ELCI AND OTHERS v. TURKEY JUDGMENT 92 G. The Turkish Government's Derogation under Article 15 of the Convention and Decrees Nos. 424, 425 and 430 589. The summary of the Derogation of 6 August 1990 and resultant Decrees, provided by the Government in several cases before the Convention organs, can be found in the aforementioned Demir and Others v. Turkey judgment (§§ 24-20). The Derogation refers to the terrorist threat to national security in South East Turkey and to the additional powers afforded by Decrees Nos. 424 and 425 to the Governor of the state of emergency region to meet that threat as regards the print media, residential prohibitions, labour disputes, looting, the evacuation of villages, the transfer of undesirable civil servants, and any official's immunity from suit in the exercise of those additional powers. Decree 430, promulgated on 16 December 1990, created certain safeguards in the exercise of those powers, including a right to sue the State for loss or damages arising out of emergency measures. On 12 May 1992 the Permanent Representative of Turkey wrote to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, limiting the effect of the Derogation to questions arising under Article 5 of the Convention. H. Civil and administrative liability arising out of criminal offences 590. Under Article 13 of Law No. 2577 on Judicial Administrative Procedure, anyone who sustained damage as a result of an act by the authorities could, within one year after the alleged act was committed, claim compensation from them. If the claim was rejected in whole or in part, or if no reply was received within sixty days, the victim could bring administrative proceedings. 591. Article 125 §§ 1 and 7 of the Constitution provided: “All acts or decisions of the authorities are subject to judicial review... The authorities shall be liable to make reparation for all damage caused by their acts or measures.” 592. That provision established the State's strict liability, which came into play if it were shown that, in the circumstances of a particular case, the State had failed in its obligation to maintain public order, ensure public safety or protect people's lives or property, without it being necessary to show a tortious act attributable to the authorities. Under these rules, the authorities could therefore be held liable to compensate anyone who had sustained loss as a result of acts committed by unidentified persons. 593. Article 8 of Legislative Decree No. 430 of 16 December 1990 provided: “No criminal, financial or legal liability may be asserted against ... the Governor of a state of emergency region or Provincial Governors in that region in respect of

Select target paragraph3