Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

CASE OF 8 CASES AGAINST TURKEY CONCERNING FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN STATE OF EMERGENCY REGION

Doc ref: 50693/99;38323/02;75512/01;57225/00;71459/01;60608/00;51041/99;74243/01 • ECHR ID: 001-95514

Document date: September 30, 2009

  • Inbound citations: 25
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 0

CASE OF 8 CASES AGAINST TURKEY CONCERNING FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN STATE OF EMERGENCY REGION

Doc ref: 50693/99;38323/02;75512/01;57225/00;71459/01;60608/00;51041/99;74243/01 • ECHR ID: 001-95514

Document date: September 30, 2009

Cited paragraphs only

Resolution CM/ ResDH (2009)101 [1]

Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in

8 cases against Turkey concerning freedom of expression in state of emergency region

(See Appendix for details of the cases)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);

Having regard to the judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee once they had become final;

Recalling that the violations of the Convention found by the Court in these cases concern in particular unjustified interference in the applicants ’ freedom of expression due to bans imposed under article 11 e) of Law No. 2935 on the state of emergency, concerning the introduction and/or publication and/or distribution of newspapers or political posters, and absence of a judicial remedy to challenge the orders of the governor of the region of state of emergency (Violations of Articles 10 and 13) (see details in Appendix).

Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the mea s ures taken to comply with its obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Conve n tion to abide by the judgments;

Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee ’ s Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;

Having satisfied itself that, the respondent state paid the a p plicants the just satisfaction provided in the judgments (see details in Appendix),

Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded in the judgments, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate, of

- individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum ; and

- general measures preventing, similar violations;

Having examined the measures taken by the respondent state to that effect, the details of which appear in Appendix;

Recalling that in its Final Resolution CM/ ResDH (2007)97 of 20 June 2007 the Committee of Ministers decided to close the examination of 6 similar cases;

DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix), that it has exe r cised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases and

DECIDES to close the examination of these cases.

Appendix to Resolution CM/ ResDH (2009)101

Information about the measures to comply with the judgments in 8 cases against Turkey concerning freedom of expression in state of emergency region

Introductory case summary

These cases concern in particular the unjustified interferences in the applicants ’ freedom of expression due to bans imposed under article 11 e) of Law No. 2935 on the state of emergency and/or Article 1 a) of the Legislative Decree No. 430 on the measures to be taken during the state of emergency, concerning the introduction and/or publication and/or distribution of newspapers or political posters in the region subject to the state of emergency, and absence of a judicial remedy to challenge the orders of the governor of the state of emergency region (violations of Articles 10 and 13).

According to Article 7 of Legislative Decree No. 285 declaring the state of emergency, no administrative decision taken by the governor of a region under the state of emergency rule was subject to judicial review.

a) Details of just satisfaction

Name and application number

Pecuniary damage

Non-pecuniary damage

Costs and expenses

Total

Halis DoÄŸan and others 50693/99

-

EUR 12000

EUR 2000

EUR 14000

Paid on 10/07/2006

Mehmet Çolak 38323/02

-

EUR 2000

EUR 1250

EUR 3250

Paid on 06/12/2007

Demirel and others 75512/01

No just satisfaction awarded.

Tüzel 57225/00

-

EUR 1500

EUR 1000

EUR 2500

Paid on 26/07/2006

Tüzel (No. 2) 71459/01

-

EUR 1500

EUR 1000

EUR 2500

Paid on 27/05/2007

Mehmet Emin Yıldız and others 60608/00

-

EUR 7500

EUR 815

EUR 8315

Paid on 13/10/2006

Saygılı and Seyman 51041/99

-

EUR 5000

EUR 1500

EUR 6500

Paid on 21/12/2006

Fevzi Saygılı 74243/01,71459/01

-

EUR 2500

-

EUR 2500

Paid on 24/06/2008

b) Individual measures

In these cases individual measures are linked to general measures.

Legislative Decree No. 285 declaring the state of emergency was lifted in November 2002. Since the decree is no longer in force, current legislation provides sufficient safeguards to all individuals for grievances under the Convention (See Final Resolution CM/ ResDH (2007)97) .

In addition the judgments of the European Court were translated and circulated to the relevant authorities.

The government considers that these measures prevent similar violations and that Turkey has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 30 September 2009 at the 1065 th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2024
Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 396058 • Paragraphs parsed: 43415240 • Citations processed 3359795