Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ATESOGLU v. TURKEY

  Art. 3 MRK
  Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Torture) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) (englisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ATESOGLU v. TURKEY

  Art. 3 MRK
  Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Torture) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) (englisch)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Atesoglu v. Turkey

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  ATESOGLU v. TURKEY

  Art. 3 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (12)Zitiert selbst (14)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Einstufung des in französischer Haft zugefügten Übels als Folter - Verpflichtung …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2015 - 53645/10

  As to the seriousness of the treatment in question, the Court reiterates that, under its case-law in this sphere (see, among other authorities, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, §§ 96-97, ECHR 1999-V), in order to determine whether a particular form of ill-treatment should be qualified as torture, it must have regard to the distinction, embodied in Article 3, between this notion and that of inhuman or degrading treatment.
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2015 - 53645/10

  Such an investigation should be capable of leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 131, ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

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

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2015 - 53645/10

  In these circumstances, the Court finds that the acts complained of were particularly serious, cruel, and capable of causing severe pain and suffering (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, §§ 114 and 115, ECHR 2000-VII; Valeriu and Nicolae Rosca v. Moldova, no. 41704/02, § 64, 20 October 2009 and further references therein; Diri v. Turkey, no. 68351/01, §§ 42-46, 31 July 2007; and Mammadov v. Azerbaijan, no. 34445/04, §§ 68 and 69, 1 January 2007).

• EGMR, 03.06.2004 - 33097/96

  BATI AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2015 - 53645/10

  While there may be obstacles or difficulties which prevent progress in an investigation in a particular situation, a prompt response by the authorities in investigating allegations of ill-treatment may generally be regarded as essential in maintaining public confidence in their adherence to the rule of law and in preventing any appearance of collusion in or tolerance of unlawful acts (see Batı and Others v. Turkey, nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00, § 136, ECHR 2004-IV (extracts)).
• EGMR, 17.10.2006 - 52067/99

  OKKALI c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2015 - 53645/10

  This is essential for maintaining the public's confidence in, and support for, the rule of law and for preventing any appearance of the authorities" tolerance of or collusion in unlawful acts (see Okkalı v. Turkey, no. 52067/99, § 65, ECHR 2006-XII (extracts), and Derman, cited above, § 27).
• EGMR, 05.10.2000 - 57834/00

  KABLAN contre la TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2015 - 53645/10

  While there may be obstacles or difficulties which prevent progress in an investigation in a particular situation, a prompt response by the authorities in investigating allegations of ill-treatment may generally be regarded as essential in maintaining public confidence in their adherence to the rule of law and in preventing any appearance of collusion in or tolerance of unlawful acts (see Batı and Others v. Turkey, nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00, § 136, ECHR 2004-IV (extracts)).
• EGMR, 11.01.2007 - 34445/04

  MAMMADOV (JALALOGLU) v. AZERBAIJAN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2015 - 53645/10

  In these circumstances, the Court finds that the acts complained of were particularly serious, cruel, and capable of causing severe pain and suffering (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, §§ 114 and 115, ECHR 2000-VII; Valeriu and Nicolae Rosca v. Moldova, no. 41704/02, § 64, 20 October 2009 and further references therein; Diri v. Turkey, no. 68351/01, §§ 42-46, 31 July 2007; and Mammadov v. Azerbaijan, no. 34445/04, §§ 68 and 69, 1 January 2007).
• EGMR, 20.02.2007 - 45906/99

  ZYNEP OZCAN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2015 - 53645/10

  According to the Court's case-law, suspension of such sentences undeniably falls into the category of the "measures" which are unacceptable as its effect is to render convictions ineffective (see Okkalı, cited above, §§ 73-78, and Zeynep Özcan v. Turkey, no. 45906/99, §§ 40-46, 20 February 2007).
• EGMR, 31.07.2007 - 68351/01

  DIRI v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2015 - 53645/10

  In these circumstances, the Court finds that the acts complained of were particularly serious, cruel, and capable of causing severe pain and suffering (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, §§ 114 and 115, ECHR 2000-VII; Valeriu and Nicolae Rosca v. Moldova, no. 41704/02, § 64, 20 October 2009 and further references therein; Diri v. Turkey, no. 68351/01, §§ 42-46, 31 July 2007; and Mammadov v. Azerbaijan, no. 34445/04, §§ 68 and 69, 1 January 2007).
• EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 8354/04

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2015 - 53645/10

  Where domestic proceedings have taken place, it is not the Court's task to substitute its own assessment of the facts for that of the domestic courts and, as a general rule, it is for those courts to assess the evidence before them (see Gäfgen v. Germany [GC], no. 22978/05, § 93, ECHR 2010; Derman v. Turkey, no. 21789/02, § 25, 31 May 2011; and Eski v. Turkey, no. 8354/04, § 28, 5 June 2012).
• EGMR, 03.07.2012 - 32051/09

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 15.03.2011 - 39414/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 31.05.2011 - 21789/02

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 20.10.2009 - 41704/02

  [ENG]

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 14.10.2025 - 54328/20

  ÖLMEZ c. TÜRKIYE

  It subsequently suspended the pronouncement of the judgment in accordance with Article 231 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (see for the text of that provision Durukan and Birol v. Türkiye, nos. 14879/20 and 13440/21, § 23, 3 October 2023, and for its effects, for instance, Ateşoğlu v. Turkey, no. 53645/10, § 28, 20 January 2015) on the condition that he did not commit an intentional offence during the following five years.

  Rn. 18 Lastly, the Court emphasises that in cases concerning violations of Article 3, a suspension of the pronouncement of the judgment results in the impunity of the perpetrators, as it cancels the judgment with all its legal consequences, including the sentence, provided that the offender abides by the suspension order (see Ateşoğlu v. Turkey, no. 53645/10, § 28, 20 January 2015).

• EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 31959/13

  PULFER v. ALBANIA

  Furthermore, an amnesty or a pardon is not compatible with the duty incumbent on the States to investigate acts of ill-treatment and to combat impunity (see, mutatis mutandis, Abdülsamet Yaman v. Turkey, no. 32446/96, § 55, 2 November 2004; and Ateşoğlu v. Turkey, no. 53645/10, § 25, 20 January 2015).
• EGMR, 25.09.2019 - 36617/07

  AFET SÜREYYA EREN AGAINST TURKEY AND 130 OTHER CASES

  53645/10.

• EGMR, 28.03.2017 - 46248/07

  SHESTOPALOV v. RUSSIA

  The Court has on numerous occasions affirmed that the finding of a violation is not sufficient to constitute just satisfaction in cases of ill-treatment suffered by individuals at the hands of the police or other agents of the State (see, among recent authorities in which a violation of Article 3 was found on account of torture, Al Nashiri v. Poland, no. 28761/11, § 594, 24 July 2014; Ateşoğlu v. Turkey, no. 53645/10, § 35, 20 January 2015; Afet Süreyya Eren v. Turkey, no. 36617/07, § 51, 20 October 2015; Zakharin and Others v. Russia, no. 22458/04, § 94, 12 November 2015; and Pomilyayko v. Ukraine, no. 60426/11, § 62, 11 February 2016).
• EGMR, 22.10.2019 - 20289/10

  UDALOVA v. RUSSIA

  In the instant case, however, not only was concern to provide adequate protection to the victim of ill-treatment sorely lacking throughout the proceedings, but the impunity which ensued was enough to shed doubt on the ability of the judicial machinery set in motion in this case to produce a sufficiently deterrent effect to protect women from domestic abuse (see, in a similar context of vulnerable victims of ill-treatment, Okkalı, cited above, § 70, and Ateşoğlu v. Turkey, no. 53645/10, § 27, 20 January 2015).
• EGMR, 17.03.2026 - 56462/19

  SUNGUR c. TURQUIE

  It further reiterates that where a State agent has been charged with crimes involving torture or ill-treatment, it is of the utmost importance that he or she be suspended from duty during the investigation and trial, and should be dismissed if convicted (see Ateşoğlu v. Turkey, no. 53645/10, § 25, 20 January 2015, with further references).
• EGMR, 13.04.2021 - 37882/13

  E.G. v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

  La Cour estime donc que, dans le cas de V.B., les juges de la cour d'appel ont exercé leur discrétion afin de minimiser les conséquences d'un acte illégal extrêmement sérieux plutôt que de montrer que de tels actes ne sauraient en aucune manière être tolérés (comparer avec Ateşoğlu c. Turquie, no 53645/10, § 28 in fine, 20 janvier 2015 et les affaires qui y sont citées).
• EGMR, 18.12.2018 - 15014/11

  KOSE v. TURKEY

  The Court has already held in a number of cases that the procedure regulated by Article 231 of the Criminal Code of Procedure permitting suspension of the pronouncement of judgments concerning agents of the State results in the impunity of the perpetrators (see Eski v. Turkey, no. 8354/04, § 36, 5 June 2012; Taylan v. Turkey, no. 32051/09, § 46, 3 July 2012; Böber v. Turkey, no. 62590/09, § 35, 9 April 2013; Kasap and Others, cited above, § 60; and Ateşoğlu v. Turkey, no. 53645/10, § 28, 20 January 2015; see also, a contrario, Çalışkan v. Turkey ((dec.) no. 47936/11, § 47, 1 December 2015).
• EGMR, 20.10.2015 - 36617/07

  [ENG]

  Having regard to the nature and degree of the ill-treatment and to the strong inferences that can be drawn from the evidence that it was inflicted in order to obtain information from the applicant about her suspected connection with the DHKP/C, the Court finds that the ill-treatment involved very serious and cruel suffering that can only be characterised as torture (see, among other authorities, Salman, cited above, § 115; Aksoy, § 64, cited above; Abdülsamet Yaman v. Turkey, no. 32446/96, § 47, 2 November 2004; Koçak v. Turkey, no. 32581/96, § 48, 3 May 2007; and Ateşoğlu v. Turkey, no. 53645/10, § 20, 20 January 2015).
• EGMR, 15.03.2022 - 73346/11

  ÖZÇELIK c. TURQUIE

  La Cour a de maintes fois jugé que la procédure régie par l'article 231 du CPP permettant de surcroît de surseoir au prononcé de jugements concernant des agents de l'État entraîne l'impunité de ces derniers (voir, par exemple, Eski c. Turquie, no 8354/04, § 36, 5 juin 2012, Taylan c. Turquie, no 32051/09, § 46, 3 juillet 2012, Böber c. Turquie, no 62590/09, § 35, 9 avril 2013, Külah et Koyuncu c. Turquie, no 24827/05, § 42, 23 avril 2013, Kasap et autres, précité, § 60, Atesoglu c. Turquie, no 53645/10, § 28, 20 janvier 2015, et Hasan Köse, précité, § 37).
• EGMR, 01.12.2015 - 47936/11

  ÇALISKAN c. TURQUIE
• EGMR - 43718/22 (anhängig)

  SEREFLIOGULLARi v. TÜRKIYE