Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BISAR AYHAN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect);Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-2 - Use of force) (Substantive aspect) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  AYHAN c. TURQUIE

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 2, Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 14 MRK
  [FRE]

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Zitiert selbst (11)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 16.02.2021 - 4871/16

  Hanan ./. Deutschland - Ermittlungen wegen Kundus-Angriffs auf Zivilisten …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.05.2021 - 42329/11

  The Court notes in this context that the Government have not provided any information capable of demonstrating that it would not have been possible in practice, due to the situation and conditions in the area, to entrust the initial and crucial part of the investigation to an authority or officers independent from the military units responsible for the incident (see, a contrario, Hanan v. Germany [GC], no. 4871/16, § 181, 16 February 2021).
• EGMR, 24.03.2009 - 27866/03

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.05.2021 - 42329/11

  In conclusion, the Court finds that the foregoing is sufficient to conclude that the investigation conducted at the national level was inadequate and left so many obvious questions unanswered that it is not capable of establishing the true facts surrounding the incident and it is unable to rely on the conclusion reached at the end of that investigation (see Beker v. Turkey, no. 27866/03, § 53, 24 March 2009; Özcan and Others v. Turkey, no. 18893/05, § 73, 20 April 2010; and Gülbahar Özer and Others v. Turkey, no. 44125/06, §§ 74-75, 2 July 2013).
• EGMR, 22.09.2009 - 27849/03

  BEYAZGÜL c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.05.2021 - 42329/11

  At this point, the Court recalls that it has already examined cases which concerned the use of force against smugglers on borders (see Halis Akın v. Turkey, no. 30304/02, 13 January 2009; Beyazgül v. Turkey, no. 27849/03, 22 September 2009; Ölmez and Others v. Turkey, no. 22746/03, 9 November 2010; and Atiman, cited above).

• EGMR, 02.07.2013 - 44125/06

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.05.2021 - 42329/11

  In conclusion, the Court finds that the foregoing is sufficient to conclude that the investigation conducted at the national level was inadequate and left so many obvious questions unanswered that it is not capable of establishing the true facts surrounding the incident and it is unable to rely on the conclusion reached at the end of that investigation (see Beker v. Turkey, no. 27866/03, § 53, 24 March 2009; Özcan and Others v. Turkey, no. 18893/05, § 73, 20 April 2010; and Gülbahar Özer and Others v. Turkey, no. 44125/06, §§ 74-75, 2 July 2013).
• EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 18893/05

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.05.2021 - 42329/11

  In conclusion, the Court finds that the foregoing is sufficient to conclude that the investigation conducted at the national level was inadequate and left so many obvious questions unanswered that it is not capable of establishing the true facts surrounding the incident and it is unable to rely on the conclusion reached at the end of that investigation (see Beker v. Turkey, no. 27866/03, § 53, 24 March 2009; Özcan and Others v. Turkey, no. 18893/05, § 73, 20 April 2010; and Gülbahar Özer and Others v. Turkey, no. 44125/06, §§ 74-75, 2 July 2013).
• EGMR, 26.04.2016 - 7469/06

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.05.2021 - 42329/11

  In doing so, it will consider in particular the investigation carried out at the domestic level, since in cases such as the present one where the respondent Government bear the burden of justifying a killing, the examination of the steps taken in an investigation does not only serve the purpose of assessing whether the investigation was in compliance with the requirements of the procedural obligation, but also of deciding whether it was capable of leading to the establishment of whether the force used was or was not justified in the circumstances and whether the Government have thus satisfactorily discharged their burden to justify the killing (see Cangöz and Others v. Turkey, no. 7469/06, § 115, 26 April 2016; Karataş and Others v. Turkey, no. 46820/09, § 69, 12 September 2017).
• EGMR, 09.11.2010 - 22746/03

  ÖLMEZ ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.05.2021 - 42329/11

  At this point, the Court recalls that it has already examined cases which concerned the use of force against smugglers on borders (see Halis Akın v. Turkey, no. 30304/02, 13 January 2009; Beyazgül v. Turkey, no. 27849/03, 22 September 2009; Ölmez and Others v. Turkey, no. 22746/03, 9 November 2010; and Atiman, cited above).
• EGMR, 20.12.2004 - 50385/99

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.05.2021 - 42329/11

  This, however, does not exclude in principle an examination of the applicant's complaints under Article 2, the text of which, read as a whole, demonstrates that it covers not only intentional killing but also situations where it is permitted to use force which may result, as an unintended outcome, in the deprivation of life (see İlhan v. Turkey [GC], no. 22277/93, § 75, ECHR 2000-VII, and Makaratzis v. Greece [GC], no. 50385/99, § 49, ECHR 2004-XI).
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 22277/93

  ILHAN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.05.2021 - 42329/11

  This, however, does not exclude in principle an examination of the applicant's complaints under Article 2, the text of which, read as a whole, demonstrates that it covers not only intentional killing but also situations where it is permitted to use force which may result, as an unintended outcome, in the deprivation of life (see İlhan v. Turkey [GC], no. 22277/93, § 75, ECHR 2000-VII, and Makaratzis v. Greece [GC], no. 50385/99, § 49, ECHR 2004-XI).
• EGMR, 06.07.2005 - 43579/98

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.05.2021 - 42329/11

  In view of the fundamental nature of the right to life, the circumstances in which deprivation of life may be justified must be strictly construed (see Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria [GC], nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98, §§ 93-94, ECHR 2005-VII; see also Makaratzis, cited above, §§ 56-59).
• EGMR, 23.09.2014 - 62279/09

  [ENG]

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 10.12.2024 - 35922/20

  KARADENIZ AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Rn. 99 À supposer même qu'il s'agît de tels tirs, ceux-ci auraient alors été mal exécutés, au point de constituer une négligence grave, que les victimes fussent en fuite ou non (Bişar Ayhan et autres c. Turquie, nos 42329/11 et 47319/11, § 73, 18 mai 2021).
• EGMR, 10.10.2024 - 9375/20

  BAGIROVA v. AZERBAIJAN

  In that connection, the Court considers it necessary to first address the procedural aspect of the complaint under Article 2 because the question whether the investigation was capable of leading to the establishment of the facts, and to a determination that the force used was or was not justified in the circumstances, is relevant to the Court's assessment as to whether the Government have satisfactorily discharged their burden to justify the killing of the applicant's brother (see Bişar Ayhan and Others v. Turkey, nos. 42329/11 and 47319/11, § 51, 18 May 2021, and Yengibaryan and Simonyan, cited above, § 121).
• EGMR, 20.06.2023 - 2186/12

  YENGIBARYAN AND SIMONYAN v. ARMENIA

  However, the Court considers it necessary to first address the procedural aspect of the complaint under Article 2 because examination of whether the investigation was capable of leading to the establishment of the facts and the determination of whether the force used was justified in the circumstances (see the case-law quoted in paragraph 120 above) is relevant to the Court's assessment of whether the Government have satisfactorily discharged their burden to justify the killing (see Cangöz and Others, cited above, § 115; and Bişar Ayhan and Others v. Turkey, nos. 42329/11 and 47319/11, § 51, 18 May 2021).
• EGMR, 25.03.2025 - 22776/18

  ALMUKHLAS ET AL-MALIKI c. GRÈCE

  Rn. 6 Dans un certain nombre d'affaires où la Cour a décelé des défaillances graves dans l'enquête interne, les constats procéduraux en question ont eu une incidence directe sur le constat d'une violation du droit à la vie à raison du recours à la force (voir, outre les arrêts mentionnés au paragraphe 5 ci-dessus, les arrêts Bagirova c. Azerbaïdjan, no 9375/20, §§ 66-69, 10 octobre 2024, 0hanjanyan c. Arménie, no 70665/11, § 160, 25 avril 2023, Vardanyan et Khalafyan c. Arménie, no 2265/12, §§ 96-97, 8 novembre 2022, Bişar Ayhan et autres c. Turquie, nos 42329/11 et 47319/11, 18 mai 2021, Karataş et autres c. Turquie, no 46820/09, §§ 89-90, 12 septembre 2017, et Gülbahar Özer et autres c. Turquie, no 44125/06, §§ 74-76, 2 juillet 2013).
• EGMR - 60318/15 (anhängig)

  STEPANYAN AND GRYNYK v. RUSSIA AND UKRAINE and 5 other applications

  42329/11 and 47319/11, §§ 73-74, 18 May 2021)?.