Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  DEMIREL AND ATES (NO. 3) v. TURKEY

  (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (18)Zitiert selbst (18)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 12.04.2007 - 10037/03

  DEMIREL ET ATES c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.12.2008 - 11976/03

  10037/03 and 14813/03, 12 April 2007; and Demirel and Ates v. Turkey (no. 2), cited above).

  The Court observes that it has previously examined and rejected the applicants" grievances of this kind (see Demirel and Ates v. Turkey (dec.), no. 10037/03 and 14813/03, 9 February 2006).

• EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21980/93

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.12.2008 - 11976/03

  Not only does the press have the task of imparting such information and ideas: the public also has a right to receive them (see Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, § 62, ECHR 1999-III).
• EGMR, 16.03.2000 - 23144/93

  OZGUR GUNDEM c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.12.2008 - 11976/03

  The Court observes that it has examined a number of cases, two of which were brought by the same applicants, raising similar issues to those in the present case and found a violation of Article 10 of the Convention (see, in particular, Sürek and Özdemir v. Turkey [GC], nos. 23927/94 and 24277/94, 8 July 1999; Özgür Gündem v. Turkey, no. 23144/93, §§ 63-64, ECHR 2000-III; Korkmaz v. Turkey (no. 1), no. 40987/98, 20 December 2005; Korkmaz v. Turkey (no. 3), no. 42590/98, 20 December 2005; Halis DoÄŸan v. Turkey (no. 2), no. 71984/01, 25 July 2006; Karakoyun and Turan v. Turkey, no. 18482/03, 11 December 2007; Demirel and Ates v. Turkey, nos.

• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 29183/95

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.12.2008 - 11976/03

  The Court reiterates the basic principles laid down in its judgments concerning Article 10 (see, in particular, the following judgments: Sener v. Turkey, no. 26680/95, §§ 39-43, 18 July 2000; Fressoz and Roire v. France ([GC], no. 29183/95, § 45, ECHR 1999-I; Lingens v. Austria, 8 July 1986, §§ 41-42, Series A no. 103; and ErdoÄŸdu v. Turkey, no. 25723/94, §§ 51-53, ECHR 2000-VI).
• EGMR, 27.05.2003 - 43425/98

  Meinungsfreiheit (konstitutive Bedeutung in der Demokratie; Eingriff; …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.12.2008 - 11976/03

  In addition, the nature and severity of the penalties imposed are also factors to be considered when assessing the proportionality of the interference (see Skalka v. Poland, no. 43425/98, § 42, 27 May 2003).
• EGMR, 08.07.1999 - 23168/94

  KARATAS c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.12.2008 - 11976/03

  Moreover, the Court also takes into account the background to the case submitted to it, particularly problems linked to the prevention of terrorism (see Karatas v. Turkey [GC], no. 23168/94, § 51, ECHR 1999-IV).
• EGMR, 08.07.1999 - 24919/94

  GERGER v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.12.2008 - 11976/03

  The Court further considers that, despite particularly libellous and acerbic passages, the article as a whole cannot be construed, on any reading, as encouraging violence, armed resistance or an uprising (see, Gerger v. Turkey [GC], no. 24919/94, § 50, 8 July 1999, a contrario, Halis DoÄŸan v. Turkey, no. 75946/01, §§ 35-38, 7 February 2006, and Gülcan Kaya v. Turkey (dec.), no. 6250/02, 22 March 2007).
• EGMR, 08.07.1999 - 23927/94

  SÜREK AND ÖZDEMIR v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.12.2008 - 11976/03

  The Court observes that it has examined a number of cases, two of which were brought by the same applicants, raising similar issues to those in the present case and found a violation of Article 10 of the Convention (see, in particular, Sürek and Özdemir v. Turkey [GC], nos. 23927/94 and 24277/94, 8 July 1999; Özgür Gündem v. Turkey, no. 23144/93, §§ 63-64, ECHR 2000-III; Korkmaz v. Turkey (no. 1), no. 40987/98, 20 December 2005; Korkmaz v. Turkey (no. 3), no. 42590/98, 20 December 2005; Halis DoÄŸan v. Turkey (no. 2), no. 71984/01, 25 July 2006; Karakoyun and Turan v. Turkey, no. 18482/03, 11 December 2007; Demirel and Ates v. Turkey, nos.
• EGMR, 15.06.2000 - 25723/94

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.12.2008 - 11976/03

  The Court reiterates the basic principles laid down in its judgments concerning Article 10 (see, in particular, the following judgments: Sener v. Turkey, no. 26680/95, §§ 39-43, 18 July 2000; Fressoz and Roire v. France ([GC], no. 29183/95, § 45, ECHR 1999-I; Lingens v. Austria, 8 July 1986, §§ 41-42, Series A no. 103; and ErdoÄŸdu v. Turkey, no. 25723/94, §§ 51-53, ECHR 2000-VI).
• EGMR, 10.11.2005 - 63739/00

  ABDULLAH AYDIN c. TURQUIE (N° 2)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.12.2008 - 11976/03

  The Court notes that it has already examined the same grievance in the past and has found a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see, in particular, Demirel and Ates v. Turkey (no. 2), cited above, § 17; Karakoyun and Turan v. Turkey, cited above, § 40; and Abdullah Aydın v. Turkey (no. 2), no. 63739/00, § 30, 10 November 2005).
• EGMR, 18.07.2000 - 26680/95

  SENER v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 18.03.2008 - 15601/02

  KULIS v. POLAND
• EGMR, 07.02.2006 - 75946/01

  HALIS DOGAN c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 20.12.2005 - 40987/98

  KORKMAZ c. TURQUIE (N° 1)
• EGMR, 25.07.2006 - 71984/01

  HALIS DOGAN c. TURQUIE (N° 2)
• EGMR, 11.12.2007 - 18482/03

  KARAKOYUN ET TURAN c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 29.11.2007 - 31080/02

  DEMIREL AND ATES v. TURKEY (N°2)
• EGMR, 20.12.2005 - 42590/98

  KORKMAZ c. TURQUIE (N° 3)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 06.10.2026 - 45738/22

  UGUR c. TÜRKIYE

  It therefore finds that there is no need to examine the merits of the applicant's complaint under Article 5 of the Convention (see Tsaava and Others v. Georgia [GC], nos. 13186/20 and 4 others, §§ 225-229, 11 December 2025; see also, mutatis mutandis, Demirel and Others v. Turkey, no. 75512/01, § 27, 24 July 2007; Demirel and Ateş v. Turkey (no. 3), no. 11976/03, § 38, 9 December 2008; and Ürper and Others v. Turkey, nos.
• EGMR, 20.09.2018 - 22678/93

  INCAL CONTRE LA TURQUIE ET 1 AUTRE AFFAIRE

  - failure to communicate to the applicants the prosecutor's opinion before the Court of Cassation (violations of Article 6) in the cases of Çamyar and Berktaş (41959/02), Çapan (71978/01), Çapan No. 2 (29849/02), Çolak and Kasımoğulları (29969/07), Demirel and Ateş (10037/03), Demirel and Ateş No. 2 (31080/02), Demirel and Ateş No. 3 (11976/03), Halis Doğan No. 2 (71984/01), Falakoğlu (16229/03), Falakoğlu and Saygılı (11461/03), Falakoğlu and Saygılı (22147/02), Gözel and Özer (43453/04), Güzel No. 2 (65849/01), Karakoyun and Turan (18482/03), Özer (35721/04), Erdal Taş No. 3 (17445/02), Erdal Taş No. 4 (29847/02), Yalçıner (64116/00), Yıldız and Taş No. 1 (77641/01), Yıldız and Taş No. 2 (77642/01), Yıldız and Taş No. 3 (477/02), Yıldız and Taş No. 4 (3847/02) (this issue was examined under the Mehmet Göç group of cases (see Final Resolution CM/ResDH(2011)307));.

  11976/03.

• EGMR, 06.12.2016 - 50171/09

  BELGE v. TURKEY

  In the Court's view, the applicant's speech as whole cannot be construed as encouraging violence, armed resistance or an uprising (see Demirel and Ateş v. Turkey (no. 3), no. 11976/03, § 26, 9 December 2008).

• EGMR, 20.10.2009 - 14526/07

  ÜRPER AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  The Court finds, therefore, the preventive effect of the suspension orders entailed implicit sanctions on the applicants to dissuade them from publishing similar articles or news reports in the future, and hinder their professional activities (see, mutatis mutandis, Demirel and Ates v. Turkey (no. 3), no. 11976/03, § 28, 9 December 2008).
• EGMR, 16.01.2018 - 6875/05

  SAYGILI AND KARATAS v. TURKEY

  In this connection, it notes that, apart from the fines imposed on the applicants, the first-instance court also ordered the temporary closure of the newspaper for a period of seven days, which amounted to veiled censorship and hindered their professional activities (see Demirel and Ateş v. Turkey (no. 3), no. 11976/03, § 28, 9 December 2008).
• EGMR, 27.01.2015 - 14495/11

  ATILGAN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  It concludes therefore that there is no need to make separate rulings in respect of these other complaints (see, mutatis mutandis, Demirel and Others v. Turkey, no. 75512/01, § 27, 24 July 2007; Demirel and Ates v. Turkey (no. 3), no. 11976/03, § 38, 9 December 2008; Ürper and Others, cited above, § 49; Turgay and Others v. Turkey, § 27, 15 June 2010; and Ölmez and Turgay v. Turkey, § 20, 5 October 2010).
• EGMR, 19.06.2018 - 24548/10

  BAYAR c. TURQUIE

  As regards the necessity of the interference in a democratic society, the Court notes that it has already examined similar grievances in a number of other cases and found violations of Article 10 of the Convention (see, for example, Sürek v. Turkey (no. 4) [GC], no. 24762/94, §§ 54-61, 8 July 1999; Erdoğdu v. Turkey, no. 25723/94, §§ 60-73, ECHR 2000-VI; Demirel and Ateş v. Turkey (no. 3), no. 11976/03, §§ 19-30, 9 December 2008; and Fatih Taş (No.2), cited above, §§ 12-19).
• EGMR, 24.04.2018 - 45281/08

  TAS c. TURQUIE

  23536/94 and 24408/94, § 63, ECHR 1999-IV; CumpÇŽnÇŽ and MazÇŽre v. Romania [GC], no. 33348/96, § 89, ECHR 2004-XI; and Demirel and Ateş v. Turkey (no. 3), no. 11976/03, § 21, 9 December 2008).
• EGMR, 10.10.2017 - 6813/09

  TAS c. TURQUIE

  As regards the necessity of the interference in a democratic society, the Court notes that it has already examined similar grievances in a number of other cases and found violations of Article 10 of the Convention (see, for example, Sürek c. Turquie (no. 4) [GC], no. 24762/94, §§ 54-61, 8 July 1999; Erdoğdu v. Turkey, no. 25723/94, §§ 60-73, ECHR 2000-VI; Demirel and Ateş v. Turkey (no. 3), no. 11976/03, §§ 19-30, 9 December 2008).
• EGMR, 29.01.2013 - 42599/08

  GÜDENOGLU v. TURKEY

  It concludes therefore that there is no need to make separate rulings in respect of these other complaints (see, mutatis mutandis, Demirel and Others v. Turkey, no. 75512/01, § 27, 24 July 2007; Demirel and Ates v. Turkey (no. 3), no. 11976/03, § 38, 9 December 2008; Ürper and Others, cited above, § 49; Turgay and Others v. Turkey, § 27, 15 June 2010; and Ölmez and Turgay v. Turkey, § 20, 5 October 2010).
• EGMR, 26.01.2010 - 55036/07

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 10.07.2018 - 37091/11

  DÜNDAR AND AYDINKAYA v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 15.06.2010 - 8306/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 05.10.2010 - 2318/09

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 21.09.2010 - 29572/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 21.09.2010 - 21950/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 21.09.2010 - 13710/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 21.09.2010 - 32869/08

  [ENG]