Türkiye: European Court Orders Rights Defender’s Immediate Release.
Osman Kavala has spent almost nine years in prison. This week, Europe’s highest human-rights court delivered its clearest judgment yet: his conviction was fundamentally unjust, his continued detention unlawful, and he should be released immediately.
On August 25, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled that the Turkish authorities violated Kavala’s rights to liberty and security, a fair trial, freedom of expression and freedom of association. It further found that his aggravated life sentence amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment, and that the authorities had acted in bad faith by pursuing his detention for an ulterior purpose: to punish and silence him and prevent him from carrying out his human-rights work.
Not only is the ruling significant because of what happened to one prominent civil-society figure, but also because of what it reveals about the state of justice in Türkiye. The Court found that the entire basis of Kavala’s prosecution and conviction amounted to a “flagrant denial of justice”. It concluded that the judgment against him must be considered null and void and ordered the authorities to secure his release at the earliest possible opportunity.
Kavala’s ordeal began with the 2013 Gezi Park protests in Istanbul, which started over plans to redevelop the park before growing into nationwide demonstrations. He was arrested in October 2017 and later charged with attempting to overthrow the government. In December 2019, the ECtHR ruled that his detention was unlawful and aimed at silencing him as a human-rights defender, and ordered his release. Türkiye did not comply. After Kavala was acquitted in February 2020, he was immediately re-arrested on new charges based on essentially the same evidence. In April 2022, he was convicted and sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
The ECtHR’s latest judgment therefore goes beyond Kavala personally. It identifies structural problems within Türkiye’s judicial system, including deficiencies affecting the independence and impartiality of the courts. The case illustrates how criminal law can cease to function as a safeguard of rights when judicial institutions become instruments for suppressing political opposition and civil society.
Kavala is far from alone. Former opposition leaders Selahattin Demirtaş and Figen Yüksekdağ remain imprisoned despite ECtHR judgments concerning their detention. Human-rights defenders have also faced prolonged prosecutions on allegations that ultimately failed to withstand judicial scrutiny. The chilling effect extends well beyond those who are convicted: when activists, lawyers, journalists and protesters can be arrested or prosecuted, others learn to remain silent.
That pressure has intensified over the past decade. Following the failed coup attempt of 2016, Türkiye introduced a state of emergency that lasted two years. Although the emergency eventually ended, many restrictive measures were incorporated into ordinary law. Restrictions on peaceful assembly, association and expression have continued, while the independence of institutions has come under sustained pressure.
Recent events underline the continuing scale of the problem. Ahead of the NATO summit in Ankara in July, authorities imposed a 13-day blanket ban on protests and detained more than 200 people, including lawyers, academics and activists. Meanwhile, the prosecution of Istanbul mayor and opposition presidential candidate Ekrem İmamoğlu, alongside hundreds of co-defendants, has become another major test of political freedoms and judicial independence.
The pattern matters. A democracy is not measured only by whether elections take place, but by whether courts can protect people when political power turns against them.
That is why Kavala’s case has become a test for Europe as much as for Türkiye. The European Convention on Human Rights depends on states accepting that judgments from Strasbourg are binding. If a Member State can simply disregard repeated orders from the continent’s human-rights court, the authority of the entire Convention system is weakened.
The Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers is responsible for supervising implementation of ECtHR judgments and has repeatedly called for Kavala’s release. But after years of non-compliance, stronger action is increasingly necessary. European governments and institutions must make clear that adherence to the Convention is not optional.
The question is no longer whether Europe’s highest human-rights court has been clear. It has. The question is whether Türkiye will finally obey, and whether Europe will ensure that it does.
written by Clara Pescatori
Comments