PART 2: How to Bring a Case to the Court 1. At any stage of the proceedings, the Court may place itself at the disposal of the parties concerned with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the matter on the basis of respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the protocols thereto. 2. Proceedings conducted under paragraph 1 b. shall be confidential. Furthermore, Article 39 provides that if a friendly settlement is reached, the Court shall strike the case out of its list by means of a decision that shall be confined to a brief statement of the facts and of the solution reached. The parties will be informed that, regarding the requirement of strict confidentiality under Rule 62 § 2, any submissions made in this respect should be set out in a separate document, the contents of which must not be referred to in any submissions made in the context of the contentious proceedings. If the parties let it be known that they are interested in reaching a settlement, the Registry will be prepared to make a suggestion for an appropriate arrangement. b) Friendly Settlement Declaration The terms of a friendly settlement will be set out in a declaration that will be signed by the parties and submitted to the Court. The parties’ declarations in the case of Sakı v. Turkey235 are reproduced in the Textbox vi below and may serve as an illustration of the form and contents of friendly settlement declarations in a case which concerns complaints under Article 3 of the Convention. On receipt of the declarations, the Court will examine the terms with a view to establishing whether respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the protocols is upheld in the declaration; pursuant to Article 37 § 1 (c), the Court may continue the examination of the application if respect for human rights so requires and in spite of the parties’ intention to settle the case. A friendly settlement declaration signed by a Government may include the Government’s expression of regret for the actions that had led to the bringing of the application. For example, in the case of Sakı v. Turkey,236 the respondent Turkish Government submitted in its declaration that it […] regret[ed] the occurrence, as in the present case, of individual cases of ill-treatment by the authorities of persons detained in custody notwithstanding existing Turkish legislation and the resolve of the Government to prevent such occurrences.237 Furthermore, the Turkish Government also accepted in the same declaration that recourse to ill-treatment of detainees constitutes a violation of Article 3 of the Convention.238 235 236 237 238 Sakı v. Turkey, no. 29359/95, 30 October 2001. Ibid. Ibid., § 12. Ibid. 87