Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ATAS AND SEVEN v. TURKEY

  (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.12.2008 - 26893/02

  Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII).
• EGMR, 10.07.2001 - 25657/94

  AVSAR c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.12.2008 - 26893/02

  The object and purpose of the Convention as an instrument for the protection of individual human rights requires that these provisions be interpreted and applied so as to make its safeguards practical and effective (see Avsar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, § 390, ECHR 2001-VII).
• EGMR, 03.06.2004 - 33097/96

  BATI AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.12.2008 - 26893/02

  Thus, the application of the said law to the present case created virtual impunity for the alleged perpetrators of acts of violence, irrespective of the evidence against them (see, mutatis mutandis, Batı and Others v. Turkey, nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00, § 147, ECHR 2004-IV, and Abdülsamet Yaman, cited above, § 59).

 
• EGMR, 17.10.2006 - 52067/99

  OKKALI c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.12.2008 - 26893/02

  Consequently, the Court considers that the criminal-law system, as applied in the applicants" case, has proved to be far from rigorous and has had no dissuasive effect capable of ensuring the effective prevention of unlawful acts such as those complained of by the applicants (see, mutatis mutandis, Okkalı v. Turkey, no. 52067/99, § 78, ECHR 2006-...).
• EGMR, 05.10.2000 - 57834/00

  KABLAN contre la TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.12.2008 - 26893/02

  Thus, the application of the said law to the present case created virtual impunity for the alleged perpetrators of acts of violence, irrespective of the evidence against them (see, mutatis mutandis, Batı and Others v. Turkey, nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00, § 147, ECHR 2004-IV, and Abdülsamet Yaman, cited above, § 59).
• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

  RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.12.2008 - 26893/02

  Failing this, a clear issue arises under Article 3 of the Convention (see Çolak and Filizer v. Turkey, nos. 32578/96 and 32579/96, § 30, 8 January 2004; Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 87, ECHR 1999-V; Aksoy v. Turkey, 18 December 1996, § 61, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-VI; and Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 34, Series A no. 336).