Civil rights and obligations and criminal charges



Yüklə 445 b.
tarix17.11.2018
ölçüsü445 b.



 civil rights and obligations and criminal charges

  •  civil rights and obligations and criminal charges

  • a. a fair and public hearing

  • b.  access to a tribunal and

  • c.   impartial and independent tribunal established by law

  • within reasonable time;



  • Right to exercise profession is a civil right (Kök 19 October 2006)

  • Sükut 11 September 2007 : dismissal military does not fall under art 6 (cfm Vilho Eskelinen)



Art 6 does not cover access to a country/immigration issues: Mamatkulov & Askarov, 4 February 2005

  • Art 6 does not cover access to a country/immigration issues: Mamatkulov & Askarov, 4 February 2005

  • But: art 3! Abdolkhani and Karimnia 22 Sep 2009



  • Gülmez 20 May 2008: measures against him as a detainee were not considered as criminal charges (disciplinary), but he could complain of violation of civil rights



Dölek, 2 October 2007: sufficient procedural possibilities for compensation of damage: no violation of art 6 (and 13)

  • Dölek, 2 October 2007: sufficient procedural possibilities for compensation of damage: no violation of art 6 (and 13)

  • Kart, 3 December 2009: immunity for parliamentarians; criminal procedures were suspended because of his membership of parliament; sufficient reasons, no violation



Yilmaz 8 December 2009:

  • Yilmaz 8 December 2009:

    • Traffic accident, labour court condemns employer to compensate: TRL 150.000;
    • Defendants should pay court fees: TRL 8100, but they don’t
    • Enforcement office, opposition by defendant: no execution because non payment court fees, confirmed by court;
    • Cassation court: confirm decision.
    • ECHR: no effective access to court


Art 6 protects individuals:

  • Art 6 protects individuals:

    • Iran Shipping Lines 13 December 2007 (no violation)


State Security Court – not impartial (Öcalan, 2 May 2005)

  • State Security Court – not impartial (Öcalan, 2 May 2005)

  • Other cases

  • Barmaksiz 2 March 2010 (idem as Gülmez – disciplinary committee not impartial; no sufficient reasoning judgements by courts)



Salduz 27 November 2008 – right to assistance by a lawyer during detention with the police

  • Salduz 27 November 2008 – right to assistance by a lawyer during detention with the police

  • “Access to a lawyer should be provided as from the first interrogation of a suspect by the police unless … that there are compelling reasons to restrict this right”



Danayan 13 November 2009 – adds: fair trial requires that the accused can get the whole scope of assistance, that one usually can receive from the defence counsel (discussing the case, organisation of the defence, looking for favourable evidence, preparation of the hearings, support to the accused and control detention circumstances)

  • Danayan 13 November 2009 – adds: fair trial requires that the accused can get the whole scope of assistance, that one usually can receive from the defence counsel (discussing the case, organisation of the defence, looking for favourable evidence, preparation of the hearings, support to the accused and control detention circumstances)



Kök 19 October 2006: document were not sent to her, only to Council of State)

  • Kök 19 October 2006: document were not sent to her, only to Council of State)

  • Savas 8 December 2009 : conclusion procurator general at the Supreme Court not communicated (cf. Göç – legal amendment - and Vermeulen vs Belgium)



Yoldaş 23 February 2010: no violation art 6 - assistance of lawyer ( he was given the opportunity but did not use it)

  • Yoldaş 23 February 2010: no violation art 6 - assistance of lawyer ( he was given the opportunity but did not use it)

  • Savas 8 December 2009: in the form indicated “don’t call” lawyer; not sufficient: violation art 6; waiver must be undoubtful;

  • Aktaş Yunus 20 October 2010: idem; domestic court must investigate the validity of the waiver.



Köktepe 22-7-08: different experts (who contradicted each other)

  • Köktepe 22-7-08: different experts (who contradicted each other)



 

  •  

  • Tig, 24 June 2005: interdiction to carry a beard at University: no violation, sufficient reasoning of the judgement

  • Barmaksiz



    • Intiba, 25 May 2005: fiscal fraud, start investigation 1990, conviction 1997; no violation, although, partly caused by accused;
    • Includes period of enforcement (Kalender, 15 December 2009); in that case 5,5 years + 3 years and 2 months too long)


Kök 19 October 2006: 6 years for admission as medical specialist, (including period at the administration) is too long (3 years before Council of State)

  • Kök 19 October 2006: 6 years for admission as medical specialist, (including period at the administration) is too long (3 years before Council of State)

  • Evcimen 23 February 2010: accident 1993; procedure too long;

  • Yeşilyurt 23 February 2010: excessive time in pre trial detention and lengthy criminal proceedings



23 Feb 2010: Yildiz, Uyar, Gürkan (non criminal cases)

  • 23 Feb 2010: Yildiz, Uyar, Gürkan (non criminal cases)



  • Yilmaz (supra)       



Turkey has removed important problems (State Security courts)

  • Turkey has removed important problems (State Security courts)

  • Reasonable time

  • Enforcement

  • Court fees (access to court)



Periodicals: ECHR Human Rights cases (NL)

  • Periodicals: ECHR Human Rights cases (NL)

  • Book: Theory and Practice of the EUr Convention on Human Rights (Van Dijk & van Hoof), ed. 2006

  • HUDOC

    • www.coe.int – European Court of Human Rights
    • Click on “Case law”
    • http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/portal.asp?sessionId=48121840&skin=hudoc-en&action=request (for the recent cases)


Observations?

  • Observations?

  • Thank you for your attention!





Dostları ilə paylaş:


Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©genderi.org 2017
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

    Ana səhifə