Showing 46798 results

Correspondence regarding the arrangements and attendance for the seminar on 26 November 1972 in Breaffy House Hotel, Castlebar.

File relating to seminar attended by Kevin Boyle and which focused on an Effective Human Rights Council. Includes text of, with manuscript annotation by Boyle, lecture entitled "The United Nations Human Rights Council: Politics, Power and Human Rights"; Text of opening remarks by His Excellency Oh Joon, Deputy Minister for Multicultural and Global Affairs, Republic of Korea; Shorthand notebook with extensive notes written by Boyle during the conference; A4 notepad with extensive notes written by Boyle during the conference and regarding the place of the Human Rights Council; a script for interpreters only of a talk by Kevin Boyle on "Ways to Ensure an Effective UN Human Rights Council" (19 Nov 2009).

Programme and agenda from seminar for Chairpersons and Members of Parliamentary Human Rights Bodies on Freedom of Expression, Parliament and the Promotion of Tolerant Societies.

Documents relating to the seminar 'Re-Inventing Democracy? Accountability in governmental and extra-governmental organisation" which focused on democracy and accountability in Northern Ireland and the UK, with a full report on conference proceedings. Also includes letters of correspondence between Boyle and Chris Moffat, Fortnight Education Trust, who drafted the conference report. (Mar 1995)

Manuscript notes on notepad paper written by Boyle and headed "Lecture: Belfast and British Council". - also headed 'Democracy and Human Rights' and discusses international instances and cases of Human Rights, Democracy and Religious issues.

Reply of the applicant in the Tanrıkulu case to the observations of the Turkish Government submitted to the European Commission of Human Rights. The reply states that Selma Tanrıkulu has confirmed that she did indeed sign the written authorisation form dated 27 September 1993 in her application. The reply states that any domestic remedies are illusory and ineffective, and that the Government did not address any of the applicant's claims on the merits of the application. (2 copies)

Supplementary materials pertaining to the case filed by Selma Tanrıkulu on 25 February 1994 against the Republic of Turkey with the European Commission of Human Rights (application number 23763/94, later given European Court of Human Rights case number 137/1998/1040/1255, referred to internally within the Kurdish Litigation Project as Case 82 and assigned to Françoise Hampson as lead) regarding the 2 September 1993 shooting death of her husband, Dr Zeki Tanrıkulu, in the city of Silvan, Diyarbakır Province. Materials in this file include: sketches of the murder site; statements of Selma Tanrıkulu made in 1994 and in 1996; letterfaxes from Hampson to Caroline Nolan of the Kurdish Human Rights Project; the Commission, and forensic scientist Dr. Pounder; Aisling Reidy's working notes on the case as of 1997 written on foolscap; an article from the January-March 1998 issue of Kurdistan Report profiling Selma Tanrıkulu; schedules of professional fees and costs incurred in the case; and the applicant's memorial, submitted 5 February 1999, including appendices. A small piece of correspondence from the Commission is closed for access until 1 November 2073. Materials from the main casefile are located at A44/43/1/54.
In April 1993 Dr Tanrıkulu had been taken in for questioning by the police. They had received a tip-off to the effect that he was sheltering a terrorist suspect belonging to the PKK (Workers’ Party of Kurdistan). He had been released without charge the next day. As the only doctor in Silvan Hospital for about eight months, he would have been the person who produced medical reports on persons released from custody. While he generally sought to protect the applicant from anything that might worry her, he did say, on more than one occasion, “If we let them, they would write the reports”, and he also spoke about torture. Following the killing of another doctor in Silvan on 10 June 1992, which led a third doctor to seek and obtain a transfer from the area, Dr Tanrıkulu was reported in the press as having refused to talk about that incident out of fear. At the time a large number of killings were being committed in Silvan by unknown persons.
At about noon on 2 September 1993, Dr Zeki Tanrıkulu was shot dead in the Silvan on a steep road known as Kaymakam Hill which runs between the public hospital and the security directorate. Selma Tanrıkulu was on the low balcony of her hospital residence, close to the hospital gates, when she heard the sounds of automatic firing. She jumped off the balcony and ran towards Kaymakam Hill. While she was running, she heard another type of firing start. According to Selma Tanrıkulu, she did not see anyone as she ran towards him. However, as she knelt by him, she looked up and saw at least eight members of the security forces standing in a line across the street near the security directorate and brandishing machine guns, about fifteen to twenty metres away from her. They were dressed in plain clothes but were wearing special jackets that enabled them to carry spare ammunition. Although there were usually at least eight members of the security forces near the security directorate, it was not usual for them to stand together in a line. The applicant appealed to the police present at the scene to do something to catch the perpetrators, but they did nothing.
On 17 November 1994, the applicant received a summons to appear at the prosecutor’s office at the Diyarbakır National Security Court the next day. She was scared before the interview and found the experience frightening. The Chief Public Prosecutor, Mr Bekir Selçuk, questioned the applicant about her application to the Commission and, in particular, about the power of attorney she had given to her lawyers in an accompanying document. The report that was drawn up of the interview states that the applicant was shown a power of attorney in the name of Selma Tan and that she denied that the signature on that document belonged to her. The power of attorney which the applicant had submitted to the Commission, however, was in her full name of Selma Tanrıkulu. The implied threat was made by Mr Selçuk that something might happen to the applicant on account of her application. Mr Selçuk also suggested that an application to the Commission was futile. The report of the interview was not a reliable record of what had been said. Contrary to what was written in the report, the applicant did not tell Mr Selçuk during the interview that about ten days after her husband’s death she had been telephoned by a person called Kevin, who was from a centre in England and was ringing from Diyarbakır.
The European Court of Human Rights held that the material in the casefile did not enable it to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that Dr Zeki Tanrıkulu was killed by security forces or with their connivance. It did, however, agree with the Commission that the authorities failed to carry out an effective investigation into the circumstances surrounding Dr Zeki Tanrıkulu’s death.
On 18 July 1999, the European Court of Human Rights ruled unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 2 of the Convention on account of the failure of the authorities of the respondent State to conduct an effective investigation into the circumstances of the death of the applicant’s husband, but that it had not been established that the applicant’s husband was killed in violation of Article 2. The Court also ruled that there had been violations of Article 13 and former Article 25 § 1 (16 votes to 1). The Turkish Government was ordered to pay Selma Tanrıkulu and her children £15,000 sterling in non-pecuniary damages and £15,000 sterling in legal fees and expenses (less 13,495 French francs awarded in legal aid). The full judgment is available for viewing at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-58289

Materials pertaining to the case filed by Selma Tanrıkulu on 25 February 1994 against the Republic of Turkey with the European Commission of Human Rights (application number 23763/94, later given European Court of Human Rights case number 137/1998/1040/1255, referred to internally within the Kurdish Litigation Project as Case 82 and assigned to Françoise Hampson as lead) regarding the 2 September 1993 shooting death of her husband, Dr Zeki Tanrıkulu, in the city of Silvan, Diyarbakır Province. Supplementary materials pertaining to this case are located at A44/43/6/83.
In April 1993 Dr Tanrıkulu had been taken in for questioning by the police. They had received a tip-off to the effect that he was sheltering a terrorist suspect belonging to the PKK (Workers’ Party of Kurdistan). He had been released without charge the next day. As the only doctor in Silvan Hospital for about eight months, he would have been the person who produced medical reports on persons released from custody. While he generally sought to protect the applicant from anything that might worry her, he did say, on more than one occasion, “If we let them, they would write the reports”, and he also spoke about torture. Following the killing of another doctor in Silvan on 10 June 1992, which led a third doctor to seek and obtain a transfer from the area, Dr Tanrıkulu was reported in the press as having refused to talk about that incident out of fear. At the time a large number of killings were being committed in Silvan by unknown persons.
At about noon on 2 September 1993, Dr Zeki Tanrıkulu was shot dead in the Silvan on a steep road known as Kaymakam Hill which runs between the public hospital and the security directorate. Selma Tanrıkulu was on the low balcony of her hospital residence, close to the hospital gates, when she heard the sounds of automatic firing. She jumped off the balcony and ran towards Kaymakam Hill. While she was running, she heard another type of firing start. According to Selma Tanrıkulu, she did not see anyone as she ran towards him. However, as she knelt by him, she looked up and saw at least eight members of the security forces standing in a line across the street near the security directorate and brandishing machine guns, about fifteen to twenty metres away from her. They were dressed in plain clothes but were wearing special jackets that enabled them to carry spare ammunition. Although there were usually at least eight members of the security forces near the security directorate, it was not usual for them to stand together in a line. The applicant appealed to the police present at the scene to do something to catch the perpetrators, but they did nothing.
On 17 November 1994, the applicant received a summons to appear at the prosecutor’s office at the Diyarbakır National Security Court the next day. She was scared before the interview and found the experience frightening. The Chief Public Prosecutor, Mr Bekir Selçuk, questioned the applicant about her application to the Commission and, in particular, about the power of attorney she had given to her lawyers in an accompanying document. The report that was drawn up of the interview states that the applicant was shown a power of attorney in the name of Selma Tan and that she denied that the signature on that document belonged to her. The power of attorney which the applicant had submitted to the Commission, however, was in her full name of Selma Tanrıkulu. The implied threat was made by Mr Selçuk that something might happen to the applicant on account of her application. Mr Selçuk also suggested that an application to the Commission was futile. The report of the interview was not a reliable record of what had been said. Contrary to what was written in the report, the applicant did not tell Mr Selçuk during the interview that about ten days after her husband’s death she had been telephoned by a person called Kevin, who was from a centre in England and was ringing from Diyarbakır.
The European Court of Human Rights held that the material in the casefile did not enable it to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that Dr Zeki Tanrıkulu was killed by security forces or with their connivance. It did, however, agree with the Commission that the authorities failed to carry out an effective investigation into the circumstances surrounding Dr Zeki Tanrıkulu’s death.
On 18 July 1999, the European Court of Human Rights ruled unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 2 of the Convention on account of the failure of the authorities of the respondent State to conduct an effective investigation into the circumstances of the death of the applicant’s husband, but that it had not been established that the applicant’s husband was killed in violation of Article 2. The Court also ruled that there had been violations of Article 13 and former Article 25 § 1 (16 votes to 1). The Turkish Government was ordered to pay Selma Tanrıkulu and her children £15,000 sterling in non-pecuniary damages and £15,000 sterling in legal fees and expenses (less 13,495 French francs awarded in legal aid). The full judgment is available for viewing at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-58289.
The files in this subsubseries are equivalent to Tabs 1 through 10 in the Essex team's filing system.

Materials (including applications, observations, and correspondence) pertaining to:
a) Six applications filed on 11 March 1994 against the Republic of Turkey with the European Commission of Human Rights (application numbers 23878/94 to 23883/94, later given European Court of Human Rights case number 87/1996/706/898-903) by six former members (or ‘deputies’) of the Turkish Grand National Assembly (Sırrı Sakık, Ahmet Türk, Mahmut Alınak, Leyla Zana, Mehmet Hatip Dicle and Orhan Doğan; known as ‘Sakık and others’) who represented the Democracy Party (DEP) regarding their arrest and detention in police custody and prosecution in a national security court while sitting as members of the Assembly;
b) Two applications filed on 23 August 1994 (25142/94) and 16 December 1994 (27099/95, referred to internally within the Kurdish Litigation Project as Case 145 and assigned to Kevin Boyle as lead) by another DEP member of the Assembly, Selim Sadak, who alleged in particular that the duration and conditions of his custody ordered in the context of the criminal proceedings brought against him before the State Security Court of Ankara were contrary to the requirements of Article 3 and Article 5 § 3 of the Convention;
c) Nine applications filed on 23 August 1994 (25144/94) and 16 December 1994 (numbers 26149/95 to 26154/95, 27100/95, and 27101/95, the second six of which were referred to internally within the Kurdish Litigation Project as Cases 138 through 143 and assigned to Kevin Boyle as lead) by 13 current and former deputies (Selim Sadak, Sedat Yurttaş, Mehmet Hatip Dicle, Sırrı Sakık, Orhan Doğan, Leyla Zana, Ahmet Türk, Nizamettin Toguç, Naif Güneş, Mahmut Kılınç, Zübeyir Aydar, Ali Yiğit, and Remzi Kartal; known as ‘Sadak and others’), who complained that they had been forced to vacate their parliamentary seats following the dissolution of the DEP by the Constitutional Court and alleged the violation of Articles 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, and 11 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.
The applicants were former members of the Turkish National Assembly who were elected at the general election of 20 October 1991. At that time, they were members of the People’s Labour Party (HEP) which was founded in June 1990 but proscribed and dissolved by the Constitutional Court on 14 August 1993 on account of what were held to be separatist activities. By that date the applicants had joined the DEP, which had been set up in the meantime.
Between 1991 and 1994, more than 50 HEP/DEP members were murdered. As a result, the party decided to withdraw from the municipal elections which were planned to take place on 27 March 1994. On 2 March 1994, the Turkish parliament lifted the immunity of two deputies from the DEP. Orhan Doğan and Hatip Dicle were detained. On 2 April 1994, a deadly attack on the Bazaar in Istanbul occurred for which the Turkish Government blamed the PKK and the DEP. In reaction to the attack, the Turkish Prime Minister Tansu Çiller deemed the DEP a cover for the PKK and called for end of a PKK presence in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey. The seven applicants were imprisoned, and the party was banned. On 8 August 1994, Orhan Doğan, Leyla Zana, Selim Sadak and Hatip Dicle were sentenced to 15 years in prison. They were released in June 2009 following a decision of Turkey's Appeal Court after Turkey experienced some pressure from the European Parliament, which asked for their release and condemned their imprisonment.
The DEP was succeeded by the People's Democracy Party (HADEP), established in May 1994.
On 22 March 2000, Kevin Boyle and Françoise Hampson withdrew as legal representatives in the six applications in which they had been participating as part of the Kurdish Litigation Project.
On 26 November 1997, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that there had been breaches of Articles 5 §§ 3, 4, and 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights regarding the Sakık and others case. Sakık, Türk, Alınak and Zana were each awarded 20,000 French francs in non-pecuniary damages, Dicle and Doğan were each awarded 30,000 French francs in non-pecuniary damages, and the applicants were collectively awarded 120,000 French francs in legal costs and expenses. On 11 June 2002, the Court ruled that there had been a violation of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 regarding the Sadak and others case. Each applicant was awarded €50,000 in damages and the applicants were collectively awarded €19,500 in legal costs and expenses. On 8 March 2004, the Court ruled that there had been a breach of Article 5 § 3 regarding the Sadak case. Selim Sadak was awarded €4,000 in moral damages and €3,000 in costs and expenses.
The full judgment in Sakık and others is available at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-58117
The full judgment in Sadak is available at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-66257
The full judgment in Sadak and others is available at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-60498
Materials from the related case also involving the imprisoned DEP deputies (Case of Dicle for the Democratic Party (DEP) of Turkey v. Turkey) can be found at A44/43/6/27.

Recording of a selection of tunes on the fiddle played by Johnny Hoare at Lios Bui, Macroom, County Cork. Tunes include "The Pipe and the Harp", "Flanagan's Ball", "The Londonderry Hornpipe" and a set dance. Recorded by Jean Ritchie and George Pickow. Originally from recording marked ER 5.