5.  The applicant was born in 1973 and lives in the Netherlands. 6.  The applicant was a political dissident in Iran. On 17 December 2004 he went to Turkey. Subsequently he requested asylum from the Turkish authorities and applied to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (“the UNHCR”) for recognition of his refugee status. 7.  On 11 March 2005 the applicant was notified that he had been granted a temporary residence permit to live in the city of Konya pending the asylum proceedings. The applicant did not follow the instructions and settled in Istanbul. 8.  On 30 July 2007 the applicant was arrested in connection with a drug‑related crime. He was subsequently convicted of that crime and sentenced to eighteen months’ imprisonment. 9.  On 25 August 2007 the UNHCR recognised the applicant’s refugee status and on 6 February 2008 it informed the national authorities of its decision. The UNHCR also requested that the applicant be issued with a temporary residence permit pending the completion of the procedure for his resettlement once the criminal proceedings against him had ended. 10.  On 29 December 2008 the applicant was released from prison and placed in the Kumkapı Foreigners’ Removal Centre attached to the Istanbul police headquarters. 11.  On an unspecified date the national authorities decided that the applicant could not be granted asylum seeker status in Turkey. The applicant was notified of this decision on 2 January 2009 and submitted an objection on the same date. 12.  On 22 July 2009 the applicant’s objection was dismissed. He was then denied a temporary residence permit on 24 July 2009. 13.  In a letter dated 7 September 2009 the Ministry of the Interior asked the Governor of Istanbul to deport the applicant. The letter did not specify to which country the applicant should be deported. 14.  On 14 September 2009 the UNHCR asked the Turkish authorities to grant the applicant a temporary residence permit – on humanitarian grounds, if not as an asylum seeker. 15.  On 5 October 2009 the Ministry of the Interior instructed the Istanbul Governor not to proceed with the applicant’s deportation, on humanitarian grounds, and to continue holding the applicant at the Kumkapı Centre until the UNHCR had completed the procedure for his resettlement. The Ministry of the Interior added that, given the applicant’s conviction for drug-related crimes, the decision had been based on the threat he posed to public order and health. 16.  On 10 March 2010 the UNHCR informed the national authorities that the Netherlands had granted the applicant refugee status and asked them to allow the applicant’s departure to that country. 17.  On 14 April 2010 the applicant left Turkey. 18.  In the meantime, on an unspecified date in 2010, the applicant had brought a case before the Ankara Administrative Court challenging his detention at the Kumkapı Centre. 19.  On 1 June 2010 the Ankara Administrative Court dismissed the case, holding that the administrative authorities’ decision to detain the applicant had been in accordance with the law: he had been detained with a view to protecting public order and public security pending his possible deportation and the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights.
  20.  A description of the relevant domestic law and practice may be found in the case of Abdolkhani and Karimnia v. Turkey (no. 30471/08, §§ 29‑44, ECHR 2009‑... (extracts)). 21.  Paragraphs 32 and 33 of the UNHCR Detention Guidelines of 2012 (Guidelines on the Applicable Criteria and Standards relating to the Detention of Asylum-Seekers and Alternatives to Detention) provide as follows:
“32. (...) detention for the sole reason that the person is seeking asylum is not lawful under international law. Illegal entry or stay of asylum-seekers does not give the State an automatic power to detain or to otherwise restrict freedom of movement. Detention that is imposed in order to deter future asylum-seekers, or to dissuade those who have commenced their claims from pursuing them, is inconsistent with international norms. Furthermore, detention is not permitted as a punitive – for example, criminal – measure or a disciplinary sanction for irregular entry or presence in the country. Apart from constituting a penalty under Article 31 of the 1951 Convention, it may also amount to collective punishment in violation of international human rights law. 33. As a general rule, it is unlawful to detain asylum-seekers in on-going asylum proceedings on grounds of expulsion as they are not available for removal until a final decision on their claim has been made. Detention for the purposes of expulsion can only occur after the asylum claim has been finally determined and rejected. However, where there are grounds for believing that the specific asylum-seeker has lodged an appeal or introduced an asylum claim merely in order to delay or frustrate an expulsion or deportation decision which would result in his or her removal, the authorities may consider detention – as determined to be necessary and proportionate in the individual case – in order to prevent their absconding, while the claim is being assessed.” 22.  Article 18 (1) of the European Union Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005 on Minimum Standards on Procedures in Member States for Granting and Withdrawing Refugee Status provides as follows:
“Member States shall not hold a person in detention for the sole reason that he/she is an applicant for asylum.”