DJAVIT AN v. TURKEY - 20652/92 [2003] ECHR 91 (20 February 2003)

DJAVIT AN v. TURKEY - 20652/92 [2003] ECHR 91 (20 February 2003)

Turkey is responsible under the Convention for acts of the 'TRNC' due to effective overall control. The repeated refusals to grant permits to the applicant to cross the 'green line' for bi-communal meetings constituted an interference with his right to freedom of peaceful assembly under Article 11. The restriction was not prescribed by law, as no legal basis was provided or foreseeable, resulting in a violation of Article 11. No effective domestic remedy existed, leading to a violation of Article 13.

Citation
[2003] ECHR 91
Parties
Applicant: Ahmet Djavit An; Respondent Government: Republic of Turkey
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
20 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Application to European Court of Human Rights / Final Judgment
Outcome
Violation found
Legal Topics
Freedom of Assembly, Freedom of Expression, Effective Remedies, Jurisdiction, Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies
Human Rights Law International Law Freedom of Assembly Freedom of Expression Effective Remedies Jurisdiction Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ahmet Djavit An

Applicant

Republic of Turkey

Respondent Government

Procedural Posture

Application to European Court of Human Rights / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Turkey is responsible under the Convention for acts of the 'TRNC' authorities
  2. 2 Whether refusal to grant permits to cross the 'green line' violated applicant's rights under Articles 10, 11, and 13
  3. 3 Whether effective domestic remedies existed for the applicant

Ratio Decidendi

Turkey is responsible under the Convention for acts of the 'TRNC' due to effective overall control. The repeated refusals to grant permits to the applicant to cross the 'green line' for bi-communal meetings constituted an interference with his right to freedom of peaceful assembly under Article 11. The restriction was not prescribed by law, as no legal basis was provided or foreseeable, resulting in a violation of Article 11. No effective domestic remedy existed, leading to a violation of Article 13.

Court Disposition

Violation found

Orders

  • Turkey held responsible for violation of Article 11 (freedom of assembly)
  • Turkey held responsible for violation of Article 13 (effective remedy)