By Article Archives

Condemnation of a politician because he did not assist the police in dispersing demonstrations! Violation of freedom of expression

Article 10
22/11/2020 10:25

JUDGMENT
Ιmrek v. Turkey 10.11.2020 (app. no. 45975/12)
Criminal conviction of a politician for participating in demonstrations and non-assistance of the police in the dissolution. Freedom of expression.

The applicant was convicted of propaganda in favor of a terrorist organization. The domestic courts based their conviction on his participation in two demonstrations and his lack of assistance to the police in dispersing the protesters. They considered that he did not have the appropriate reaction to the disputed actions of the protesters, that he only had to warn them, that he had not asked the government commissioner to end the demonstration and had not provided the necessary assistance to him and the police for this purpose.

Refusing to respond to a candidate’s request whether playing a Kurdish song in his election campaign was an offense did not limit or affect the effectiveness of his voting rights

1st P - Article 3
21/11/2020 17:20

JUDGMENT
Ahmet Yavuz Yılmaz v. Turkey 10.11.2020 (app. no. 48593/07)
Right to be elected. Possibility to play a Kurdish song in the election campaign of a candidate for MP.
The applicant is a lawyer and run in the national elections. He applied to the Electoral Council of his district to clarify if he could play a Kurdish song in his election campaign and if it was illegal, because the election law provided that the election campaign could only take place in Turkish, the The Supreme Court had ruled that the reproduction of a Kurdish song was not illegal. The Council replied that it had no jurisdiction to respond.

The violent arrest of a lawyer-protester by police constituted degrading treatment. ECHR violations due to arrests and overnight detention of protesters

Article 11
20/11/2020 15:43

JUDGMENT
Navalnyy and Gunko v. Russia 10.11.2020 (app. no. 75186/12)
Two protesters were arrested in Bolotnaya Square in Russia in May 2012 during a political demonstration against the government. Their overnight detention in a police station and administrative conviction for violating legal police orders.
One of the protesters, Aleksey Navalnyy, a lawyer and political activist, claimed in his application before the ECtHR that a police officer had used excessive force during his arrest. Both protesters also claimed that their arrest and overnight detention was unjustified and arbitrary, that the administrative proceedings against them were unfair, that the dissolution of the demonstration, their arrest and subsequent conviction were disproportionate and that these violations of their rights were intended to undermine the freedom of assembly.

The Athens Court of Appeals did not take into account a affidavit that had not been submitted in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure. Non-violation of access to court as its content emerged from the testimony of a witness at the hearing precedures

Article 6 - Par. 1
19/11/2020 15:23

The applicants in this case considered that the refusal by the court of appeal and the Court of
Cassation to take account of evidence which they considered as decisive for the outcome of the case
had been excessively formalistic. Those courts had considered that the documents in question had
not been presented to the court of appeal in accordance with the requirements of Article 240 of the
Greek Code of Civil Procedure.

The non-legislative provision for awarding damages for non-pecuniary damage for illegal detention violated the right of redress under Article 5 par. 5 of the ECHR

Article 5
18/11/2020 13:34

Lack of legislation for compensation for non-pecuniary damage due to illegal detention. Right of redress.

The applicant was sentenced to 3 years in prison for drug possession, which he served normally. The appellate court overturned the conviction and ruled that his detention was illegal.

The deportation of a homosexual to Gambia without assessing the dangers he faced because of his sexual orientation in that country constitutes degrading treatment

Article 3
17/11/2020 15:22

JUDGMENT
B. and C. v. Switzerland 17.11.2020 (app. no. 43987/16 and 889/19)
Same-sex couple. One of the two partners was in danger of returning to Gambia after his partner’s application was rejected by the Swiss authorities for family reunification. He claimed that he was in danger of being mistreated if he returned.

Corporal examinations of a detainee in the anus constitute degrading treatment. Violation of Article 13 for non-provision of legal aid for filing a claim for damages

Article 13
16/11/2020 10:45

JUDGMENT
Roth v. Germany 22.10.2020 (app. no. 6780/18 and 30776/18)
Humiliating treatment and the right to compensation. The applicant, being held in a detention center in Germany, was ill-treated during his detention. He underwent at least 12 physical searches in secret parts of his body after he was forced to undress in front of the police. The domestic courts considered the corporal searches to be offensive treatment, however, they considered the recognition of the insult to be sufficient as a justification and refused to provide legal assistance to bring an action for damages.

The temporary placement of a juvenile convicted of drug offences and theft in an open center to prevent him from committing new crimes did not violate his right to liberty and security

Article 5
14/11/2020 10:38

JUDGMENT
Reist v. Switzerland 27.10.2020 (app. no. 39246/15)
The case concerned a provisional protective measure ordered against the applicant by the
prosecutor for juvenile offenders, pending the delivery of a judgment replacing an initial measure of
personal assistance which had proved unsuccessful.

Prisoner anal reserch for drugs and its videotaping. Insufficient research. Humiliating treatment (procedural part) and violation of a fair trial

Article 3
13/11/2020 18:03

JUDGMENT
Bokhonko v. Georgia 22.10.2020 (app. no. 6739/11)
Degrading treatment of an inmate and effective investigation. The applicant was arrested for a drug offense. He filed a complaint for inhuman and degrading treatment, claiming that during his arrest he underwent a humiliating physical anal search and was videotaped by police. He also complained that the domestic courts based their decision on this evidence even though it was taken during ill-treatment.

The best interest of the child prevails over the right to communication with his mother’s ex-partner!

Article 8
12/11/2020 19:20

JUDGMENT
Honner v. France 12.11.2020 (app. no. 19511/16)
The case concerned the refusal to award contact rights to the applicant in respect of the child which
had been born to her former partner in Belgium using assisted reproductive techniques while the
two women were a couple, despite the fact that the applicant had raised the child during his early
years.

By Article