Email |  Print | RSS | Comment |  

 Email |  Print

Thu, Jan 27, 2011 | European Court of Human Rights | Today’s Zaman

European Court of Human Rights: Turkey “Worst Human Rights Violator”

In an annual report released on Thursday [Jan 27, 2011], the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), the top judicial body to rule on human rights violations in Europe, once again found that Turkey is by far the worst violator of human rights among the 47 signatory states of the European Convention on Human Rights.

In statistical data on violation judgments by country for the last year, Turkey once more topped the chart with 18.55 percent of all violation judgments, practically the same as last year’s figure of 18.81, followed by Russia with 14.48 percent and Romania 9.54 percent. In 2010, a total of 278 judgments were entered for Turkey and only in nine cases did the court find no violations.

Read related article in Today’s Zaman.

European Court of Human Rights annual report 2010

The year 2010 was the sixtieth anniversary of the European Convention on Human Rights. In 2010 the Court delivered a total of 1,499 judgments, slightly down on the 1,625 judgments delivered in 2009. There was a 9% increase in the number of applications that resulted in a judgment compared to the previous year. The Convention provision which gave rise to the greatest number of violations was Article 6, firstly with regard to the right to a hearing within a reasonable time, then with regard to the right to a fair trial. This was followed by Article 5 (right to liberty and security) and Article 3 (prohibition of torture and of inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment). The highest number of judgments finding at least one violation was delivered in respect of Turkey (228), followed by Russia (204), Romania (135), Ukraine (107) and Poland (87). The European Court of Human Rights annual report showed the following Court’s statistics for 2010:

Pending allocated cases

Approximately 139,650 applications were pending before a judicial formation on 1 January 2011. More than half of these applications had been lodged against one of four countries: Russia, Turkey, Romania or Ukraine.

Violation judgments by State

In 2010, more than a third of the judgments delivered by the Court concerned four of the Council of Europe’s forty-seven member States: Turkey (278 judgments), Russia (217 judgments), Romania (143 judgments) and Ukraine (109 judgments). Of the total number of judgments it has delivered in 2010, in over 85% of cases the Court has found at least one violation of the Convention by the respondent State.

Since it was established in 1959, near the half of the judgments delivered by the Court concerned four member States: Turkey, Italy, Russia and Poland.

Violations by Article and by country

Selection of Judgments and Decisions

— Article 2: Failure of authorities to protect life of a journalist following death threats: violation
Hrant Dink v. Turkey, nos. 2668/07 et al., 14 September 2010, no. 133

— Article 3: Failure to ensure appropriate medical treatment for person injured in police custody: violation
Umar Karatepe v. Turkey, no. 20502/05, 12 October 2010, no. 134

— Article 6: Conviction based to decisive degree on witness statements that had since been retracted: violation
Orhan Çaçan v. Turkey, no. 26437/04, 23 March 2010, no. 128

— Article 8: Removal of judge from office for reasons partly related to her private life: violation
Özpınar v. Turkey, no. 20999/04, 19 October 2010, no. 134

— Article 9: Indication of religion on identity cards: violation
Sinan Işık v. Turkey, no. 21924/05, 2 February 2010, no. 127

— Article 9: Criminal conviction for wearing religious attire in public: violation
Ahmet Arslan and Others v. Turkey, no. 41135/98, 23 February 2010, no. 127

— Article 10: Seizure of translation of erotic literary work and conviction of publisher: violation
Akdaş v. Turkey, no. 41056/04, 16 February 2010, no. 127

— Article 10: Re-entry ban on American academic for controversial statements on Kurdish and Armenian issues: violation
Norma Cox v. Turkey, no. 2933/03, 20 May 2010, no. 130

— Article 10: Conviction of non-violent demonstrators for shouting slogans in support of an illegal organisation: violation
Gül and Others v. Turkey, no. 4870/02, 8 June 2010, no. 131

— Article 10: Seizure of book for almost two years and eight months on basis of unreasoned judicial decisions: violation
Sapan v. Turkey, no. 44102/04, 8 June 2010, no. 131

— Article 10: Virtually automatic conviction of media professionals for publishing written material of banned organisations: violation
Gözel and Özer v. Turkey, nos. 43453/04 and 31098/05, 6 July 2010, no. 132

— Article 10: Failure of authorities to protect freedom of expression of a journalist who had commented on identity of Turkish citizens of Armenian extraction: violation
Dink v. Turkey, nos. 2668/07 et al., 14 September 2010, no. 133

— Article 13: Judge denied an effective remedy in respect of Article 8 complaint: violation
Özpınar v. Turkey, no. 20999/04, 19 October 2010, no. 134

— Article 14: Inability of an asylum-seeker in a detention centre to hold meetings with a lawyer despite the indication of an interim measure by the European Court: violation
D.B. v. Turkey, no. 33526/08, 13 July 2010, no. 132

— Article 46: Respondent State required to remove details of religious affiliation from identity cards
Sinan Işık v. Turkey, no. 21924/05, 2 February 2010, no. 127

— Article 1 of Protocol No. 1: De facto expropriation without payment of compensation: violation
Sarıca and Dilaver v. Turkey, no. 11765/05, 27 May 2010, no. 130

— Article 1 of Protocol No. 1: Disproportionate burden on applicants resulting from depreciation of compensation for expropriation between date of assessment and date of settlement, with no default interest: violation
Yetiş and Others v. Turkey, no. 40349/05, 6 July 2010, no. 132

The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms was drafted by the member States of the Council of Europe. It was opened for signature in Rome on 4 November 1950 and came into force in September 1953. Taking as their starting-point the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the framers of the Convention sought to pursue the aims of the Council of Europe through the maintenance and further realisation of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The Convention represented the first step towards the collective enforcement of certain of the rights set out in the Universal Declaration.

In addition to laying down a catalogue of civil and political rights and freedoms, the Convention set up a mechanism for the enforcement of the obligations entered into by Contracting States. Three institutions were entrusted with this responsibility: the European Commission of Human Rights (set up in 1954), the European Court of Human Rights (set up in 1959) and the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, the latter being composed of the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the member States or their representatives.

If you are interested, you can read the ECtHR annual report 2010 here.

Source: “Annual Report 2010 of the European Court of Human Rights, Council of Europe”

The European Convention on Human Rights places Turkey under the jurisdiction of the ECtHR. In 1987 Turkey accepted the right of individuals to make applications to the ECtHR and in 1990 recognized the compulsory jurisdiction of the court. However Turkey has still not ratified some of the protocols of the convention despite having signed them.