4.  The applicant was born in 1953 and lives in Tunceli, south-east Turkey. 5.  The applicant, without submitting any documents, submitted the following: 6.  On 6 November 1992 he was taken into custody by police officers from the anti-terror branch of the Istanbul police headquarters in the course of which he was subjected to “torture”. 7.  On 20 November 1992 the Istanbul State Security Court ordered the applicant's detention on remand. Criminal proceedings were initiated against him before the 3rd Chamber of the Istanbul State Security Court. 8.  On an unspecified date, the 3rd Chamber of the Istanbul State Security Court convicted the applicant under Article 168 of the Criminal Code of membership of an illegal organisation. 9.  On 21 December 2000 Law no. 4616, which governed conditional release, suspension of proceedings and execution of sentences in respect of offences committed before 23 April 1999, came into force. The Law stipulated that persons who had committed offences under Article 168 of the Criminal Code were not eligible for parole. Thus, the applicant could not benefit from Law no. 4616. 10.  The following information appears from the parties' submissions and from the documents submitted by them: 11.  On 21 July 1993 the public prosecutor at the Istanbul State Security Court filed a bill of indictment with the 1st Chamber of that court (hereinafter “the trial court”) against B.G. who is the owner of a monthly review entitled Emeğin Bayrağı (“The Flag of Labour”). The public prosecutor charged B.G., in his capacity as owner and editor of the review, with disseminating propaganda against the indivisibility of the State on account of an article published in the review in July 1993, entitled Yeni Bir Maraş: Sivas Katliamı (“A New Maraş: The Sivas Massacre”)[1]. The charges were brought under Article 8 § 1 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (Law no. 3713). 12.  On 28 September 1993 B.G. stated before the trial court that the author of the article was Ziya Ulusoy, i.e. the applicant. The trial court subsequently heard the applicant who confirmed that he was indeed the author of the impugned article. 13.  The relevant passages of the article may be summarised as follows:
“... Today, there is a dirty war which continues with the most violent methods in Kurdistan. The State carries on a war with the aim of genocide against the Kurdish people and its leaders. While the legitimate movement of the Kurdish nation aims at political freedom, the State reinforces Turkish chauvinism in order to quieten and weaken the voice of this war. The funerals of the soldiers who die during this war are used to create a racist and chauvinist mass movement... These movements occupy the agenda along with the Kurdish national movement... This State, which aims to oppress the Kurdish workers and the national freedom movement with blood and gunpowder, used the fundamentalist Islamists and the Hizbullah against you yesterday. Today, it again uses the fundamentalist Islamist masses under the leadership of Hizbullah against Alevis, progressive and democratic people and Turkish intellectuals without making a distinction between Kurdish and Turkish. This massacre, during which houses and offices were burned and more than forty people were killed, is a new Maraş. Don't remain silent in the presence of the massacre, demand that it be accounted for by your actions”. 14.  On 26 November 1993 the public prosecutor at the Istanbul State Security Court filed a bill of indictment and charged the applicant with the offence of disseminating propaganda against the indivisibility of the State, contrary to Article 8 § 1 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (Law no. 3713). 15.  In the course of the trial the applicant submitted a number of petitions to the trial court in which he submitted, inter alia, the following:
“... I am proud to have protested against the Sivas massacre by writing that article... Protesting against such fascist massacres, just like protesting against the actions of Hitler who massacred Jews, is a democratic duty...”. 16.  On 15 April 1997 the trial court convicted the applicant as charged and sentenced him to one year and four months' imprisonment and a fine of 133,333,333 Turkish liras (approximately 1,000 US dollars at the time). In its judgment, the trial court considered that the applicant had committed the offence defined in Article 8 of Law no. 3713 by, inter alia, having referred to a part of the country as “Kurdistan” and having stated that this part belonged to the Kurdish nation. The trial court further observed that the applicant had defined terrorist acts as a “national liberation movement” and the fight against terrorism as a “dirty war”. In the opinion of the trial court, the opinions expressed by the applicant were negative propaganda capable of destroying the indivisibility and integrity of the Turkish Republic and the nation. 17.  On 9 July 1997 the applicant appealed against his conviction. He argued in his appeal petition that he had written the article in order to protest against the massacre of 35 intellectuals in Sivas and to explain the truth behind it. He further stated that the article was an expression of opinion; punishing persons like him who opposed such massacres would facilitate further massacres. 18.  On 5 March 1999 the Court of Cassation rejected the applicant's appeal and upheld the conviction of 15 April 1997. 19.  According to the documents, which were drawn up by national authorities and submitted to the Court by the Government, the applicant began serving his prison sentence on 30 April 1999. On 1 November 1999 the Istanbul State Security Court suspended the applicant's prison sentence pursuant to Law no. 4454, concerning the suspension of pending cases and penalties in media-related offences, which had entered into force on 28 August 1999. The court also held that the applicant would continue to serve the remainder of his sentence if, within the next three years, he were to commit one of the offences set out in Article 1 of Law no. 4454.