4.  The applicants were born in 1961, 1974, 1971, 1974, 1967, 1962 and 1967 respectively. The first two applicants live in İzmit. The third applicant lives in Germany and the remainder of the applicants reside in İstanbul. 5.  On 11 January 1998 around 350-400 people gathered at the Ümraniye Sarıgazi Cemevi[1] to commemorate the death of members of the TKP‑ML/TIKKO.[2] The commemoration turned into a violent clash between some of the participants and the security forces. Thirty-five people were arrested, including the applicants. The applicants were first taken to Sarıgazi Gendarmerie. Later on the same day they were transferred to the İstanbul Provincial Gendarmerie Command as there was not enough space at the Sarıgazi Gendarmerie. 6.  On various dates between 11 January and 14 January 1998 two gendarmes at Sarıgazi Gendarmerie, Mr E.G. and Mr Ö. K. took the applicants’ statements with the exception of Ercan Başkan who stated that he wished to give his statement before a prosecutor. 7.  On 15 January 1998 the applicants were released pending trial. 8.  On various occasions between 12 and 15 January 1998 the applicants were medically examined. 9.  On 12 January 1998 the applicant was examined by a doctor, Dr O.A. at Sarıyer State Hospital who noted that he had a slight ecchymosis on his nose and an ecchymosis of 5x4 cm on his right tibia. 10.  On 15 January 1998 the applicant was examined by another doctor, Dr Ç.A. at Sarıyer State Hospital. This doctor noted that he had an ecchymosis on his right tibia and right femoral region and a number of old ecchymoses on various parts of his back. Dr Ç.A. mentioned that the applicant complained of pain in his chest. 11.  On the same day, the Üsküdar Forensic Medicine Department (hereinafter: “FM department”), relying on the aforementioned medical reports, concluded that the injuries rendered the applicant unfit for work for a week. 12.  On 13 January 1998 the applicant was examined by Dr O.A. who noted grazes on the skin of his right knee joint. 13.  On 15 January 1998 the applicant was examined by Dr Ç.A. who found no signs of ill-treatment on his body. 14.  On the same day, the FM department, referring to the aforementioned medical reports, concluded that the injuries rendered the applicant unfit for work for three days. 15.  On 13 January 1998 the applicant was examined by two doctors at Şişli Etfal Hospital. The first doctor noted an ecchymosis of 10x10 cm and 3x3 cm as well as pain and sensitivity on the right and the left of his lower back respectively. The second doctor found widespread ecchymoses on the right side of the back. 16.  On 15 January 1998 the applicant was examined by Dr Ç.A. who found no signs of ill-treatment on his body. 17.  On the same day, the FM department, taking into account the medical reports dated 13 January 1998, concluded that the injuries rendered the applicant unfit for work for a week. 18.  On 13 January 1998 the applicant was examined by Dr O.A. who noted a graze on the skin of the left knee joint. 19.  On 15 January 1998 the applicant was examined by Dr Ç.A. who found no signs of ill-treatment on his body. 20.  On the same day, the FM department, referring to the medical report of 13 January 1998, concluded that the injuries rendered the applicant unfit for work for 3 days. 21.  On 12 January 1998 the applicant was examined by Dr A.T. who noted that he had pain in his right periorbital region (around the eyes) and left leg. The doctor found a slight ecchymosis on the right periorbital region. 22.  On 15 January 1998 the applicant was examined by Dr Ç.A. who found no signs of ill-treatment on his body. 23.  On the same day, the FM department, in view of the medical report of 12 January 1998, concluded that the injuries rendered the applicant unfit for work for a week. 24.  On 13 January 1998 the applicant was examined by Dr O.A. who found a traumatic ecchymosis on her right femoral (thigh) region and left scapula (shoulder blade). He transferred her to Şişli Etfal Hospital where she was examined by two doctors. The first doctor found a traumatic ecchymosis on top of her right femoral region, on top of her left scapula and underneath her right scapula. He noted that the applicant had pain in her neck and right crural region (back of upper legs). The second doctor (an orthopaedist) found an ecchymosis of 7x10 cm on the right lateral side of the femur region as well as subjective pain in this region. No pathology was noted in the X-rays. 25.  On 15 January 1998 the applicant was examined by Dr Ç.A who indicated that the applicant complained of numbness in her right arm and legs. He found that the applicant had ecchymoses on her right femoral region and left scapula region. He further noted a number of ecchymoses on her back. The doctor concluded that these lesions were old. 26.  On the same day, the FM department, as a result of the medical reports of 13 and 15 January 1998, concluded that the injuries rendered the applicant unfit for work for a week. 27.  On 13 January 1998 the applicant was examined by two doctors at Şişli Etfal Hospital. According to the two medical reports issued on the same day the applicant had a superficial graze on the left side of his nose and his left eyebrows. His left cheek was swollen. The applicant’s scalp had multiple hyperaemic areas and he had an ecchymosis of 5x7 cm on his left gluteal region (buttocks) and multiple superficial grazes on the inside of his femoral region. Dr U.D. noted that the applicant complained of pain in his scrotum and penis. However, he found no ecchymoses, laceration or hyperaemia in the anal region. 28.  On 15 January 1998 the applicant was examined by Dr Ç.A. who found no signs of ill-treatment on his body. 29.  On the same day, the FM department, in view of the medical reports dated 13 January 1998, concluded that the injuries rendered the applicant unfit for work for a week. 30.  On 15 January 1998 the applicant, Mr Başkan was bought before the Üsküdar public prosecutor where he denied the accusations against him. In particular, he submitted that he had been subjected to ill-treatment while he was held in custody. He claimed that they had inserted a truncheon in his anus, hit his penis with a stick and squeezed his testicles. In addition, he alleged that they put a plastic bag over his head and that he was blindfolded and threatened. 31.  On the same day, the applicants were brought before the Üsküdar Criminal Court of First Instance where they refuted the accusations that they had taken part in the violent clash on 11 January 1998. In particular, Mr Hazırcı stated that he was coerced to sign the deposition taken by the security forces. Mr İyit[4] and Mr Başkan said that their statements given to the security forces were not true. Ms Uluk stated that her police deposition was not given of her own free will and that they tore up her initial statement and re‑wrote, and made her sign, another one. She also stated that she had been sexually harassed and given electric shocks. The court ordered their release. 32.  On the same day, the representatives of the thirty-five people arrested, including the applicants, submitted a petition to the Üsküdar public prosecutor’s office claiming that their clients had been subjected to ill‑treatment during their interrogation, that they had not been properly medically examined and that they had also been subjected to ill‑treatment after their medical examination. They submitted that their clients had been beaten and deprived of food. They requested an urgent medical examination. 33.  The Üsküdar public prosecutor decided to transfer the applicants to the Haydarpaşa Numune Hospital for a medical examination. According to the report drafted by the prosecutor at the Üsküdar Criminal Court of First Instance on 15 January 1998, the complainants left the court house after the hearing despite his request,and therefore could not be taken to a hospital for a medical examination. 34.  On an unspecified date, the Üsküdar public prosecutor decided that his office lacked competence ratione loci and transferred the case file to the Şişli public prosecutor’s office on 29 January 1998. 35.  On 13 February 1998 Mr T.O., the prosecutor at the Şişli public prosecutor’s office, requested the identities of the gendarmes who had participated in the interrogation of the complainants. 36.  On 11 March 1998 the İstanbul Provincial Gendarmerie Command informed the Şişli public prosecutor’s office that Mr E.G. and Mr Ö.K. were the gendarmes who had interrogated the complainants. 37.  On 8 July 1998 Mr E.G. and Mr Ö.K. were heard by a prosecutor. They denied the accusations against them. 38.  On 15 July 1998 the prosecutor, Mr T.O. gave a decision of non‑prosecution against Mr E.G. and Mr Ö.K. on the ground that there was no evidence that they had ill-treated the complainants during interrogation. The prosecutor considered that the physical findings noted in the medical reports were the result of lawful use of force by the gendarmes during arrest. 39.  The applicants’ objection against this decision was dismissed by the 2nd Chamber of the Beyoğlu Assize Court on 29 September 1999. 40.  On 6 July 1998 the applicants, with the exception of Mr Balçık, filed an official complaint with the Üsküdar public prosecutor’s office against the gendarmes at the İstanbul Provincial Gendarmerie Command. They submitted that, on various dates, they had been tortured by plain clothes officers. 41.  On 21 October 1998 Mr T.E., another prosecutor at the Şişli public prosecutor’s office, decided that there was no need to investigate the applicants’ allegations of ill-treatment since the matter had been investigated and a decision not to prosecute Mr Ö.K. and Mr E. G. had already been given in this respect. 42.  The applicants objected. They submitted that they did not know that an investigation into their allegations had been held, or that a decision of non-prosecution had been rendered, as the decision had never been served on them. They further stated that, in any event, they were subjected to ill-treatment at the İstanbul Provincial Gendarmerie Command and not at the Sarıgazi Gendarmerie where Mr Ö.K. and Mr E. G. were stationed. 43.  On 11 June 1999 the First Chamber of the Beyoğlu Assize Court dismissed the applicants’ objection. 44.  The criminal proceedings instigated against the applicants in respect of their involvement in the violent clashes on 11 January 1998 ended with their acquittal. 45.  According to the report issued by the Human Rights Association of Turkey on 14 November 2003, Mr Başkan applied to them on 7 May 1998 for treatment. He gave a description of the alleged ill-treatment he had been subjected to while held in custody in 1994, 1995, and 1996 and in January 1998 at the İstanbul Provincial Gendarmerie Command. The report indicates that the applicant was diagnosed as suffering from gingivitis, sinusitis and haemorrhoids and was given appropriate treatment.