Gagrule.net

Gagrule.net News, Views, Interviews worldwide

  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • GagruleLive
  • Armenia profile

ECHR launches new infringement procedure against Azerbaijan

December 15, 2017 By administrator

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is to examine whether Azerbaijan has refused to abide by the ECHR’s judgment in the case of imprisoned opposition politician Ilgar Mammadov, the first use of a new infringement procedure, ECHR said in a statement.

The procedure was introduced into the European Convention on Human Rights in 2010 and allows the Committee of Ministers, which has the responsibility under the Convention for supervising the execution of the Court’s judgments, to refer a question to the ECHR about whether a country has refused to abide by a final judgment.

The Committee decided on 5 December 2017 to launch the proceedings against Azerbaijan owing to the authorities’ persistent refusal to ensure Mr Mammadov’s unconditional release following the ECHR’s 2014 finding of multiple violations of his rights. The ECHR received the formal request from the Committee on 11 December.

The Grand Chamber might also decide to hold a hearing. If the Grand Chamber finds a violation because Azerbaijan has failed to abide by the ECHR’s judgment of 2014 in the case, it will refer the case back to the Committee of Ministers for consideration of the measures to be taken. A finding of no violation also leads to the case being referred back to the Committee of Ministers, which then closes its examination.

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: Azerbaijan, ECHR, infringement

ECHR court fines Turkey in wiretapping case during Ergenekon probe

June 7, 2016 By administrator

ec.thumbThe European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has fined Turkey 7,500 euros for violating privacy through telephone wiretaps in disciplinary proceedings against a public prosecutor during the infamous Ergenekon investigation, the Hurriyet Daily News reports.

The court ruled that public prosecutor Hamdi Ünal Karabeyoğlu’s “right to respect for privacy and family life” was violated in the use of information obtained by telephone wiretapping. It also ruled that his “right to effective remedy” was violated.

Karabeyoğlu had appealed to the ECHR over his case in Turkey, which was part of the Ergenekon investigation – a massive probe into hundreds of senior military personnel, journalists and politicians on charges of attempting to stage a coup against the Turkish government.

The ECHR found that Karabeyoǧlu had received “the minimum degree of protection required by the rule of law in a democratic society,” as his telephone wiretap was found to be based on reasonable suspicion and so was carried out in line with the relevant legislation.

However, the court also ruled that “the use of the information thus obtained in the context of a disciplinary investigation” was not in line with the law and that the relevant legislation was violated both when the information was used for “purposes other than the one for which it had been gathered” and when it was not “destroyed within the 15-day time limit after the criminal investigation had ended.”

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: case, Court, during, ECHR, Ergenekon, fines, probe, Turkey, wiretapping

Dink’s attorneys apply to ECHR demanding to resume prosecution of Turkish officials

June 1, 2016 By administrator

dink caseAttorneys of Hrant Dink, assassinated Turkish-Armenian journalist, have filed a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) against the Turkish court. The latter earlier decided to stop the prosecution of the officials linked with the investigation of Dink’s murder.

Dink’s attorneys also appealed to the Constitutional court, noting that those officials had to do with in the preparation of Dink’s murder.

Moreover, the attorneys noted that a number of officials weren’t involved in the investigation at all.

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: dink, ECHR, Officials, prosecution, Turkey, Turkish

ECHR ex-President completes work on bill criminalizing Armenian Genocide denial in France

May 4, 2016 By administrator

defaultE-CHRFormer President of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) Jean-Paul Costa has completed the work on drawing out the bill criminalizing the Armenian Genocide denial in France, co-chairman of the Coordination Council of Armenian Organizations of France (CCAF), Murad Papazian, told Armenian News – NEWS.am.

“Now we are already holding working consultations. By the end of the expert work, it will become clear whether we will be able to introduce this bill in the parliament or not. We must be sure that this bill will have a constitutional power,” Papazian noted, stressing that they will complete this stage by the end of May.

French President François Hollande earlier raised the issue on adopting a law criminalizing the Armenian Genocide denial.

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: armenian genocide, Bill, completes, criminalizing, ECHR, ex-President

ECHR fines Turkey for violating Alevis’ right to religious freedom

April 26, 2016 By administrator

alv.thumbThe European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled Turkey must pay 3,000 euros each to 203 applicants in a case concerning Turkish authorities’ “refusal to provide the applicants, who are followers of the Alevi faith, with [a] public religious service,” the Hurriyet Daily News reports.  

In its decision, the court stated that Turkey had violated the applicants’ rights to freedom of religion and the prohibition of discrimination.

In its April 26 ruling, the court said the authorities’ “refusal of the applicants’ requests amounted to a lack of recognition of the religious nature of the Alevi faith and its practices (cem).” The ruling also elaborated that Turkey’s lack to recognize their religious practice had the “effect of denying legal protection to Alevi places of worship [cemevis] and religious leaders [dedes],” thus causing “numerous consequences for the organization, continuation and funding of their religious activities.”

 

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: alevis, ECHR, fines, freedom, religious, right, Turkey, violating

Artak Zeynalyan: Families of beheaded soldiers by Azerbaijan apply to ECHR

April 25, 2016 By administrator

f571e17d73f47b_571e17d73f4b8.thumbA group of lawyers and human rights defenders applied to the European Court for Human Rights (ECHR) against Azerbaijan on behalf of the families of soldiers killed and then beheaded on the night of April 1-2, 2016 during the military operations on the Line of Contact between Nagorno Karabakh and Azerbaijan, informs lawyer Artak Zeynalyan.

According to him, they applied to the ECHR to recognize violations against them through inhuman treatment, disrespect of the private lives of the victims, as well as national discrimination.

“On April 9 and 15, 2016, the ECHR registered the complaints and notified the representatives of the plaintiffs. In their own initiative, the ECHR labeled these complaints anonymous restricting public access to decisions and other documents within the framework of these proceedings. In these circumstances, the plaintiffs and their representatives cannot provide full public access on the information. Any violations of the rules of the proceedings is considered an abuse of rights and can lead to cancelation of examination by the Court.

Considering the above mentioned, we ask the journalists and others to refrain from questions on the cases to the families of the victims and their representatives, as well as publication of unverified information to avoid harming the proceedings. We ensure that the representatives of the plaintiffs will provide necessary information in good faith and in accordance with the rules of the Court,” says Zeynalyan in a statement.

 

Source Panorama.am

Filed Under: News Tagged With: Artak Zeynalyan, Azerbaijan, beheaded, ECHR, families, soldiers

ECHR focus tightens screw on Turkey’s military operations in southeast

January 8, 2016 By administrator

A woman covers her face as Turkish police use tear gas during clashes at the Sur district in Diyarbakır, on January 3, 2016. Tensions are running high throughout Turkey's restive southeast as security forces impose curfews in several towns including Cizre in a bid to root out outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) militants from urban centres. AFP Photo

A woman covers her face as Turkish police use tear gas during clashes at the Sur district in Diyarbakır, on January 3, 2016. Tensions are running high throughout Turkey’s restive southeast as security forces impose curfews in several towns including Cizre in a bid to root out outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) militants from urban centres. AFP Photo

ANKARA

Amid focus from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in ongoing violence in Turkey’s southeast, military operations against the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in densely populated urban zones are coming under increasing scrutiny.

Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu chaired two consecutive meetings of his ruling Justice and Development Party’s (AKP) high decision-making body on Jan. 5 and Jan. 6 with briefings on ongoing operations given by related executives.

Legal action has been taken against 18 mayors and 48 municipals council members from the Kurdish problem-focused Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) as clashes continue, with some MYK members demanding swifter action against HDP municipalities that the government says have been lending logistical support to the PKK.

“We are going over the situation carefully in order not to lead to a disadvantaged situation for Turkey if these practices are taken to the Constitutional Court and the ECHR,” Davutoğlu was quoted by sources as saying in the meetings.

AKP executives were also told in the meeting that security operations were planned to be completed by the end of January at latest.

At a late December meeting, AKP executives discussed ongoing curfews in a number of southeastern towns during operations. Although curfews are purportedly designed to avoid harming civilians, officials also said disturbing images of human rights abuses by police during operations should be avoided and the support of locals against the PKK should be put to good use.

Also in late December, the HDP applied to the ECHR after Turkey’s Constitutional Court rejected an appeal by HDP Deputy Co-Chair Meral Danış Beştaş against the ongoing declaration of curfews in the country’s eastern and southeastern regions.

The ECHR subsequently asked Ankara to submit a defense statement over the ongoing curfew in the southeastern city of Cizre by Jan. 8.

Meanwhile, daily Cumhuriyet reported on Jan. 8 that Prime Minister Davutoğlu is “eager to return to resolution table.” A fragile peace process and two-and-a-half-year de facto ceasefire collapsed in the summer of 2015.

The report cited a Jan. 6 meeting between Davutoğlu and “a group of intellectuals calling for peace,” referring to observations of the meeting participants who wished to remain anonymous.

“Both the ruling party and [President Recep Tayyip] Erdoğan are aware that the current situation is not sustainable,” one participant told Cumhuriyet when asked whether a return to the table would be possible.

Erdoğan recently claimed that Turkey “no longer has Kurdish problem, only a terrorism problem.”

When asked who would sit around the prospective table as a counterpart, the same participant responded it would likely be “Kurdish circles who are close to the AKP.”

The group – composed of Oya Baydar, Baskın Oran, Ayşe Erzan, Nesrin Nas, Raci Bilici, Selim Ölçer, Nurcan Baysal, Gülseren Onanç, Ahmet Faruk Ünsal, Tarık Çelenk, Ali Bayramoğlu, Kezban Hatemi and Mebuse Tekay – also held meetings with leaders of the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the HDP on the same day.

Davutoğlu is willing to take further steps that involve the HDP, but Erdoğan and certain hardline figures in the government favor the continuation of security-based policies, Cumhuriyet also reported.

Reminded of calls for the parliamentary immunity of the two HDP co-chairs to be lifted, the source suggested that those calls will likely “remain politically delivered remarks.”

“In particular, Deputy Prime Minister Numan Kurtulmuş has frequently underlined their willingness to resolve the matter at parliament and through dialogue,” Cumhuriyet quoted them as saying.

Source: hurriyetdailynews.com

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: ECHR, Kurd, tightens, Turkey

(ECHR) Euro Court fines Turkey 71,000 euros for citizen’s death in southeast

October 27, 2015 By administrator

AFP Photo

AFP Photo

STRASBOURG

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has fined Turkey a total of 71,000 euros over the death of a citizen in the southeastern province of Diyarbakır in 2007 for violating his right to life and failing to conduct an effective and independent investigation.

In the Özpolat and Others vs. Turkey case, the ECHR has fined Turkey over the July 14, 2007 death of Mehmet Özpolat, also stating that the investigation into the alleged lack of prompt medical treatment for Özpolat was insufficient.

Özpolat died on July 14, 2007, the day after his brother İskender Özpolat had also died. Police officers had surrounded the Özpolat family home in Diyarbakır after receiving reports that someone inside had been injured by a firearm. Mehmet Özpolat then appeared on the roof with a weapon but was neutralized by police, after which the public prosecutor applied to have him taken into police custody.

Complaining of stomach pains, Mehmet Özpolat was taken to hospital, where he died of a cervical hemorrhage the following day.

His death followed that of his brother İskender Özpolat, who was killed by police after refusing to come out of his home during the raid the day before, even starting to fire shots at the officers.

The public prosecutor’s office later opened a preliminary investigation into allegations of unintentional homicide, abuse of power, and failure to ensure the prompt transfer of an injured person to hospital.

However, on June 24, 2009 the public prosecutor’s office issued an order to discontinue the proceedings, stating that the police officer who had fired the fatal shot at İskender Özpolat had acted in self-defense.

However, as a result of the ECHR ruling, Turkey will pay the applicants jointly 65,000 euros for non-pecuniary damages and 6,000 euros for costs and expenses.

October/27/2015

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: ECHR, Euro court, fine, Turkey

JUDGES ANGRY Dean Spelmann President of the Grand Chamber of the ECHR Perinçek disagree with the stop

October 16, 2015 By administrator

arton117504-480x360Spelmann joint dissenting opinion of Judges Casadevall, Berro, De Gaetano, Sicilianos Sivil and Kuris

1. We are not able to agree with the conclusion that in this case there has been a violation of Article 10 of the Convention.

2. We note at the outset that the Court has shown a certain timidity reaffirming the position of the chamber in the sense that it is not required to say whether the massacres and deportations suffered by the Armenian people at the hands of the Ottoman Empire can be qualified as genocide within the meaning assumed by the term in international law, but also that it has no jurisdiction to decide, one way or the other, a binding legal conclusion on this point (paragraph 102). The massacres and deportations suffered by the Armenian people were constitutive of genocide falls under “obvious”. The Armenian Genocide is a historical fact clearly établi.1 To deny is to deny the obvious. But that is not the issue. The case is not about historical truth, nor the legal qualification of the events of 1915. The real challenge of the case concerns the question whether it is possible for a State to criminalize the insult to the memory a people victim of a genocide without exceeding its discretion. We believe this is the case.

1. See for details, both on the facts and the intentional element of those who committed the crimes, Hans-Lukas Kieser and Donald Bloxham, in The Cambridge History of the First World War, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2015, Vol. I, “Global War”, Ch. 22 (Genocide), pp. 585-614.

3. In these conditions, we can not follow the approach of the majority as to the assessment of what the applicant (I). The same applies to the assessment of the impact of geographical and historical factors (II), the implications of the time factor (III) and the lack of consensus (IV) of the lack of an obligation to criminalize (V), as well as the weighing performed by the national authorities (VI).

The assessment of the applicant’s comments

4. Our disagreement mainly concerns how the majority has understood the complainant’s statements (paragraphs 229-241). This speech, especially pernicious, and its consequences have been minimized throughout the stop. Although they do not necessarily form a discourse falling under Article 17 of the Convention – although for some of us this is indeed the case – the impugned constitute, in our view, a distortion of historical events that goes far beyond a simple denial of the Armenian genocide as a legal qualification. They contain the animus to insult people. Ils’agit a real diversion aimed Armenians as a group, trying to justify the actions of the Ottoman authorities by presenting almost as defensive and is of racist denigrating the memory of the victims, as has been judged rightly by the Federal Court. To the extent that it attempts to discredit the “evidence”, the speech in question – also confirmed by the applicant at the hearing very clearly – can even be considered a call if not hatred and violence, at least in intolerance against Armenians. Far from being liable to the historical, legal and political, it presents the Armenians as aggressors of the Turkish people. He calls “international lie” using the term “genocide” to describe the atrocities against Armenians. The applicant claims, moreover, Talaat Pasha, one of the events of the protagonists, presented at the hearing as a “Friend of the Armenians” (sic). This is in excess of place, in our view, which could be acceptable under Article 10 of the Convention.

5. Thus, the case concerns simply the limits of freedom of expression. By applying the sequential reading grid of Article 10 of the Convention, we have no difficulty concluding that the interference and the legality of it. The police court in Lausanne, in its decision of 9 March 2007, held that the applicant had denied the Armenian Genocide, justifying the massacres. The Federal Court, in its judgment of 12 December 2007, has length on the mental element of the offense (mobile racial discrimination, 5.1 and 5.2) arriving at the conclusion that the findings of fact “démontr [ed] the existence of sufficient motives in addition to nationalism, not p [ouvaie] be noted that the racial, ethnic, respectively. “ The applicant was prosecuted for violating Article 261 bis of the Penal Code, which does not, as such, no problem about its content and its legitimacy in the light of the values ​​protected by the Convention. The courts have considered the facts and assessed the impugned. The applicant knew that taking these he exposed himself to the application of Article 261 bis of the code. This provision also pursues the legitimate aims of protecting the rights of others and prevention of disorder.

The impact of geographical and historical factors

6. Beyond this aspect, it seems to us that the methodology used by the majority, here and there, problematic. This applies in particular “geographic and historical factors,” further developed in paragraphs 242-248 of the judgment. Downplay about the applicant by attempting to confine geographically leads to seriously relativize universal and erga omnes of human rights, which is the quintessence of their contemporary meaning. Indeed, as has been strongly affirmed by the Institute of International Law, the obligation for States to ensure respect for human rights is an obligation erga omnes; “It is incumbent upon every State vis-à-vis the international community as a whole, and every State has a legal interest in the protection of human rights” (Resolution on “the protection of human rights and principle of non-intervention in internal affairs of states “, Yearbook of the Institute of International Law, 1989, vol. II, p. 341, Article 1). In the same vein, the Declaration and Programme of Action of the Vienna World Conference on Human Rights states that “the promotion and protection of all human rights are a legitimate concern of the international community “(UN official documents A / CONF / 123, para. 4, 1993). 7. It is obvious that this universalist approach contrasts with that of the majority in this judgment. If one wanted to draw all the logical consequences of the geographically restricted approach appears to be that of the majority, one would think that the denial of genocides in Europe committed in other continents, such as the Rwandan genocide or that perpetrated by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia would be protected by freedom of expression without limits or almost. It does not seem that such a view reflects the universal values ​​that are enshrined in the Convention.

The impact of the time factor

8. The emphasis on the time factor (paragraphs 249-254 of the judgment) seems to pose similar problems. Should we conclude that within 20 or 30 years, Holocaust denial itself would be acceptable under the freedom of expression? What about the compatibility of that factor with the principle of limitation for war crimes and crimes against humanity?

The lack of consensus

9. The lack of consensus on which is based the majority in paragraphs 258-268, could at most be seen also as a factor specific to widen the margin of appreciation of the Swiss authorities. At the risk of repeating ourselves, we believe that Parliament has every right to blame remarks like those uttered by the applicant. The issue of consensus as limit the discretion of national authorities would only arise in the event that there would be consensus on the explicit prohibition of such criminality. But this is not the case here.

The absence of an obligation to criminalize

10. As for the lack of an obligation for Switzerland to criminalize remarks in question (see paragraphs 258-268), we confess to have the greatest doubts about the relevance of the argument. Can we not say, instead, that a custom (regional) gradually emerges through the practice of States, the European Union (Framework Decision 2008/913 / JHA) and ECRI (Recommendation policy # 7)? Note also that beyond Europe, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has repeatedly recommended the criminalization of Holocaust denial discourse. Can we ignore these developments relate to a hand by standing on the ground of an alleged conflict of obligations? 11. Apart from these developments point in the opposite direction to that taken by the majority, it should be pointed out that the Supreme Court of the Canton of Vaud, in its decision of 13 June 2007, recalled that the particularity of the standard Swiss anti-racism was the fact that the national legislature had decided, acting is including genocide or other crimes against humanity, to go beyond the minimum requirements set by the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. In our opinion, a legislature has every right to blame remarks like those uttered by the applicant. The Swiss national legislature, following lengthy parliamentary debates, said that speeches such as those made by the applicant deserved to be. We believe that the need for the criminalization falls in a democratic society, in this case, the state’s margin of appreciation.

The balancing of the rights in question

12. Finally, concerning the balancing of the rights in question (see paragraphs 274-280 of the judgment), it seems that the Federal Court has done an excellent job, measured, detailed and motivated. He dedicated point 6 to freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 10 of the Convention by speaking as follows:

“(…) The applicant essentially seeks, by a provocative approach to obtain Swiss judicial authorities for confirmation of his theses to the detriment of members of the Armenian community, for whom this issue plays a central role identity. The conviction of the appellant thus tends to protect the human dignity of the members of the Armenian community, who recognize themselves in 1915. The memory of the genocide repression of genocide denial finally constitutes a genocide prevention measure within the meaning of art. I of the Genocide Convention concluded at New York December 9, 1948, approved by the Federal Assembly March 9, 2000) (…) “

13. Balancing, there was in this case. Therefore, the conclusion in paragraph 280 is not justified.

14. In a word, we are convinced that there has been no violation of Article 10 of the Convention in this case.

Filed Under: Articles, Genocide Tagged With: angry, ECHR, JUDGES

FRANCE The CCAF condemns Perinçek ECHR judgment and requires the criminalization of Holocaust denial law in France

October 16, 2015 By administrator

arton117492-480x250“The judgment delivered today by the ECHR constitutes a serious attack on the memory of victims of the 1915 genocide and the dignity of their descendants, present in particular in European countries. Everyone knows the deniers and clearly referred antiarméniennes Mr Perinçek and the framework in which it operates. That judges mésestiment malicious and hateful to Mr. Pericenk and injuries that denial because the Armenians, especially in the specific context of 2015, commemorating the centenary of the genocide, is simply unacceptable.

The position expressed by a narrow majority (10 against 7) ​​of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights, strongly criticized by the judges who dissented, is also inconsistent with that expressed by the overwhelming majority interveners’ third parties whose LICRA and FIDH.

The CFC strongly condemns this decision which disregards human dignity and reports of denial of justice.

However, it notes that this judgment, which sanctions the applicability of Swiss judges an uncontested legal standard in principle, marks an increase compared to that delivered in first instance, to the extent that it leaves the door open the criminalization of denial of the Armenian genocide. Implying that nothing prevents the adoption of a law to that effect by France, as it is particularly engaged the President of the Republic. The fight goes on.”

Friday, October 16, 2015,
Stéphane © armenews.com

Filed Under: Articles, Genocide Tagged With: CCAF, Condemns, ECHR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Next Page »

Support Gagrule.net

Subscribe Free News & Update

Search

GagruleLive with Harut Sassounian

Can activist run a Government?

Wally Sarkeesian Interview Onnik Dinkjian and son

https://youtu.be/BiI8_TJzHEM

Khachic Moradian

https://youtu.be/-NkIYpCAIII
https://youtu.be/9_Xi7FA3tGQ
https://youtu.be/Arg8gAhcIb0
https://youtu.be/zzh-WpjGltY





gagrulenet Twitter-Timeline

Tweets by @gagrulenet

Archives

Books

Recent Posts

  • “Nikol Pashinyan Joins the Ranks of 7 World Leaders Accused of Betrayal, Surrender, and Controversial Concessions”
  • The Myth of Authenticity: Why We’re All Just Playing a Role
  • From Revolution to Repression Pashinyan Has Reduced Armenians to ‘Toothless, Barking Dogs’
  • Armenia: Letter from the leader of the Sacred Struggle, political prisoner Bagrat Archbishop Galstanyan
  • U.S. Judge Dismisses $500 Million Lawsuit By Azeri Lawyer Against ANCA & 29 Others

Recent Comments

  • administrator on Turkish Agent Pashinyan will not attend the meeting of the CIS Council of Heads of State
  • David on Turkish Agent Pashinyan will not attend the meeting of the CIS Council of Heads of State
  • Ara Arakelian on A democratic nation has been allowed to die – the UN has failed once more “Nagorno-Karabakh”
  • DV on A democratic nation has been allowed to die – the UN has failed once more “Nagorno-Karabakh”
  • Tavo on I’d call on the people of Syunik to arm themselves, and defend your country – Vazgen Manukyan

Copyright © 2025 · News Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in