Weitere Entscheidungen unten: EKMR, 21.10.1996 | EKMR, 29.06.1998

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 02.10.2001 - 29221/95, 29225/95   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2001,23326
EGMR, 02.10.2001 - 29221/95, 29225/95 (https://dejure.org/2001,23326)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 02.10.2001 - 29221/95, 29225/95 (https://dejure.org/2001,23326)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 02. Oktober 2001 - 29221/95, 29225/95 (https://dejure.org/2001,23326)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2001,23326) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (4)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    STANKOV ET ORGANISATION MACEDONIENNE UNIE ILINDEN c. BULGARIE

    Art. 11, Art. 11 Abs. 1, Art. 11 Abs. 2, Art. 41 MRK
    Exception préliminaire rejetée Violation de l'art. 11 Dommage matériel - demande rejetée Préjudice moral - réparation pécuniaire Frais et dépens (procédure nationale) - demande rejetée Remboursement partiel frais et dépens - procédure de la Convention ...

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    STANKOV AND THE UNITED MACEDONIAN ORGANISATION ILINDEN v. BULGARIA

    Art. 11, Art. 11 Abs. 1, Art. 11 Abs. 2, Art. 41 MRK
    Preliminary objection dismissed Violation of Art. 11 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) - claim dismissed Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings ...

  • Österreichisches Institut für Menschenrechte PDF

    (englisch)

  • juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

Verfahrensgang

 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (104)Neu Zitiert selbst (4)

  • EGMR, 07.12.1976 - 5493/72

    HANDYSIDE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2001 - 29221/95
    Such are the demands of pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no "democratic society" (see Handyside v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 7 December 1976, Series A no. 24, p. 23, § 49, and Gerger v Turkey [GC], no. 24919/94, § 46, 8 July 1999, unreported).

    "The domestic margin of appreciation... goes hand in hand with a European supervision" (see Handyside v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 7 December 1976, Series A no. 24, pp. 22-23, §§ 48-49).

  • EGMR, 21.06.1988 - 10126/82

    Plattform "Ärzte für das Leben" ./. Österreich

    Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2001 - 29221/95
    Likewise, freedom of assembly as enshrined in Article 11 of the Convention protects a demonstration that may annoy or give offence to persons opposed to the ideas or claims that it is seeking to promote (see Plattform "Ärzte für das Leben" v. Austria, judgment of 21 June 1988, Series A no. 139, p. 12, § 32).
  • EGMR, 08.07.1999 - 26682/95

    SÜREK c. TURQUIE (N° 1)

    Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2001 - 29221/95
    Where there has been incitement to violence against an individual or a public official or a sector of the population, the State authorities enjoy a wider margin of appreciation when examining the need for an interference with freedom of expression (see Incal v. Turkey, judgment of 9 June 1998, Reports 1998-IV, p. 1566, § 48, and Sürek v. Turkey (no. 1) [GC], no. 26682/95, § 61, ECHR 1999-IV).
  • EGMR, 18.05.2000 - 41488/98

    VELIKOVA c. BULGARIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 02.10.2001 - 29221/95
    The Court reiterates that, under the Convention system as in force after 1 November 1998, where the respondent Government repeat objections raised and examined at the admissibility stage, its task is to verify whether there are special circumstances warranting re-examination of questions of admissibility (see Velikova v. Bulgaria, no. 41488/98, § 57, ECHR 2000-VI, and Basic v. Austria, no. 29800/96, § 34, ECHR 2001-I).
  • BVerfG, 11.07.2017 - 1 BvR 1571/15

    Das Tarifeinheitsgesetz ist weitgehend mit dem Grundgesetz vereinbar

    Die Koalitionsfreiheit der EMRK gilt als soziales Recht, weshalb dem Gesetzgeber ein Beurteilungsspielraum zuerkannt wird (vgl. EGMR, Stankov and the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden v. Bulgaria, Entscheidung vom 2. Oktober 2001, Nr. 29221/95 und 29225/95, § 87; (GK), Demir and Baykara v. Turkey, Entscheidung vom 12. November 2008, Nr. 34503/97, § 119).
  • EGMR, 15.10.2015 - 27510/08

    Leugnung des Völkermords an Armeniern von Meinungsfreiheit gedeckt

    Examples include Lehideux and Isorni v. France (23 September 1998, § 53, Reports 1998-VII), where the statements could not be read as a justification of pro-Nazi policies; Stankov and the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden (nos. 29221/95 and 29225/95, §§ 102 and 106, ECHR 2001-IX), where the statements, although consisting in "fierce anti-Bulgarian declarations", could be regarded as containing an element of exaggeration designed merely to attract attention; Radio France and Others (cited above, § 38), where the statements, which contained serious defamatory allegations, were marked by their categorical tone; and Orban and Others v. France (no. 20985/05, §§ 46, 49 and 51, 15 January 2009), where the statements were simply a witness account by a first-hand participant in the Algerian War, not justification of torture or glorification of its perpetrators.
  • EGMR, 13.02.2003 - 41340/98

    Refah Partisi (Wohlfahrtspartei)

    It necessarily follows that a political party whose leaders incite violence or put forward a policy which fails to respect democracy or which is aimed at the destruction of democracy and the flouting of the rights and freedoms recognised in a democracy cannot lay claim to the Convention's protection against penalties imposed on those grounds (see Yazar and Others v. Turkey, nos. 22723/93, 22724/93 and 22725/93, § 49, 9 April 2002, unreported, and, mutatis mutandis, the following judgments: Stankov and the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden v. Bulgaria, nos. 29225/95 and 29221/95, § 97, ECHR 2001-IX, and Socialist Party and Others v. Turkey, judgment of 25 May 1998, Reports 1998-III, pp.
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.

Rechtsprechung
   EKMR, 21.10.1996 - 29221/95, 29222/95, 29223/95, 29225/95, 29226/95   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/1996,32110
EKMR, 21.10.1996 - 29221/95, 29222/95, 29223/95, 29225/95, 29226/95 (https://dejure.org/1996,32110)
EKMR, Entscheidung vom 21.10.1996 - 29221/95, 29222/95, 29223/95, 29225/95, 29226/95 (https://dejure.org/1996,32110)
EKMR, Entscheidung vom 21. Oktober 1996 - 29221/95, 29222/95, 29223/95, 29225/95, 29226/95 (https://dejure.org/1996,32110)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1996,32110) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

Verfahrensgang

 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (12)

  • EGMR, 02.10.2001 - 29225/95
    Auszug aus EKMR, 21.10.1996 - 29221/95
    Application Bo. 29223/95 Application No. 29225/95.

    29221/95, 29222/95, 29223/95, 29225/95 and 29226/95,.

    The applicant in application No. 29225/95 is the United.

    association in Application No. 29225/95, was founded on 14 April 1990.

    29221/95, 29222/95, 29223/95, 29225/95 and 29226/95 complain respectively of several incidents where some of them were allegedly ill-treated by the police; of the refusal of the courts to register the applicant association; of the refusal of the authorities on several occasions to allow the holding of marches and meetings; of the confiscation of a newspaper; and of the denial of certain alleged rights of the Macedonians.

  • EKMR, 10.10.1979 - 8142/78

    X. v. AUSTRIA

    Auszug aus EKMR, 21.10.1996 - 29221/95
    None of the applicants has shown that the alleged non-recognition of a Macedonian minority engenders for him or her such direct practical consequences as to amount to an interference with the right, for example, to respect for a person's private life under Article 8 of the Convention, or with the other rights guaranteed by the Convention (cf. No. 8142/78, Dec. 10.10.79, D.R. 18, p. 88).
  • EKMR, 17.05.1985 - 10650/83

    CLERFAYT, LEGROS et ALII c. BELGIQUE

    Auszug aus EKMR, 21.10.1996 - 29221/95
    The Commission first recalls that no right to the use of a particular language is guaranteed by the Convention to citizens in all their contacts with the authorities (No. 2333/64, Yearbook 8, p. 338; No. 10650/83, Dec. 17.5.85, D.R. 42, p. 212; No. 11100/84, Dec. 12.12.85, D.R. 45, p. 240).
     
  • EKMR, 28.01.1983 - 9266/81

    YARROW P.L.C., YARROW, M. & G. SECURITIES Ltd and AUGUSTIN-NORMAND v. the UNITED …

    Auszug aus EKMR, 21.10.1996 - 29221/95
    Where no effective domestic remedies are available, the complaint has to be introduced within six months after the events complained of (cf. No. 9266/81, Dec. 28.1.83, D.R. 30 p. 155; No. 11660/85, Dec. 19.1.89, D.R. 59, p. 85).
  • EKMR, 10.07.1975 - 6742/74

    X. c. REPUBLIQUE FEDERALE D'ALLEMAGNE

    Auszug aus EKMR, 21.10.1996 - 29221/95
    However, insofar as the applicants' complaint can be considered as relating to a claim for self-determination or for collective rights of a minority, the Commission recalls that the Convention does not guarantee such rights (cf. No. 6742/74, D.R. 3, p. 98; No. 7230/75, D.R. 7, p. 109; Nos. 9278/81 and 9451/81, Dec. 3.10.83, D.R. 35, p. 30, 35).
  • EKMR, 16.12.1968 - 2333/64

    HABITANTS DE LEEUW-ST. PIERRE contre la BELGIQUE

    Auszug aus EKMR, 21.10.1996 - 29221/95
    The Commission first recalls that no right to the use of a particular language is guaranteed by the Convention to citizens in all their contacts with the authorities (No. 2333/64, Yearbook 8, p. 338; No. 10650/83, Dec. 17.5.85, D.R. 42, p. 212; No. 11100/84, Dec. 12.12.85, D.R. 45, p. 240).
  • EKMR, 12.12.1985 - 11100/84

    FRYSKE NASIONALE PARTIJ ET AL. c. PAYS-BAS

    Auszug aus EKMR, 21.10.1996 - 29221/95
    The Commission first recalls that no right to the use of a particular language is guaranteed by the Convention to citizens in all their contacts with the authorities (No. 2333/64, Yearbook 8, p. 338; No. 10650/83, Dec. 17.5.85, D.R. 42, p. 212; No. 11100/84, Dec. 12.12.85, D.R. 45, p. 240).
  • EKMR, 03.10.1983 - 9278/81

    G. and E. v. NORWAY

    Auszug aus EKMR, 21.10.1996 - 29221/95
    However, insofar as the applicants' complaint can be considered as relating to a claim for self-determination or for collective rights of a minority, the Commission recalls that the Convention does not guarantee such rights (cf. No. 6742/74, D.R. 3, p. 98; No. 7230/75, D.R. 7, p. 109; Nos. 9278/81 and 9451/81, Dec. 3.10.83, D.R. 35, p. 30, 35).
  • EKMR, 11.04.1996 - 24019/94

    FINSKA FÖRSAMLINGEN I STOCKHOLM AND HAUTANIEMI v. SWEDEN

    Auszug aus EKMR, 21.10.1996 - 29221/95
    It is unclear why they would not be able to establish their own places of worship or otherwise enjoy their right to freedom of religion (cf. No. 24019/94, Dec. 11.4.96, unpublished).
  • EKMR, 19.01.1989 - 11660/85

    J.M. contre le PORTUGAL

    Auszug aus EKMR, 21.10.1996 - 29221/95
    Where no effective domestic remedies are available, the complaint has to be introduced within six months after the events complained of (cf. No. 9266/81, Dec. 28.1.83, D.R. 30 p. 155; No. 11660/85, Dec. 19.1.89, D.R. 59, p. 85).
  • EKMR, 10.05.1979 - 8612/79

    ALLIANCE DES BELGES DE LA COMMUNAUTE EUROPEENNE v. BELGIUM

  • EKMR, 04.10.1976 - 7230/75

    X. v. NETHERLANDS

  • EGMR, 19.01.2006 - 59491/00

    THE UNITED MACEDONIAN ORGANISATION ILINDEN AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

    In some instances the courts refused to examine appeals against such bans on the same ground (for the period 1994-97 see Stankov and the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden v. Bulgaria, nos. 29221/95 and 29225/95, §§ 21, 25, and 29-30, ECHR 2001-IX; for the period 1998-2003 see The United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden and Ivanov v. Bulgaria, no. 44079/98, §§ 12-71, 20 October 2005).

    The Court starts by noting that what is at issue in the present case is solely the refusal of the authorities to register Ilinden in 1998-99, not the earlier refusal to do so in 1990-91, a complaint in respect of which was declared inadmissible by the former Commission as being incompatible ratione temporis with the provisions of the Convention (see Stankov, Trayanov, Stoychev, the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden, Mechkarov and Others v. Bulgaria, nos. 29221/95, 29222/95, 29223/95, 29225/95 and 29226/95, Commission decision of 21 October 1996, unreported), nor the subsequent one in 2002-04, which is the subject of another application, currently pending before the Court (no. 34960/04).

    The present application, although part of a group (see Stankov and the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden v. Bulgaria, nos. 29221/95 and 29225/95, ECHR 2001-IX; The United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden and Ivanov v. Bulgaria, no. 44079/98, 20 October 2005; The United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden - PIRIN and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 59489/00, 20 October 2005; and Ivanov and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 46336/99, 24 November 2005), illustrates well the principle that, while being attentive to the overall context, the Court confines its attention as far as possible to the issues raised by the specific case before it (see Mellacher and Others v. Austria, judgment of 19 December 1989, Series A no. 169, p. 24, § 41; and Kokkinakis v. Greece, judgment of 25 May 1993, Series A no. 260-A, p. 18, § 35).

  • EGMR, 18.10.2011 - 34960/04

    THE UNITED MACEDONIAN ORGANISATION ILINDEN AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA (No. 2)

    Lastly, it cannot be overlooked that the instant refusal to register Ilinden was the third in a row (see Stankov, Trayanov, Stoychev, the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden, Mechkarov and Others v. Bulgaria, nos. 29221/95, 29222/95, 29223/95, 29225/95 and 29226/95, Commission decision of 21 October 1996, unreported, and United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden and Others, cited above, § 30).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.

Rechtsprechung
   EKMR, 29.06.1998 - 29221/95, 29225/95   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/1998,21579
EKMR, 29.06.1998 - 29221/95, 29225/95 (https://dejure.org/1998,21579)
EKMR, Entscheidung vom 29.06.1998 - 29221/95, 29225/95 (https://dejure.org/1998,21579)
EKMR, Entscheidung vom 29. Juni 1998 - 29221/95, 29225/95 (https://dejure.org/1998,21579)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1998,21579) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

Verfahrensgang

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht