An application to the European Court of Human Rights requires more than the loss of a case. The applicant must be able to show which right was violated by which act or omission, that the complaint was brought before the Turkish authorities, and that the application was lodged with Strasbourg in time. The soundness of the claim matters as much as the presentation of that claim by the correct applicant, on the correct form and with the correct documents.
The first individual application to the ECtHR is made by completing and signing the current official form and sending it with its attachments by post to the Registry of the Court in Strasbourg. The general time limit is four months. Being able to apply to the Constitutional Court (AYM) through the UYAP Lawyer Portal does not mean that applications can be made to the ECtHR through UYAP. eComms correspondence and urgent requests for interim measures are subject to separate procedures. [1–3]
This guide is based on the official regulations checked on October 11, 2026 for individual applications against Türkiye. The time limit, the domestic remedy to be used and the redress that may be claimed depend on the specific features of each complaint.
Which disputes does the ECtHR examine?
The ECtHR supervises the application of the European Convention on Human Rights within the Council of Europe system. It is a different court from the Court of Justice of the European Union. The subject of an application is a violation of rights that engages the responsibility of a State party to the Convention. A company, a lawyer, an employer or a neighbour is not named as respondent. However, where a violation by a private person is involved, the State's failure to fulfil its obligation of protection, investigation or effective judicial review may be the subject of an application against the State. [1, 26]
The principal areas of application are the right to life, the prohibition of ill-treatment, liberty and security, the right to a fair trial, respect for private and family life, freedom of expression and association, and the right to property. However, the existence of a right in a protocol is not sufficient on its own; it must also be verified whether the State concerned is bound by that protocol and whether it was in force at the date of the events.
For example, an allegation that a low compensation amount was fixed in a property case may be explained in terms of access to court, the fairness of the proceedings or the proportionality of the interference with property. Asking the ECtHR merely to "recalculate the expert's figures" would reopen the domestic dispute in the same way. The applicant must show what problem the dispute raises under the Convention.
Is the ECtHR an appeal court?
The ECtHR is not the next ordinary court of appeal from decisions of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay) or the Council of State (Danıştay). The assessment of evidence and the interpretation of domestic law are primarily the task of the national courts. However, where a judicial assessment infringes a guarantee in the Convention, review by the ECtHR is possible.
In Bochan v. Ukraine (No. 2), Grand Chamber, Application No. 22251/08, February 5, 2015, the limit was given concrete form. The applicant, relying on an earlier ECtHR judgment, requested a fresh examination in domestic law; the national supreme court manifestly misrepresented the content of the earlier Strasbourg judgment. The Grand Chamber held that this approach, going beyond a simple difference of interpretation, violated the right to a fair trial. The decision shows that not every legal error is corrected in Strasbourg, but that manifest arbitrariness may be examined for compliance with the guarantee of a fair trial. [11, §§61–65]
Who may apply, and how is victim status shown?
Natural persons, non-governmental organizations and groups of individuals may allege a violation of the Convention that affects them. It is not necessary to be a Turkish citizen in order to apply against Türkiye. The relationship of the applicant with the authority of the State and the scope of the right relied upon are decisive. [1, Arts. 1 and 34]
Where a transaction affects the assets of a company, the harm suffered by the company and by its shareholder is not treated as identical. If an application is to be made on behalf of a company, the legal identity of the company, the capacity of the person representing it and the basis of that representation must be documented. The authority of the company's organ representative and of the lawyer who follows the application are distinct.
Victim status ordinarily requires personal effect; complaining in the abstract about the wrongness of a law is not enough. However, in cases of death and disappearance, indirect victimhood of relatives, potential victimhood in certain conditions and exceptional situations of representation are assessed separately. Scholarship also shows that victimhood cannot be explained solely by capacity to sue or by the status of heir in domestic law. [18, pp. 205–214]
When the file is prepared, the following questions must be made specific: Whose right was the violation directed at? How was the applicant affected by the measure? Did the national authorities acknowledge the violation and provide adequate redress? Has there been a death of the applicant, the liquidation of a company or a change of representation? Disclosing these developments to the Court, rather than concealing them, is required both for the question of status and for the honest conduct of the application. [25, section 4.6]
Where and how is an ECtHR application made?
The official address for the first application
The postal address on the current official application page is as follows: [3]
The Registrar European Court of Human Rights Council of Europe 1 avenue de l'Europe 67075 Strasbourg Cedex FRANCE
The application is prepared using the form taken from the official application page of the ECtHR. The form should be downloaded, opened in a compatible PDF reader, the completed copy saved, and every field of the printed version read again. Filling the form in electronically does not mean that it is sent electronically.
A copy of the complete file handed in for posting, the acknowledgment of receipt, the tracking number and the delivery record must be kept. Registered or trackable postage helps to document the date of sending. The date of arrival at the Court and the date of posting of a properly completed application are different. Under Rule 47, the date taken into account is, in principle, the date on which the form containing the necessary information was sent, which is generally the postmark date. [2, §6; 27]
The difference between UYAP, email, fax and eComms
| Procedure or channel | Area of use | Consequence for the applicant |
|---|---|---|
| Post to Strasbourg | Ordinary first ECtHR application | The current, signed form is sent together with the necessary attachments. |
| UYAP Lawyer Portal | Individual application to the AYM in Türkiye | Does not make an ECtHR application. |
| Ordinary email or general contact form | Information or specific communications of the relevant unit | Does not replace the ordinary first application. |
| Fax | One of the urgent channels accepted under Rule 39 | Does not stop the four-month time limit under the ordinary procedure. |
| eComms | Electronic correspondence and notifications at the stage the Court prescribes | Not a general portal through which everyone can make a first application. |
| ECHR Rule 39 Site | Temporary measures for a risk of imminent and irreparable harm | Not the general channel that replaces the substantive application form and procedure. |
The distinctions in the table are based on the ECtHR's documents on applications, electronic communications and interim measures, and on the AYM's announcement concerning UYAP. Applications to the AYM have been received through the UYAP Lawyer Portal since October 1, 2025; this arrangement did not merge the application systems of the two courts. [3, 12, 14, 21]
Submitting the file to a courthouse in Türkiye, to the Ministry of Justice, to the AYM or to a diplomatic mission "for forwarding to the ECtHR" cannot safely replace the ordinary postal procedure of the ECtHR. Likewise, a petition sent to the press office's email address should not be assumed to start the proceedings. Sending the first file to the correct recipient by the correct procedure is part of the applicant's preparatory obligations.
The 2026 special procedure for applications concerning dismissal from public office in Türkiye
For the group of applications concerning the dismissal of public officials, judges and prosecutors, military personnel and other public servants following the 2016 coup attempt, the ECtHR has provided special administrative measures from January 1, 2026. For each applicant, the official form completed electronically and a cover page bearing a personal QR code are printed separately; the cover page is placed in front of the form. The cover page does not replace the form containing the legal complaints. [20]
In this group, an email address must be provided unless there are justified and explained obstacles. Correspondence, including the letter of registration, is, as a rule, conducted through eComms; a paper copy of the registration letter is not sent. A missing cover page may cause significant delays in processing. This special arrangement cannot be read as meaning that all ECtHR applications have become entirely online. The current cover page should be obtained from the relevant page of the Court. [20]
What does exhaustion of domestic remedies mean?
Exhausting domestic remedies is not merely a matter of listing the decisions in the case file. The remedy to be used must be accessible, capable of redressing the complaint and effective in practice; the applicant must also have used that remedy in accordance with its own time limits and procedural rules. The substance of the same violation must be put before the national authorities. [9, §§69–77]
If the applicant argued only the amount of the claim before the first-instance court and in the AYM argued only a calculation error, raising for the first time in Strasbourg a completely different complaint of discrimination may create a problem of non-exhaustion. On the other hand, the failure to specify the number of a particular Convention article in the national petition is not, by itself, decisive if the substance of the complaint was clearly stated.
In Vučković and Others v. Serbia, Grand Chamber, Application No. 17153/11 and 29 other applications, March 25, 2014, a complaint of discrimination concerning military service payments was examined. The applicants had not expressly or in substance raised the complaint of discrimination in their constitutional applications. The Grand Chamber concluded that available and sufficient domestic remedies had not been properly exhausted. The lesson for lawyers is not limited to recording that "the AYM was applied to", but to showing which violation was raised in which petition. [9, §§79–91]
Must one apply to the Constitutional Court first in Türkiye?
An individual application to the AYM is, as a rule, a remedy that must be exhausted in respect of complaints within its jurisdiction and capable of providing effective redress. In Hasan Uzun v. Türkiye, Second Section, Application No. 10755/13, April 30, 2013, the applicant, who came directly to Strasbourg after a dispute over a property boundary, was found not to have applied to the AYM, and this led to a finding of inadmissibility. The Court also reserved the power to examine the practical effectiveness of the constitutional application. [8, §§52–71]
For this reason, the idea that "the AYM rejects every application" is not sufficient explanation for bypassing that route. On the other hand, it cannot be said that the same route must be followed in the same order for every complaint. Complaints of detention, ill-treatment, unreasonable length of proceedings or non-enforcement of a judgment may raise different remedies. For example, the current Compensation Commission regime for compensation for unreasonable length of proceedings must be examined separately. The end of the main action and the end of the domestic process for each complaint of rights may not fall on the same date.
A failure to examine an AYM application because of a time-limit or procedural error does not, as a rule, show that domestic remedies were successfully exhausted for the ECtHR. An applicant who has, through his or her own omission, made a remedy unusable may not get round it by stating that "no other remedy remains". Where the ineffectiveness of a remedy is alleged, the allegation must rest on concrete practice and documents.
Extraordinary remedies and the ineffectiveness exception
Not every extraordinary application, request for retrial or request for an objection by the prosecutor is a remedy that must be exhausted. Using an ineffective or discretionary remedy does not automatically restart the four-month period. Where new matters have in fact been examined in a reopened proceeding, those matters may be assessed differently. [7, §§191–200]
When identifying the applicable remedy, the State may object that "an effective remedy was not used". The applicant must not only list the remedy used but also explain why it is inapplicable or ineffective. The most reliable preparation is to create, for each complaint, a schedule of domestic remedies and time limits.
How is the four-month time limit calculated?
Current time limit and determining the starting date
For final domestic decisions given on or after February 1, 2022, the general time limit is four months. The change stems from Protocol No. 15. The transitional regime provided for final decisions given before that date does not justify relying on a six-month period in current applications. If an old official brochure or an old article states six months, the current Convention and the regulations in force must be followed. [19]
As regards the starting point, the date of the decision, its service on the applicant or his or her representative, and the applicant's adequate knowledge of the content of the decision are considered together. The ECtHR's approach is autonomous; in each file a single standard cannot be applied, such as "only the date of the decision" or "always the later paper service". Notification to the representative and his or her knowledge are also important. [7, §§200–205]
If the UYAP access record, UETS electronic service and physical service show different dates, all of them must be placed on the file. The safe working method of a lawyer is to identify the earliest date that may legally be significant, to record the uncertainty with reasons, and not to postpone preparation by reference to a later date. This does not mean that every viewing in UYAP starts the ECtHR time limit in every case; the concrete decision, the duty of notification and the scope of knowledge must be examined.
Where there is no effective domestic remedy, the period may run from the act or from the time it was sufficiently known. If the ineffectiveness of the initially used remedy is understood later, the date on which this became apparent must be explained. The continuation of the effects of a violation does not in every case mean a "continuing violation"; it must not be assumed that an unlimited right of application exists because the effects of an old measure persist. [7, §§206–211]
Four months is not calculated as 120 days
The time limit is calculated in calendar months. Hypothetical example: assume that the final decision, which starts the period, became known on June 15, 2026. The last day of the four-month period is October 15, 2026. Calculating the application over 120 days may lead to a different and wrong result. Where periods begin at the end of a month, the calendar should be checked separately. [7, §§212–215]
If the last day falls on a Saturday, a Sunday or a public holiday, this does not extend the ECtHR period automatically by reference to national rules on extension. The file should not be left to be sent on the last day. In Sabri Güneş v. Türkiye, Grand Chamber, Application No. 27396/06, June 29, 2012, an application made on the Monday after the six-month period of the time had expired on a Sunday was out of time. The six-month period in that judgment belongs to the historical regime; the principle of calculation regarding public holidays also remains important in the current four-month regime. [10, §§43–61; 7, §214]
Steps that do not preserve the time limit
Simply sending a letter, faxing, emailing or submitting a form lacking the essential information does not replace the first application containing the necessary particulars. Preparing the postal label on the last day of the time limit does not show that the file was accepted on that day. The date of actual acceptance shown on the delivery document must be kept.
Where the first file was incomplete, a letter that follows does not mean that a new four-month period has been granted for completion of the missing items. Rule 47 provides for special considerations, but these are not routine extensions. If an exceptional impediment is to be claimed, the impediment, its effect and the care shown despite it must be documented. [2, §§5–6; 5]
How should the application form and its attachments be prepared?
The form must be understandable on its own
The applicant's identity, representation details, the respondent State, the facts, the complaints of violation, the domestic remedies and the statements on time limits must be placed in the relevant fields of the form. Leaving the essential sections of the form blank with the words "the statement of facts is in the attached petition" is not acceptable. Attaching the AYM petition or the appeal brief in full does not remove the obligation to complete the ECtHR form. [5]
The statement of facts should follow chronological order and include the facts and decisions necessary for the application to be understood. The legal complaint section explains, for each right, why the conduct of the State raises a problem. Keeping the statement of facts and the legal evaluation separate prevents the same document from being unnecessarily repeated in two different sections.
Where additional explanation is needed, no more than 20 pages may be used. This limit does not mean that the total of all court judgments and evidentiary attachments will be 20 pages. The additional statement must be in A4, with at least 12-point main text, 10-point footnotes, 1.5 line spacing and margins of at least 3.5 cm, and its pages and paragraphs must be numbered. The additional text expands the sufficient explanation in the form. [2, §2; 5]
Which documents must be attached?
Depending on the scope of the file, the act alleged to have caused the violation, the relevant court decisions, decisions on remedies, the AYM decision, the relevant petitions submitted to the national authorities, the necessary hearing records and the notification records showing the time limit are attached. A final judgment alone may not be sufficient to show that a complaint was raised in domestic law. [6, errors 3–4]
For example, if it is said that a decisive objection was not answered, both the petition containing the objection and the decision said to have failed to consider it must be included. Where it is alleged that service was not properly effected, not only the judgment but also the service records and the application that brought this problem to the national authorities are important. This selection of documents does not rest on the assumption that the ECtHR will independently investigate the whole national file on the applicant's behalf.
The original signatures required on the form and the copies of the attachments are different matters. Legible copies of the attachments are sent; there is no assurance that original documents will be returned. The attachments must be listed in chronological order with continuous page numbering, and the file must not be bound with staples, clips or tape. If a particular document cannot be obtained, the concrete reason and the steps taken to obtain it must be shown. [4, Parts II and III]
Signature, representation and notarized power of attorney
In an application by a lawyer, the authorization section of the form must bear the dated original signatures of the applicant, who grants authority, and of the lawyer, who accepts it. The declaration-of-accuracy signature at the end of the form has a separate function. The presence of one signature does not replace the other required signatures. [2, §1(c); 6, errors 5 and 11]
The presence in the file of a power of attorney notarized in Türkiye does not make the authorization section of the form unnecessary. On the other hand, it cannot be said that a separate notarized power of attorney is a general Strasbourg requirement for every ECtHR application. A separate authority document arises, for example, where a representative is subsequently appointed or changed, and in exceptions allowed by the rules. Where the original signature cannot be submitted with the first application, a serious impediment must be clearly explained; being at the last date is not, by itself, a sufficient reason. [2, 5]
In a company application, before the lawyer's authority is examined, the authority of the person who grants the lawyer authority to represent the company must be investigated. A trade registry extract or a decision of the competent organ is therefore important as a basis. Where the applicant is a child, a person under restriction or a person whose capacity to be represented is limited, capacity and authority are documented separately according to the features of the case.
Application in Turkish and protection of personal information
The first application may be prepared in Turkish. It is not a general requirement to translate all Turkish attachments into English or French at the outset. After notification to the Government, English or French is, as a rule, used; permission for use of another language is subject to the Court's procedure. [16, Rule 34; 26]
An anonymous application cannot be made by withholding identity from the Court. However, a reasoned request may be made for identity not to be disclosed to the public. Reasons such as the identity of children, health information or security risks must be specified. Anonymity towards the public and the obligation to provide correct identity and representation information to the Court are different. Rather than piling irrelevant personal data into the file, the records necessary for the complaint should be selected. [2, §4; 28]
How is an effective complaint of violation constructed?
A good application is not strengthened by listing many Convention articles one after another. In each complaint, a link must be established between the facts, the conduct of the State, the guarantee alleged to have been violated, the way it was raised in domestic law, and the supporting document. The table below is a hypothetical preparation example, not a real case file.
| Element of preparation | Information to be made specific | Documents that may be used |
|---|---|---|
| Facts | The date on which the decisive expert report entered the file to the applicant's detriment | Report, register of incoming documents |
| Complaint of violation | That judgment was delivered without giving the applicant an opportunity to comment on the report | Hearing record, reasoned judgment |
| Raising in domestic law | The petitions and claims in which this problem was raised | Relevant sections of the appeal, cassation and AYM petitions |
| National response | The response of the courts to the objection, or the absence of any response | Relevant paragraphs of the judgment |
| Personal effect | How the availability of the defense was weakened within the file as a whole | Decisive reasoning and the applicant's statement |
| Redress | The connection between the finding of violation and the loss claimed | Records of loss and expenses |
In the example, the State may argue that the report had already been accessible, that the applicant could submit observations, or that the report was not decisive in the judgment. The preparation of the application must not conceal these possibilities; it must explain the date of access, the time given, the objection made and the weight of the report in the judgment. In this way, the complaint is taken from the level of "I disagree with the report" to a discussion of the procedural guarantee.
Where judgments are cited, similarity with the file must be established. A case won by another person, with different facts and a different domestic procedure, does not automatically produce a result for the applicant in a different file. Whether a judgment is a Chamber or Grand Chamber judgment, whether it was delivered on admissibility or on the merits, and the limits in the relevant paragraphs must be read separately.
Where an AI-assisted draft or a list of decisions has been prepared, the name of the decision, the application number, the date, the paragraph and the legal proposition must be checked against the original source. The ECtHR's January 2026 Turkish-language notes state that, whatever tool is used, responsibility for the content submitted lies with the applicant. Knowingly submitting false or misleading information may raise a problem of abuse of the right of application. Not every typographical error amounts to abuse; however, filing a decision that does not exist without verifying it is a serious preparatory failure. [4, section on the use of artificial intelligence tools]
Errors that lawyers may make in ECtHR applications
Representation by a lawyer does not remove procedural errors automatically. The list below does not contain an error rate or any allegation concerning a particular member of the profession; it shows the risks arising from the application of the official rules to file preparation. The ECtHR's "Common mistakes" document of May 7, 2026 is one of the principal reference sources for this check. [6]
| Error | Problem it may cause | Check before file delivery |
|---|---|---|
| Treating the AYM application as an ECtHR application | No application has been made to Strasbourg | Verify separately the Court, address and sending channel |
| Using an old form or old time-limit information | The form not being processed, or the time limit expiring | Obtain the form again from the official page; check the four-month regime |
| Attaching every complaint to the same final decision | Missing the time limit or the required remedy for one complaint | Prepare a time and exhaustion schedule for each complaint |
| Sending the form blank with a supplementary petition | The conditions of Rule 47 are not met | Read the facts, violation and exhaustion fields on the form |
| Relying on a single signature in the authorization area | Representation not properly established | Check the applicant's, lawyer's and final declaration signatures separately |
| Sending only the AYM decision | The substance of the complaint and the domestic process cannot be proven | Match the relevant decision, petition, record and notification records |
| Having argued a different claim in domestic law | Failure to exhaust in substance | Show where the ECtHR complaint appears in the national petitions |
| Using a general list of rights or a copied application | The personal violation cannot be substantiated | Write the facts, harm and evidence of each applicant separately |
| Concealing a previous international application | Problems of duplication or abuse | Disclose the earlier application and decisions |
| Not monitoring eComms and time-limited correspondence | Right of defense cannot be exercised, or the case is struck out | Establish a responsible person and a back-up monitoring arrangement |
| Requesting compensation only in the initial form | Risk of rejection of the claim for just satisfaction | Submit the claim and documents in line with the Court's subsequent instructions |
| Transferring case law without verifying it | Wrong legal proposition or misleading application | Check the citation, reasoning and outcome against the full HUDOC text |
Why is completing an incomplete first file by sending only additional documents risky?
According to the Court's current guidance on errors, an initial submission that does not comply with Rule 47 may not be registered as a file. In that case, the approach of "add the missing document to the old file" is not sufficient: a new, complete application form and all necessary attachments must be sent together. The re-sending must still fall within the four-month period that remains applicable. This explanation should not be confused with the sending of a specific document that the Court has requested in a registered file. [6, error 13]
Hypothetically, a lawyer who sends an unsigned form three days before the last day cannot treat the arrival of a deficiency letter a month later as the start of a new time limit. However, where the Court has set a specific time limit for a particular document in a registered file, the subject and time limit of that instruction must be observed. Distinguishing the two situations requires reading the full text of the deficiency letter.
How should the final check before sending be carried out?
A second review by someone other than the person who prepared the file is useful. The check should not consist only of counting pages. The following questions should be answered: are the applicant and the respondent State correct; are all complaints in the form; has the domestic history and time-limit basis of each been shown; are the signatures complete; does the list of attachments match the actual attachments; is there an illegible or incomplete judgment page; and will the record of acceptance of the postal delivery be kept?
Where there are many similar applications, a collective working table does not replace the individual form and the applicant-specific documents. According to the official instructions, an additional identity table is required for more than ten applicants. In the special group concerning dismissal from public office in Türkiye, the separate form and cover-page obligations for each person apply in addition. [3, 5, 20]
Why may an application be rejected at the admissibility stage?
A formally valid application is not thereby admissible. In addition to the time-limit and exhaustion requirements, competence ratione personae, materiae, loci and temporis; victim status; prior international applications; the sufficiency of the basis of the complaint; and the honest use of the right of application are assessed. [1, Arts. 34–35]
Manifest lack of foundation is a different matter from ticking the boxes on the form. This conclusion may be reached where the facts and documents do not show the violation alleged, or where the application merely re-argues the ordinary evaluation of evidence by the national court. The statement that "no significant disadvantage was suffered" is a separately regulated criterion; it cannot be explained solely by the amount of money involved. The exception where respect for human rights requires examination on the merits is preserved. [1, Art. 35(3)]
The same matter having previously been examined by the ECtHR, or having been submitted to another international examination or settlement procedure, is also important. Not every international correspondence is an automatic bar; the nature of the body, the applicants, the facts, the complaint and whether new information exists are assessed. Disclosing earlier applications allows the examination to be carried out properly.
Some complaints in one file may be inadmissible while others may be examined. Rather than assuming a single outcome for the whole application, the conditions of each complaint of violation must be separately examined. Moreover, inadmissibility is not a general confirmation that every step taken in that dispute was fully lawful; the reasoning of the decision must be read.
How does the process work after an application is made?
The form and attachments are first assessed; the application is then sent to the appropriate judicial formation. A single judge, a three-judge committee or a seven-judge Chamber perform different functions. Repetitive issues within settled case-law may also be disposed of by a committee. There is no mandatory step system in which each file must pass in turn from a single judge to a committee and then to a Chamber. [27]
Communication of the application to the Government serves to obtain observations on the complaints and questions. This communication is not a finding of violation; admissibility and merits may be examined together. According to the Court's letter, friendly settlement and adversarial examination may be conducted at separate stages or together. The applicant must respond concretely to the State's objections on exhaustion, time limits, victim status and the merits. [16, Rules 54A; 3]
The process is largely written. A hearing is not held in every application, and no reliable single year range can be given for the time it takes to conclude. The nature of the file, its priority, the parties' responses and the method of examination affect the duration. Receiving a registration number, or a long period without a reply, does not show that the application has been accepted. [27]
The lawyer's duty of follow-up in eComms correspondence
The Court's electronic submission instructions, updated on October 1, 2026, govern the submission of documents through eComms in applicable files. Documents must be prepared in PDF format searchable by text; the original of a signed document must be preserved. Strasbourg time is the reference for a document successfully uploaded. Waiting only for an email notification is not sufficient; the eComms account must also be checked regularly. [12]
A document once uploaded must not be handled as in a simple shared folder in which a new version can be written over the old one. If a correction is needed, the procedure must be followed with the nature of the new document clearly identified. Where a time-limited letter reaches the office, a back-up monitoring arrangement must be set up so that the "the file-handler was on leave" problem does not arise. Changes of address, email and representation must also be notified.
Is a lawyer required, and is there a fee for the application?
A first application may be made without a lawyer. After notification to the Government, representation in accordance with Rule 36 of the Rules of Court is, as a rule, required, subject to exceptions permitted by the Court. There is no general requirement that a lawyer practising in Türkiye obtain a separate licence to practise in France for the purposes of representation. [16, Rule 36]
No court fee is payable for an application to the ECtHR. However, there may be lawyers' fees, postage and, where necessary, translation costs. The Court's legal aid does not mean automatic appointment of a lawyer for everyone who prepares a first application; it is considered at a particular stage of the procedure, assessing the need for assistance and the insufficiency of financial means. [26; 16, Rules 105–110]
How is a Rule 39 interim measure requested in urgent cases?
Rule 39 is for exceptional situations in which there is a risk of imminent and irreparable harm to a right under the Convention. Risk of serious ill-treatment in case of expulsion or extradition is among the areas where this assessment is frequently made. The fact that a case has been lost, that money must be paid or that a sentence is to be enforced does not, on its own, show that the conditions for a measure are met. [13]
A request for a measure should explain the current danger, the act expected to occur and when, the domestic remedies used, any suspensive decisions and the relevant documents. For a health risk, current health records are important; for removal, the act, the destination country and the planned date are important. A general country report does not, on its own, replace the explanation of the risk specific to the applicant.
The request may be submitted through the ECHR Rule 39 Site, by fax or by post; email is not an accepted channel for interim measure requests. Under the current procedure, working hours are stated as 08:00–16:00 Strasbourg time on working days. Late requests cannot be assumed to be examined the same day; particularly where the request is made less than one working day before removal, examination may not be completed in time. [14]
Where domestic remedies capable of suspending enforcement exist, their use is also assessed separately. The instructions also address the risk of waiting where a final decision is about to be given and will be enforced immediately. Planning of the interim measure request should go hand in hand with pursuit of the substantive application; the form or document requested by the Court must be submitted within the time allowed. The fact that an interim measure has been requested is not a general exemption from the four-month time limit. [13, §§38–42]
Consequences of an ECtHR judgment, compensation and retrial
Violation judgment and just satisfaction
A finding of a violation does not mean that all compensation claimed will be paid. A proper link must be shown between the pecuniary loss and the violation; calculations and documents must be submitted. For non-pecuniary damage, the assessment is based on equity; the claim may be left to the discretion of the Court. Costs and expenses must be shown to have actually been incurred or to be payable, and to have been necessary and reasonable. [15, §§8–19]
The fact that a claim for compensation was written into the initial form does not remove the obligation to follow the Court's subsequent instructions. The claim for just satisfaction and the related documents must be submitted within the time set by the Court. The exception is special procedures, such as an express notice to the parties that a separate claim will not be required in simplified repetitive applications. For this reason, the two absolute statements "a new claim is always required" and "the first claim is always sufficient" are both misleading. [15, §§20–23]
How judgments become final and are enforced
There is no ordinary appeal against decisions on inadmissibility. Referral of a Chamber judgment to the Grand Chamber is an exceptional procedure that may be requested within three months from the date of the judgment; it does not give a second examination in every file. The rules on finality differ for Committee decisions and Grand Chamber judgments. [1, Arts. 28 and 43–44; 27]
Enforcement of a final judgment finding a violation is the obligation of the State concerned and is supervised by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. Redress is not limited to payment of money: individual measures to remove the consequences for the person, and general measures to prevent similar violations, may be required. The time for payment, interest and currency are determined by the operative part of the judgment. [17]
Retrial time limits are not the same in Türkiye
The ECtHR does not itself quash a domestic court's judgment and substitute an acquittal, a land registry entry or a reinstatement order. The manner in which a violation finding is implemented under domestic law is determined by the nature of the violation and the relevant procedural law. A request for retrial must also be prepared separately.
| Field of proceedings | Principal provision | Basic time-limit point in the case of an ECtHR violation judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Criminal | CMK Art. 311(1)(f) | A retrial may be requested within one year from the date the ECtHR judgment became final, subject to the conditions in the law. |
| Civil | HMK Arts. 375(1)(i) and 377(1)(e) | Three months from service of the final ECtHR judgment. The former ten-year upper limit has been annulled by the AYM in respect of this subparagraph. |
| Administrative | İYUK Art. 53(1)(ı) and 53(3) | A one-year period from the date the ECtHR judgment became final is provided for the relevant reason. |
This table shows the basic periods for the ordinary scenario of an ECtHR violation judgment. Historical transitional provisions, the consequences of a friendly settlement or unilateral declaration leading to striking out, and other conditions of the relevant field of proceedings must be examined separately. Assuming that there is "one year" in all cases may cause loss of rights, particularly in civil actions. [22–24]
In criminal proceedings, a request for retrial does not automatically stay the execution of the judgment; under CMK Article 312, deferral or stay of execution is a separate question. The applicant must explain the connection between the violation identified and his or her own conviction, and which step would remedy the violation. [22]
In civil cases, the AYM's decision of June 21, 2022, E.2022/7, K.2022/79, must also be taken into account. The Court annulled the ten-year maximum limit in HMK Article 377, in respect of subparagraph (e), which governs applications based on a final ECtHR violation judgment. The reasoning was that the long national and international review periods, which the applicant did not cause, could render the remedy of redress ineffective. That annulment does not mean that the three-month period for application has been removed. [29, §§24–30 and operative part]
Friendly settlement and unilateral declaration
A friendly settlement may allow the file to be concluded by agreement of the parties on specific redress terms. The confidentiality of the negotiations must be protected. A unilateral declaration is the Court's assessment of the State's declaration on the violation and redress; the Court may strike the application out despite the applicant's objection. These are not the same type of decision as a violation judgment. [1, Arts. 37 and 39; 16, Rule 62A]
When an offer is assessed, not only the amount of money should be looked at. The timing of payment, individual redress, the possibility of a retrial in domestic law and the consequences of the application being struck out must be considered together. The applicant must be told clearly in plain terms what the text means for him or her, so that he or she can make an informed decision.
Conclusion
The strength of an ECtHR application lies in combining an accurate description of the rights violation with correct procedure. First, the effective domestic remedy and time limit for each complaint must be determined; then the current form, representation signatures and documents must be prepared in full. After the file has been sent, the Court's letters, eComms records and just satisfaction claims must be followed.
Posting the application, calculating the four-month period in calendar months, sending the complete file again where the first file was incomplete, and implementing a violation judgment in domestic law by separate procedures are the fundamental distinctions for avoiding loss of rights. The lawyer's task is to apply these to the client's file rather than leave them to a standard petition, and to evaluate both the strong and the weak points of the case on the basis of documents.
Frequently Asked Questions
To which institution in Türkiye is an ECtHR application delivered?
An ordinary first application, with the official form and attachments, is posted directly to the Registry of the ECtHR in Strasbourg. It should not be assumed that delivery to an institution in Türkiye preserves the time limit for a Strasbourg application. See the address and method section.
Can I apply to the ECtHR through UYAP or e-Government?
The general first ECtHR application is not made through these channels. The individual application facility on the UYAP Lawyer Portal concerns the AYM. eComms and the Rule 39 system serve different purposes. The difference between the electronic channels is explained in the section Differences between electronic channels.
Is the ECtHR time limit four months or six months?
For final domestic decisions given on or after February 1, 2022, the general time limit is four months. For earlier decisions there is a historical transitional rule. Old six-month examples must not be applied directly to a current file. See the section on calculating the time limit.
If the last day is a Sunday, can I send it on Monday?
The extension of the time limit for national public holidays does not apply automatically to the ECtHR time limit. The file should not be left to be sent on the last day. The Sabri Güneş decision and the calendar example are explained in the relevant section.
Can I apply to the ECtHR without going to the AYM?
Where the AYM route is accessible and effective for the relevant complaint, it should, as a rule, be used first. The exception rests not merely on an expectation of an adverse result but on a concrete assessment of effectiveness. See the section on domestic remedies.
Does an AYM decision of time-limit expiry open the ECtHR route?
Not on its own. Failure to comply with a domestic time limit may result in the conditions of exhaustion for the ECtHR not having been met. The reasoning of the AYM decision and the history of the relevant complaint must be examined. See the section AYM stage.
Is my lawyer's notarized power of attorney sufficient?
A notarized power of attorney does not automatically replace the original signatures required in the authorization section of the first form. Representation authority and the declaration signature at the end of the form must be checked separately. See the section Signature and representation.
Can I complete the application form in Turkish?
Yes. The first application may be made in Turkish. Later stages follow the Court's language rules and the permissions it gives. See the section Turkish application and protection of personal information.
Are court decision attachments included in the twenty-page limit?
The limit applies to the additional statement that expands the form; it is not a general twenty-page limit on the total of court judgments and other documentary attachments. The form must itself contain a sufficient explanation. See the section Preparation of the form.
If I send the missing document later, is my first application preserved?
Not in every case. For a first submission that does not comply with Rule 47, a new complete form and all the necessary attachments may need to be sent within the time limit. A document the Court has requested in a registered file is a different matter. See the section Re-sending an incomplete file.
Does an ECtHR application stop the enforcement of a sentence?
An application does not stop enforcement automatically. For Rule 39, the exceptional risk of imminent and irreparable harm applies; for suspension requests in domestic law, the relevant national conditions are assessed. See the section Interim measure.
Does the grant of an application number mean I have won the case?
No. Registration, admissibility and the finding of a violation are separate stages. Communication to the Government is also not a guarantee of outcome. See the section Process after the application.
Is there a court fee or a requirement for a lawyer for an ECtHR application?
There is no court fee for an application to the Court; a lawyer is not required at the first stage. At a later stage representation is, as a rule, required; legal aid has its own conditions. See the section Representation and costs.
If a violation judgment is found, do I have one year for retrial?
The period differs by field of proceedings. The one-year periods in criminal and administrative proceedings must not be confused with the three-month period in civil actions. The starting point and other conditions are set out in the retrial table.
Sources and legal bases
[1] Council of Europe, European Convention on Human Rights, in particular Arts. 1, 19, 28, 34–35, 37, 39, 41 and 43–46; current text.
[2] ECtHR, Rule 47 of the Rules of Court, §§1–7.
[3] ECtHR, Apply to the Court, form, address, submission and contact information.
[4] ECtHR, Explanatory notes on completing the application form, January 2026, in particular pp. 3–12.
[5] ECtHR, Institution of Proceedings, practice direction amended on February 1, 2022, §§1–17.
[6] ECtHR, Common mistakes in filling in the application form and how to avoid them, May 7, 2026, notes 1–13.
[7] ECtHR Registry, Practical Guide on Admissibility Criteria, updated February 28, 2026, in particular §§191–215. The guide does not bind the Court.
[8] ECtHR, Second Section, Hasan Uzun v. Türkiye, Application No. 10755/13, April 30, 2013, §§52–71; Ministry of Justice Turkish translation.
[9] ECtHR, Grand Chamber, Vučković and Others v. Serbia, Application No. 17153/11 and 29 other applications, March 25, 2014, §§69–91.
[10] ECtHR, Grand Chamber, Sabri Güneş v. Türkiye, Application No. 27396/06, June 29, 2012, §§43–61; Ministry of Justice Turkish translation. The length of the period concerns the historical regime.
[11] ECtHR, Grand Chamber, Bochan v. Ukraine (No. 2), Application No. 22251/08, February 5, 2015, §§61–65; text including the correction of March 11, 2015.
[12] ECtHR, Electronic filing by applicants and third parties, update of October 1, 2026.
[13] ECtHR, Requests for interim measures, amendment of March 28, 2024, in particular §§31–42.
[14] ECtHR, Procedure for interim measures, Rule 39 transmission channels and working hours.
[15] ECtHR, Just satisfaction claims, amendment of June 9, 2022, §§8–23.
[16] ECtHR, Rules of Court, text of September 15, 2025, in particular Rules 34, 36, 47, 54A, 60, 62A and 105–110.
[17] Council of Europe, The supervision process, execution of judgments under the supervision of the Committee of Ministers.
[18] Mustafa Baysal, "The Concept of Victim in Individual Applications to the European Court of Human Rights" (Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesine Bireysel Başvuruda Mağdur Kavramı), Uyuşmazlık Mahkemesi Dergisi (Jurisdictional Disputes Court Journal), 2015, No. 5, pp. 193–233; in particular pp. 205–214.
[19] ECtHR Registry, Announcement on the four-month time limit for applications, ECHR 032 (2022), February 1, 2022.
[20] ECtHR Registry, Special measures for applications concerning dismissal from public office in Türkiye, ECHR 306 (2025), December 19, 2025; effective from January 1, 2026.
[21] Constitutional Court, Individual Applications Begin to Be Received Through the UYAP Lawyer Portal, application from October 1, 2025.
[22] Law No. 5271 on Criminal Procedure (CMK), Arts. 311–312.
[23] Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 (HMK), Arts. 375(1)(i) and 377(1)(e).
[24] Administrative Procedure Law No. 2577 (İYUK), Art. 53.
[25] Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE), The European Court of Human Rights: Questions & Answers for Lawyers, in particular sections 4.6–4.8.
[26] ECtHR, Questions and Answers, statements on application, representation, costs and the Court's jurisdiction.
[27] ECtHR, Your application to the ECHR: How to apply and how your application is processed, registration of the application and stages of judicial examination.
[28] ECtHR, Requests for anonymity, practice direction on requests for concealment of identity from the public.
[29] Constitutional Court, E.2022/7, K.2022/79, June 21, 2022, official selected decisions compilation, in particular §§24–30 and the operative part; Official Gazette July 1, 2022, No. 31883.
The verification date for sources is October 11, 2026. The legal status of the official English and French texts and of the Turkish explanatory translations is not the same.