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

AKDİVAR AND OTHERS v. TURKEYPARTLY DISSENTING OPINION OF MRS. J. LIDDY

Doc ref:ECHR ID:

Document date: October 26, 1995

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

AKDİVAR AND OTHERS v. TURKEYPARTLY DISSENTING OPINION OF MRS. J. LIDDY

Doc ref:ECHR ID:

Document date: October 26, 1995

Cited paragraphs only

               DISSENTING OPINION OF Mr. WEITZEL

    ON THE ISSUE UNDER ARTICLE 25 PARA. 1 OF THE CONVENTION

     For the same reasons as those set out in Mr. Danelius' dissenting

opinion, my view is that Turkey cannot be considered to have failed to

comply with its obligations under Article 25 para 1 of the Convention.

                                                  (Or. English)

          PARTLY DISSENTING OPINION OF MRS. J. LIDDY

     I agree with the conclusions and reasoning of the majority of the

Commission in this Report, except in relation to Article 3 of the

Convention.  The violations of Article 8 of the Convention and Article

1 of Protocol No. 1 were serious, but there is insufficient evidence

that the acts in question were carried out in such a manner and

resulted in such suffering for each of the seven applicants concerned

as to constitute inhuman or degrading treatment, having regard to the

minimum level of severity required by the case-law of the Convention

organs.

                                                  (Or. French)

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2025

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 400211 • Paragraphs parsed: 44892118 • Citations processed 3448707