Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  FATMA AKALTUN FIRAT v. TURKEY

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 11, Art. 11 Abs. 1 MRK
  Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention) Violation of Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association (Article 11-1 - Freedom of peaceful assembly) (englisch)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Fatma Akaltun Firat v. Turkey

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 15.03.2012 - 39692/09

  AUSTIN ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.09.2013 - 34010/06

  39692/09, 40713/09 and 41008/09, § 57, ECHR 2012).
• EGMR, 31.07.2000 - 34578/97

  JECIUS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.09.2013 - 34010/06

  The Court reiterates that the expressions "lawful" and "in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law" in Article 5 § 1 essentially refer back to national law and state the obligation to conform to the substantive and procedural rules thereof (see Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, § 56, ECHR 2000-IX).
• EGMR, 26.02.2002 - 39187/98

  H.M. v. SWITZERLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.09.2013 - 34010/06

  We would point out that, under the Court's established case-law, Article 5 § 1 is not concerned with mere restrictions on liberty of movement, which are governed by Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 (see H.M. v. Switzerland, no. 39187/98, § 40, ECHR 2002-II; Nada v. Switzerland [GC], no. 10593/08, § 225, ECHR 2012; Austin and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos.
• EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 30194/09

  SHIMOVOLOS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.09.2013 - 34010/06

  For example, a person detained for a period of one hour in the case of Shimovolos v. Russia (no. 30194/09, § 49, 21 June 2011), and a person whose detention lasted 30 minutes in Gillan and Quinton v. the United Kingdom (no. 4158/05, § 57, ECHR 2010 (extracts)), were both held by the Court to have been deprived of their liberty within the meaning of that provision.
• EGMR, 06.11.1980 - 7367/76

  GUZZARDI v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.09.2013 - 34010/06

  The difference between deprivation and restriction of liberty is one of degree or intensity, and not of nature or substance (see Engel and Others v. the Netherlands, 8 June 1976, § 59, Series A no. 22; Guzzardi v. Italy, 6 November 1980, § 92-93, Series A no. 39; Medvedyev and Others v. France [GC], no. 3394/03, § 73, ECHR 2010; and Austin and Others v. the United Kingdom, cited above, § 57).

• EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 6315/09

  DONAT AND FASSNACHT-ALBERS v. GERMANY

  Although the Court found that short-term deprivation of liberty may fall under Article 5 § 1 (see, inter alia, M.A. v. Cyprus, no. 41872/10, §§ 185-195, ECHR 2013 (extracts); and Fatma Akaltun Fırat v. Turkey, no. 34010/06, §§ 33-36, 10 September 2013), it has considered that "kettling" differed substantially from cases of detention in police facilities (see Austin and Others, cited above, § 52).
• EGMR, 17.10.2017 - 49752/07

  BASBAKKAL KARA c. TURQUIE

  Elle estime donc que la privation de liberté a eu pour but d'accomplir certaines formalités légales en vue de vérifier son identitée et que cette privation n'a pas excédé ce qui était strictement nécessaire (voir Foka c. Turquie, no 28940/95, § 75, 24 juin 2008, et, a contrario, Fatma Akaltun Firat c. Turquie, no 34010/06, § 45, 10 septembre 2013).