Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BÖBER v. TURKEY

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

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Böber v. Turkey

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (7)Zitiert selbst (12)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 62590/09

  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, 03.06.2004 - 33097/96

  BATI AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 62590/09

  33097/96 and 57834/00, §§ 96-98, ECHR 2004-IV (extracts).
• EGMR, 17.10.2006 - 52067/99

  OKKALI c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 62590/09

  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 v. Turkey, no. 21789/02, § 27, 31 May 2011).

• EGMR, 05.10.2000 - 57834/00

  KABLAN contre la TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 62590/09

  33097/96 and 57834/00, §§ 96-98, ECHR 2004-IV (extracts).
• EGMR, 24.03.2009 - 27866/03

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 62590/09

  In the present case, regard being had to the documents in its possession, the above criteria and the fact that time sheets have been accepted by the Court as supporting documents in a number of cases (see Çoselav v. Turkey, no. 1413/07, § 89, 9 October 2012, and Beker v. Turkey, no. 27866/03, § 68, 24 March 2009 and the cases cited therein), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sum of EUR 2, 000 for the proceedings before the Court.
• EGMR, 20.02.2007 - 45906/99

  ZYNEP OZCAN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 62590/09

  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 Eski, cited above § 36; Taylan v. Turkey, no. 32051/09, § 46, 3 July 2012; Okkalı, cited above, §§ 73-78; and Zeynep Özcan v. Turkey, no. 45906/99, §§ 40-46, 20 February 2007).
• EGMR, 18.09.2008 - 1249/03

  ATALAY v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 62590/09

  As regards the Government's objection that the applicant failed to exhaust domestic remedies, the Court reiterates that it has already examined and rejected the Government's preliminary objections in similar cases (see, in particular, Atalay v. Turkey, no. 1249/03, § 29, 18 September 2008).
• EGMR, 09.10.2012 - 1413/07

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 62590/09

  In the present case, regard being had to the documents in its possession, the above criteria and the fact that time sheets have been accepted by the Court as supporting documents in a number of cases (see Çoselav v. Turkey, no. 1413/07, § 89, 9 October 2012, and Beker v. Turkey, no. 27866/03, § 68, 24 March 2009 and the cases cited therein), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sum of EUR 2, 000 for the proceedings before the Court.
• EGMR, 15.02.2007 - 57049/00

  YÜKSEL ERDOGAN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 62590/09

  Though the Court is not bound by the findings of domestic authorities, in normal circumstances it requires cogent elements to lead it to depart from the findings of fact reached by those authorities (see, among others, Yüksel ErdoÄŸan and Others v. Turkey, no. 57049/00, § 87, 15 February 2007, and Eski v. Turkey, no. 8354/04, § 28, 5 June 2012).
• EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 8354/04

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 62590/09

  Though the Court is not bound by the findings of domestic authorities, in normal circumstances it requires cogent elements to lead it to depart from the findings of fact reached by those authorities (see, among others, Yüksel ErdoÄŸan and Others v. Turkey, no. 57049/00, § 87, 15 February 2007, and Eski v. Turkey, no. 8354/04, § 28, 5 June 2012).
• EGMR, 03.07.2012 - 32051/09

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 31.05.2011 - 21789/02

  [ENG]

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 25.09.2019 - 36617/07

  AFET SÜREYYA EREN AGAINST TURKEY AND 130 OTHER CASES

  62590/09.
• EGMR, 22.11.2016 - 35132/05

  [FRE]

  La différence réside dans le fait que, dans le premier cas, à l'issue du sursis, le jugement constatant la culpabilité et toutes ses conséquences disparaissent alors que dans le cas d'un sursis à l'exécution d'une peine ni le jugement ni le constat de culpabilité ne cessent d'exister (Böber c. Turquie, no 62590/09, § 35, 9 avril 2013).
• EGMR, 13.01.2015 - 37308/05

  [ENG]

  Thus, as it has done in a number of its judgments concerning similar issues, the Court considers that the conclusion reached by the trial court amounts to an acknowledgment in substance that the applicants" rights under Article 3 of the Convention have been breached (see, mutatis mutandis, Kasap and Others v. Turkey, no. 8656/10, § 56, 14 January 2014 and the cases cited therein; Böber v. Turkey, no. 62590/09, § 30, 9 April 2013; Eski v. Turkey, no. 8354/04, §§ 29-30, 5 June 2012; and Taylan v. Turkey, no. 32051/09, § 38, 3 July 2012).

• 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, 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

  La Cour rappelle avoir déjà examiné la question du sursis au prononcé du jugement dans le cadre d'affaires relatives à des mauvais traitements infligés par les forces de l'ordre (Eski c. Turquie, no 8354/04, 5 juin 2012, Taylan c. Turquie, no 32051/09, 3 juillet 2012, Böber c. Turquie, no 62590/09, 9 avril 2013, et, plus récemment, Ateşoğlu c. Turquie, no 53645/10, 20 janvier 2015).
• EGMR - 43718/22 (anhängig)

  SEREFLIOGULLARi v. TÜRKIYE

  Has the applicant been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, on account of the treatment inflicted on him by the police officers on 7 July 2017 (compare Böber v. Turkey, no. 62590/09, §§ 28-30, 9 April 2013)?.