right which must be exercised independently by human rights organizations”. Amnesty International considers that the granting of such powers to groups like local Bar Associations and Medical Chambers would be an important step towards improving scrutiny of places of detention and therefore eradicating torture and ill-treatment. Certainly, development of effective monitoring mechanisms would be mandated by the policy of “zero tolerance for torture”."

Document(s): Open document

25.05.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

Sirnak: alleged member of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK–now renamed as Kongra-Gel), may have been killed following his capture by army ("Turkey - Further Information on UA 95/05") [#32381], [ID 13522]

Document(s): Open document
Open document

25.05.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

Change in the use of some torture techniques ("Annual Report 2005") [#32304], [ID 13548]

"Detention regulations that provided better protection for detainees led to an apparent reduction in the use of some torture techniques, such as suspension by the arms and falaka (beatings on the soles of the feet). However, the regulations were often not fully implemented. Torture and ill-treatment in police and gendarmerie custody continued to be a serious concern with cases of beatings, electric shock, stripping naked and death threats being reported.

Torture methods which did not leave lasting marks on the detainee’s body were also widely reported. Deprivation of food, water and sleep and making detainees stand in uncomfortable positions continued to be reported, despite a circular from the Minister of the Interior prohibiting the use of such techniques. In addition, people were beaten during arrest, while being driven around or after being taken to a deserted place for questioning."

Document(s): Open document
Open document

19.05.2005 - Source: International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights

Poor Prison Conditions ("Human Rights in the OSCE Region: Europe, Central Asia and North America, Report 2005 (Events of 2004)") [#32120], [ID 13523]

"Prisons were criticized by human rights organizations and international mechanisms for poor conditions, restricted access to basic services and unjustified punitive measures against defendants and convicts. While the government expanded and improved the system of prison monitoring boards, these boards excluded from their mandate the issues of ill-treatment and prolonged isolation of detainees. As of May 2004, the boards had received nearly 12,000 complaints and accepted less then 4,000 of them.

In the reporting period, the ECtHR requested as an interim measure suspension of the imprisonment of several political prisoners who were suffering progressive brain damage as a result of a prolonged “death fast” in prisons. Human rights organizations protested the conditions imposed in prisons, mainly maximum-security facilities (E-Type and F-Type prisons for persons tried or convicted at former State Security Courts).

The HRA reported that eleven inmates committed suicide in prisons, and six persons killed themselves by setting fire to themselves, a common form of protest. Another person died due to the so-called “death fast,” another form of protest by political prisoners. Nine prisoners died reportedly due to the prevention or neglect of medical treatment, and five others were killed by other inmates. The prevention of the treatment of prisoners with fatal or serious medical condition was a common problem.

• Sitki Bektas, a political prisoner, was taken from a hospital to Izmir Kiriklar F Type Prison despite a hospital report that stated he needed treatment at the hospital for leukaemia.

• The Tekirdag Medical Association launched an investigation against a prison doctor, Adnan Ozer, on the basis of allegations from inmates at F Type Prison that he had been involved in torture and mistreatment of prisoners there. Dr. Ozer continued to hold his post at the year’s end.

A survey by the Association of Solidarity with Children Deprived of Their Freedom (Ozge-Der) in prisons throughout Turkey revealed a high prevalence of torture and ill-treatment among minor detainees, both before and after imprisonment."

Document(s): Open document

03.03.2005 - Source: Reporters Sans Frontières

Austrian journalist Sandra Bakutz transferred to Ankara's Ulucanlar prison, long famous for torture; her trial date has not been set but she faces a 5 to 15-year prison sentence for "belonging to an illegal organization" ("Sandra Bakutz faces up to 15 years in prison") [#29619], [ID 13549]

Document(s): Open document

28.02.2005 - Source: US Department of State

Seven persons died while in police or Jandarma custody during the year ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2004") [#29519], [ID 13524]

"According to the Government, seven persons died while in police or Jandarma custody during the year: Four deaths were recorded as suicides, two as heart attacks, and one was under investigation at year's end to determine the cause of death."

Document(s): Open document

28.02.2005 - Source: US Department of State

Conditions in most prisons remained poor, although the Government made significant improvements in the system ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices