Summary of the Case Law: Salduz v. Turkey (Comparative Criminal Law, 2016/2017)
Access to a lawyer, breach of Article 6(3)(c) European Convention on Human Rights & Fundamental Freedoms
This case is about article 6(3)(c) of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Salduz claims that his right to a fair trial has been breached, because he did not have access to a lawyer from the first police interrogation.
Salduz was taken into custody on the suspicion that he had participated in an unlawful demonstration in support of an illegal organisation (PKK) (par. 12). Salduz was interrogated in the absence of a lawyer. In his statement, the applicant admitted his involvement and gave the names of several persons who worked for the organisation. A medical report stated that Salduz had no trace of ill-treatment on his body (par. 13,14). On the same day the applicant was brought before the prosecutor and the investigating judge. He denied that he had a part in the PKK and that he was beaten and insulted while in police custody. He denied any illegal activity. After this moment, the applicant got access to a lawyer.
Salduz got convicted on the basis of his confession. He appealed against that decision, stating that there had been a breach of article 5 and 6 of the Convention, arguing that the proceedings before the first-instance court had been unfair and that the court had failed to assess the evidence properly (par. 24).
Access to a lawyer is the right under article 6(3)(c) Convention. The applicant alleged that his defence rights had been violated as he had been denied access to a lawyer during his police custody (par. 45). The Chamber held that there had been no violation of the... Interested? Read the instructions below in order to read the full content of this page.