Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Kart v. Turkey

Kart v. Turkey Right of access to a court ­ violation Article 6, Section 1 Inability of a parliamentarian to have his parliamentary immunity lifted to enable him to defend himself in criminal proceedings. In a judgment delivered on 8 July 2008 in the case of Kart v. Turkey, the European Court of Human Rights held by four votes to three that there had been a violation of Article 6, Section 1 (right of access to a court) of the European Convention on Human Rights. As the applicant had not submitted a claim under Article 41 (just satisfaction) of the Convention, the Court made no award on that account. This judgment is not final. The case was referred to the Grand Chamber, in accordance with Article 43 of the Convention, where a final judgment was delivered on 3 December 2009. 1. Principal facts The case concerned Mr Kart's complaint that he could not defend his name in criminal proceedings against him because, as a member of parliament (MP), he was subject to parliamentary immunity. In the parliamentary elections of 3 November 2002 he was elected to the Turkish National Assembly as a member of the People's Republican Party (CHP). Prior to http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Human Rights Case Digest Brill

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/kart-v-turkey-ntRKcWPaN3

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© Copyright 2008 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0965-934X
eISSN
1571-8131
DOI
10.1163/15718131-90000058
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Right of access to a court ­ violation Article 6, Section 1 Inability of a parliamentarian to have his parliamentary immunity lifted to enable him to defend himself in criminal proceedings. In a judgment delivered on 8 July 2008 in the case of Kart v. Turkey, the European Court of Human Rights held by four votes to three that there had been a violation of Article 6, Section 1 (right of access to a court) of the European Convention on Human Rights. As the applicant had not submitted a claim under Article 41 (just satisfaction) of the Convention, the Court made no award on that account. This judgment is not final. The case was referred to the Grand Chamber, in accordance with Article 43 of the Convention, where a final judgment was delivered on 3 December 2009. 1. Principal facts The case concerned Mr Kart's complaint that he could not defend his name in criminal proceedings against him because, as a member of parliament (MP), he was subject to parliamentary immunity. In the parliamentary elections of 3 November 2002 he was elected to the Turkish National Assembly as a member of the People's Republican Party (CHP). Prior to

Journal

Human Rights Case DigestBrill

Published: Oct 3, 2008

There are no references for this article.