The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe announced its interim resolution CM/ResDH (2025)264 concerning the “Gurban Group” judgments.
Ayşe Bingöl Demir, lawyer and Turkey Director of the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project (TLSP), spoke to ANF about the Committee of Ministers’ decision on the “right to hope”.
‘The Committee is highlighting structural problems’
Ayşe Bingöl Demir stated that the decision of the Committee of Ministers points to structural problems identified in the Rule 9.2 submissions made by national and international legal organizations and bar associations: “The interim resolution CM/ResDH (2025)264 of 17 September 2025 highlights, as underlined in the Rule 9.2 submissions by TLSP, ELDH, MAF-DAD and LLG, as well as ÖHD, İHD, TİHV, TOHAV, ÇHD, CİSST, and the bar associations of Diyarbakır, Van, Şırnak, Hakkari and Urfa, the ongoing structural problem that prisoners sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment under the ‘Anti-Terror Law’ and ‘Crimes Against State Security’ have no access to any sentence review mechanism, including in the context of implementing the Gurban Group judgments of the ECtHR, among them the Öcalan (2) judgment.”
‘Encouraging a will for change’
Recalling that the Committee has criticized the Turkish state for failing to implement legal changes and reforms, Ayşe Bingöl said: “The Committee criticizes Turkey for not having taken the necessary legal or other measures until now and calls for urgent steps to be taken. Referring also to the existing action plans and ongoing dialogue, the Committee encourages a will for change in this matter and continues its political pressure regarding the need for reform.”
Ayşe Bingöl added that the submissions made by legal organizations under Rule 9.2 are connected with the analyses presented by international legal bodies such as TLSP, ELDH, MAF-DAD and LLG, and continued: “In the interim resolution, the Committee explicitly refers to the Convention, ECtHR case law, and positive practices in Council of Europe member states, pointing to the necessity of reforms in line with these and drawing attention to the international trend that requires review within no later than 25 years from the start of the sentence. The call to take inspiration from the practices of other Council of Europe member states is also linked to the examples analyzed in the Rule 9.2 submissions by TLSP, ELDH, MAF-DAD and LLG.
Court standards also entail the necessity of minimum guarantees for a qualified mechanism that includes timely and periodic reviews, judicial oversight, individual assessment, and procedural safeguards, as discussed in the Rule 9.2 submissions.
Within the scope of the decision, the Committee requests Turkey to provide information on steps taken in this regard by June 2026. This indicates that the Committee will place this group back on its agenda after June, possibly in September or December.”