AKDİVAR AND OTHERS v. TURKEYPARTLY DISSENTING OPINION OF MRS. J. LIDDY
Doc ref: • ECHR ID:
Document date: October 26, 1995
- 0 Inbound citations:
- •
- 0 Cited paragraphs:
- •
- 0 Outbound citations:
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)