The Constitutional Court (AYM) of Turkey recently addressed the delicate balance between security measures in penal institutions and the fundamental rights of prisoners. In a significant decision, the court ruled that the 11-day solitary confinement sentence imposed on Nihat Ekmez was excessive and infringed upon his freedom of expression rights, as guaranteed by the Turkish Constitution.
Ekmez, incarcerated at the Izmir No. 2 T Type Closed Penal Institution, was sanctioned for displaying a victory sign during a monthly open visitation. Turkish authorities have often interpreted this gesture as an expression of support for outlawed groups, leading to the prison’s decision to place Ekmez in solitary confinement under Article 44 of the Law on the Execution of Penalties and Security Measures (Law No. 5275).
Despite two failed appeals at lower courts, Ekmez pursued an individual application to the Constitutional Court, invoking the violation of his freedom of expression, among other rights. The individual complaint mechanism, introduced seven years ago, empowers individuals in Turkey to seek redress when they believe their fundamental rights have been breached. Turkey’s Constitution under Article 26 safeguards the right to express and disseminate opinions, with limitations permitted only when aligned with constitutional principles and proportionality, as outlined in Article 13.
The court found that the disciplinary action taken by the prison had not sufficiently demonstrated how the victory sign was connected to criminal organizations. In delivering its verdict, the Constitutional Court underscored the right to freedom of expression even within prison walls and acknowledged a lack of comprehensive examination by previous courts. Consequently, the court ordered the state to compensate Ekmez with a sum of 30,000 Turkish Lira for the violation of his rights.