Showing 46798 results

Revised copy of the original 26 March 2002 judgment in the Mehmet Haran case (A44/43/1/34; the judgment is available for viewing at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-60330), in which the European Court of Human Rights struck the case out of its list after imposing the terms of a unilateral declaration from the Turkish Government offering a payment of £80,000 sterling and a statement accepting 'that the use of unjustified force resulting in death constitutes a violation of Article 2 of the Convention'.

Printout of the judgment in the Hasan İlhan case (A44/43/1/37). On 9 November 2004, the European Court of Human Rights unanimously ruled that there had been violations of Articles 2, 8, 13, and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Turkish Government were ordered to pay Hasan İlhan’s estate €33,500 in pecuniary damages, €14,500 in non-pecuniary damages, and €15,000 in legal costs and expenses (less €2,652 granted in legal aid). The full judgment is available for viewing at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-67346

Observations of the Government in response to the applicant's claims for just satisfaction in accordance with Article 41 of the European Convention on Human Rights in the Berktay case. The Government requests the Court to dismiss all claims on the grounds that there is no substantiated violation and that the claims consist of unnecessary and excessive expenses.

Original published judgment in the Abdurrazak İkincisoy and Halil İkincisoy case (A44/43/1/36). On 27 July 2004, the European Court of Human Rights unanimously ruled: that there had been a violation of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights regarding Mehmet Şah İkincisoy's death the failure to conduct an effective investigations into its circumstances; that there had been violations of Articles 5 § 3, 5 § 4, 5 § 5 with regards to Halil İkincisoy; that there had been a violation of Article 13, and that Turkey failed to comply with its obligations under former Article 25 § 1. The Court unanimously ruled: that there had not been violations of Article 5 §§ 1, 3, 4 and 5 of the Convention with regard to Abdurrazak İkincisoy; no violations of Article 5 §§ 1 with regard to Halil İkincisoy; and no violations of Article 3, 8, 9, and 14. The Turkish Government were ordered to pay Mehmet Şah İkincisoy’s heirs €25,000 in pecuniary damages, €3,500 to Abdurrazak İkincisoy in non-pecuniary damages, €7,500 to Halil İkincisoy in non-pecuniary damages, and €15,000 in legal costs and expenses. The full judgment, corrected on 15 March 2005 (see A44/43/3/1/27) is available for viewing at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-61940

Corrected published judgment (this version was rectified under Rule 81 of the Rules of the Court) in the Abdurrazak İkincisoy and Halil İkincisoy case (A44/43/1/36). On 27 July 2004, the European Court of Human Rights unanimously ruled: that there had been a violation of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights regarding Mehmet Şah İkincisoy's death the failure to conduct an effective investigations into its circumstances; that there had been violations of Articles 5 § 3, 5 § 4, 5 § 5 with regards to Halil İkincisoy; that there had been a violation of Article 13, and that Turkey failed to comply with its obligations under former Article 25 § 1. The Court unanimously ruled: that there had not been violations of Article 5 §§ 1, 3, 4 and 5 of the Convention with regard to Abdurrazak İkincisoy; no violations of Article 5 §§ 1 with regard to Halil İkincisoy; and no violations of Article 3, 8, 9, and 14. The Turkish Government were ordered to pay Mehmet Şah İkincisoy’s heirs €25,000 in pecuniary damages, €3,500 to Abdurrazak İkincisoy in non-pecuniary damages, €7,500 to Halil İkincisoy in non-pecuniary damages, and €15,000 in legal costs and expenses. The full judgment is available for viewing at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-61940

Published judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Nasır İlhan case. The Court unanimously ruled that there had been violation of Articles 3 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and held by 12 votes to 5 that there had been no violation of Article 2. The Turkish Government was ordered to pay Abdüllatif İlhan €£80,600 sterling in pecuniary damages and £25,000 sterling in non-pecuniary damages, and to pay Nasır İlhan £17,000 sterling in legal costs and expenses (less 11,300 French francs granted in legal aid). The full judgment is available for viewing at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-58734

Memorial of the applicants in the Selçuk and Asker case submitted to the European Court of Human Rights, including the applicants' claims for just satisfaction under Article 50 of the European Convention on Human Rights, lists of the applicants' destroyed goods, schedule of legal costs and expenses, statements of the applicants to the Human Rights Association, the 25 June 1993 petition of İsmet Asker to the Kulp District Governor, and published reports and news clippings on forced village evacuations/destructions and other human rights violations in southeast Turkey.

Published judgment in the Mehmet Kaya case (A44/43/1/41). On 19 February 1998, the European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that it has not been established that the applicant’s brother was unlawfully killed in breach of Article 2 of the Convention; held by 8 votes to 1 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 surrounding the death of the applicant’s brother; held by 8 votes to 1 that there had been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention; and held unanimously that there has been no violation of Articles 2, 6 and 13 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 14 of the Convention. The Turkish Government were ordered to pay the widow and children of Abdülmenaf Kaya £17,000 sterling. The full judgment is available for viewing at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-58138. (2 copies)

Published judgment in the Mahmut Kaya case (A44/43/1/40). On 28 March 2000, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that there had been violations of Articles 2, 3, and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights (6 votes to 1). The Turkish Government were ordered to pay Mahmut Kaya £2,500 sterling in non-pecuniary damages and Hasan Kaya’s heirs £15,000 sterling in non-pecuniary damages, and to pay Mahmut Kaya £22,000 sterling in legal costs and expenses (less 15,095 French francs granted in legal aid). The full judgment is available for viewing at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-58523

Published judgment in the Cemil Kılıç case (A44/43/1/42). On 28 March 2000, the European Court of Human Rights ruled unanimously that there had been violations of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights and ruled 6 votes to 1 that there had been a violation of Article 13. The Turkish Government were ordered to pay the heirs of Kemal Kılıç £15,000 sterling in non-pecuniary damages, and to pay Cemil Kılıç £2,500 in non-pecuniary damages and £20,000 in legal costs and expenses (less 4,200 French francs received in legal aid). The full judgment is available for viewing at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-58524