I incorrectly predicted that there's no violation of human rights in BAYRAM v. TURKEY.

Information

  • Judgment date: 2023-01-17
  • Communication date: 2017-09-26
  • Application number(s): 54611/11
  • Country:   TUR
  • Relevant ECHR article(s): 10, 10-1, 11, 11-1
  • Conclusion:
    Violation of Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association (Article 11-1 - Freedom of peaceful assembly) read in the light of Article 10 - (Art. 10) Freedom of expression-{general} (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression)
  • Result: Violation
    • SEE FINAL JUDGMENT

JURI Prediction

  • Probability: 0.5
  • Prediction: No violation

  • Inconsistent


Legend

 In line with the court's judgment
 In opposition to the court's judgment
Darker color: higher probability
: In line with the court's judgment  
: In opposition to the court's judgment

Communication text used for prediction

The applicant is a Turkish national who was born in 1986 and lives in Istanbul.
The application concerns the criminal proceedings brought against the applicant with the charge of aiding and abetting the PKK, an illegal armed organisation, under Article 169 of the former Criminal Code, and obstructing the functioning of a public service under Article 113 of the Criminal Code.
On 18 November 2003 a group of twenty-two demonstrators, including the applicant, occupied a corridor at the Istanbul courthouse in 2003 in order to protest against the conditions of detention of the leader of PKK and chanted slogans.
Subsequently, the applicant was remanded in custody and criminal proceedings were brought against him.
On 30 June 20102 he was convicted by the first-instance court under Article 169 of the former Criminal Code and Article 113 of the Criminal Code.
On 2 April 2012 the Court of Cassation decided that the proceedings were time-barred in so far as they concerned the charge under Article 169 of the former Criminal Code and upheld the applicant’s conviction under Article 113 of the Criminal Code.
The applicant relies on Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention.
QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression, contrary to Article 10 of the Convention, or his right to freedom of assembly, contrary to Article 11 of the Convention, on account of the criminal proceedings brought against him with the charge of aiding and abetting the PKK and his conviction for obstructing the functioning of a public service?

Judgment