Inmate Denied His Right to Phone Call, Constitutional Court Says ‘Violation of Right’

Click to read the article in Turkish

Convict Ümit Balaban appealed to the Constitutional Court in 2016 after his request for using his right to make a phone call at the weekend instead of weekdays was rejected by the Tekdirağ No. 2 Type F High-Security Prison. The Court announced its ruling yesterday (July 18) and concluded that "his right to respect for family life has been violated."

Divorced from his wife in 2006, Balaban wanted to use his right to make a phone call with her daughter at the weekend, because his daughter, who was under the custody of her mother, could not talk to him in weekdays due to her studies and because she was living with her mother.

After the request of Balaban was rejected by the prison administration, he first appealed to the Judgeship of Execution, then to the Heavy Penal Court. With his both appeals remaining inconclusive, he made an individual application to the Constitutional Court on February 4, 2016.

Accordingly, the Constitutional Court has concluded that his "right to respect for family life" guaranteed by the Article 20 of the Constitution has been violated. It has also ruled that he shall be paid 5 thousand 500 Turkish Lira (approx. 970 US Dollars) in non-pecuniary damages.

'His claim should be considered reasonable'

Giving details of the daily routine of Balaban's daughter at the time of application, the Constitutional Court has underlined in its ruling that "the claim that the applicant had difficulties in talking to her child under those circumstances should be considered reasonable."

Moreover, referring to the allegation that "a problem of security would have arisen in the penal institution", the Court has concluded that "the decision did not include concrete information as to the number of personnel on duty at the weekend and their duties and no objective reason was put forward, except for general expressions referring to a possible problem of security."

The Court has also indicated that in evaluating the application of Balaban, "the positive obligations of the state in terms of the right to respect family life need to be taken into consideration." (RT/EKN/SD)