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

Learn More →

Öztürk v. Turkey

Öztürk v. Turkey 195 10 hrcd [ 1999 ] ÖZTÜRK v. TURKEY Freedom of expression – violation Article 10 There is little scope under Article 10, Section 2 of the Convention for restrictions on political speech or on debate on matters of public interest. Fact that author of book was acquitted of offense for which here publisher had been convicted and that the first edition of the book had been on open sale since 1991 and had not apparently aggravated the “separatist” threat in Turkey indicated a violation of the Convention. In a judgment delivered at Strasbourg on 28 September 1999 in the case of Öztürk v. Turkey , the European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (free- dom of expression) and that it was not necessary to examine a complaint under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property). Under Article 41 of the Con- vention (just satisfaction), the Court awarded the applicant 10 , 000 American dollars (USD) for pecuniary damage and 20 , 000 French francs (FRF) for costs and expenses. 1. Principal facts The applicant, Ünsal Öztürk, a Turkish national, http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Human Rights Case Digest Brill

Öztürk v. Turkey

Human Rights Case Digest , Volume 10 (7-9): 195 – Jan 1, 1999
Download PDF
6 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/zt-rk-v-turkey-M7OXyxQ5t8

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
© 1999 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0965-934X
eISSN
1571-8131
DOI
10.1163/157181399400838788
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

195 10 hrcd [ 1999 ] ÖZTÜRK v. TURKEY Freedom of expression – violation Article 10 There is little scope under Article 10, Section 2 of the Convention for restrictions on political speech or on debate on matters of public interest. Fact that author of book was acquitted of offense for which here publisher had been convicted and that the first edition of the book had been on open sale since 1991 and had not apparently aggravated the “separatist” threat in Turkey indicated a violation of the Convention. In a judgment delivered at Strasbourg on 28 September 1999 in the case of Öztürk v. Turkey , the European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (free- dom of expression) and that it was not necessary to examine a complaint under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property). Under Article 41 of the Con- vention (just satisfaction), the Court awarded the applicant 10 , 000 American dollars (USD) for pecuniary damage and 20 , 000 French francs (FRF) for costs and expenses. 1. Principal facts The applicant, Ünsal Öztürk, a Turkish national,

Journal

Human Rights Case Digest – Brill

Published: Jan 1, 1999

There are no references for this article.