CASE OF YASİN ATEŞ v. TURKEYPARTLY DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE MULARONI
Doc ref: • ECHR ID:
Document date: May 31, 2005
- 0 Inbound citations:
- •
- 0 Cited paragraphs:
- •
- 0 Outbound citations:
PARTLY DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE MULARONI
Unlike the majority, I believe that it is necessary for the Court to examine separately the applicant ' s complaint under Article 14 of the Convention.
After examining tens and tens of similar applications, all lodged, without exception, by Turkish citizens of Kurdish origin, and very often concluding that there was a violation of Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention, the Court should, to my mind, at least consider that there could be a serious problem under Article 14 of the Convention as well.
This does not mean, of course, that in the end the Court will invariably find that there has been a violation of Article 14. However, I cannot agree with the majority approach, which to me is tantamount to considering that the prohibition on discrimination in this type of case is not an important issue.
[1] According to the applicant, Mekap is a brand of shoes used by the guerrillas of the PKK (the Kurdistan Workers’ Party).