CASE OF SISOJEVA AND OTHERS v. LATVIADISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE ZUPANČIČ
Doc ref: • ECHR ID:
Document date: January 15, 2007
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 0
DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE ZUPANČIČ
My reasons for disagreeing as to the applicants’ loss of victim status are, mutatis mutandis , the same as those advanced by the First Section in its judgments in Shevanova v. Latvia (no. 58822/00, §§ 42 ‑ 50) and Kaftailova v. Latvia (no. 59643/00, §§ 45-52), delivered on 15 June and 22 June 2006 respectively.
Due to the obvious disagreement between the Court’s conclusions in Sisojeva and Others and in these two cases, the latter have been admitted for reconsideration by the Grand Chamber. Nevertheless, the arguments in both the First Section’s judgments are, to me, wholly persuasive.
Henceforth, we shall be bound by the outcome in Sisojeva and Others. However, that was not yet the case during the deliberations and the vote in the present case.
Accordingly, I dissent.