Sadak v. Turkey, Nos. 25142/94; 27099/95, ECtHR, (Third Section), 8 April 2004

Derogation from the European Convention on Human Rights in time of emergency. Deprivation of liberty of alleged terrorists without a prompt judicial intervention. Territorial scope of a derogation in time of emergency.

Art. 5 ECHR
Art. 15 ECHR

1. The extension of the effects of a derogation in time of emergency to territories not explicitly named in the notice of derogation runs counter to the object and purpose of Article 15 ECHR, since derogations from the obligations arising from the Convention are authorised only “to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation”. As a consequence, derogating measures apply only to the regions where a state of emergency has been proclaimed.

2. Although the special challenges posed by investigation of terrorist offences, national authorities must ensure the respect of the guarantees enshrined in Art. 5 ECHR when implementing measures of deprivation of liberty. Pursuant to Art. 5, para. 3 ECHR, it is therefore inadmissible to detain an alleged terrorist without judicial control for a period of eleven days.
(In the present case, the applicant, a former politician arrested and detained on suspicion of terrorist activities by the Turkish authorities in the city of Ankara, complained of breach of Art. 5, para. 3 ECHR. The Government maintained that, as Turkey had exercised the right of derogation under Article 15 ECHR, it had not violated the Convention. However, the Court noted that the city of Ankara was not included among the regions in which the state of emergency was proclaimed. Consequently, it stated that the derogation in question was inapplicable ratione loci to the facts of the case).