MENTEŞ AND OTHERS v. TURKEYDISSENTING OPINION OF Mr. I. CABRAL BARRETO
Doc ref: • ECHR ID:
Document date: March 7, 1996
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 0
DISSENTING OPINION OF Mr. I. CABRAL BARRETO
Much to my regret, I cannot share the opinion of the Commission
regarding the violations of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention, for
the following reasons:
As regards Article 3 of the Convention, I consider that the
measures taken by the security forces, i.e. burning down the applicants
houses and ordering them to leave their village, must be examined in
the context of the general situation prevailing in the area which
involved the fight against the members of the PKK and attempts to
"strand the fish".
Even if the application does include new evidence in addition to
that discussed in the Akdivar and Others case, particularly ill-
treatment of children, I find it difficult to accept the idea that the
measures in question, although objectively speaking they were serious,
were designed to humiliate or degrade the applicants.
I wish to confine myself to finding that there has been a
violation of Article 8 of the Convention and of Article 1 of
Protocol No. 1 to the Convention.
As regards Article 13 of the Convention, I understand the
applicants' complaints to refer to the lack of remedies with which to
complain of a violation of their "civil" rights, i.e. the right to
respect for their family life and their homes. However, having regard
to the finding of a violation of Article 6 of the Convention, I do not
believe it necessary to determine the issue from the viewpoint of
Article 13 of the Convention as well.
I regret, however, that the Commission, after finding that the
applicants' houses had been destroyed (para. 175 of its Report), did
not conclude that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol
No. 1 to the Convention, this complaint having been communicated to the
respondent Government and developed by the applicants in their
observations on the merits.
(Or. English)