english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Accueil arrow newsitems arrow ECHR: Time Deadlines may Violate Human Rights by not examining particular circumstances

ECHR: Time Deadlines may Violate Human Rights by not examining particular circumstances

Ecrit par ACM
Tuesday, 30 October 2018
echr__horizon_sunset_eurofora_400_01

*Strasbourg/Angelo Marcopolo/- Forcing strict and absolute Time Deadlines may Violate Human Rights, if it doesn't take into account the Particular Circumstances of each affair, where the cause of a Delay could be a very Serious Issue, judged, in substance, ECHR in a Ruling published Today, on a case which might be linked even with possible, Long-Time Attempts to Steal Oil from NATO's installations in Turkey, (See Facts Infra : "Kursun").


-----------------


The Applicant was an Owner of a Property used as Industrial Park, located near to a Private Oil Refinery ("Tupras"), as well as to some Oil Storage and Supply facilities, run by the Ministry of Defence, for the Turkish NATO Pipeline system ("ANT").


A Big Explosion (equivalent to an Earthquake with Magnitude of 9 on Richter scale !) at those Neighbouring Areas, and ensuing Fire, Killed 2 Persons and Injured Many others, while also Damaging nearby Properties.


Several Commissions were established in order to determine the Cause of that Explosion, and the Damage caused by it.


Contrary to Initial estimations pointing at the Private Refinery, subsequent analysis found that the Cause was related to the NATO Pipeline system in Turkey, because of a large and long Leakage, mainly of Oil, (given the Fact that Both the precise Product leaked ["Gasoline"], and its Location in the UnderGround, etc., concerned the "ANT" system of Turkish NATO Pipelines, under which, a very Old Leak appeared Continuing during Decades, in a Network established since 1960/1970+)...


Curiously, such a "Ping-Pong" on the Question : -"Who was Responsible ?", persisted also longer in Turkey, and, moreover, a Decision to "Clean" up that Dangerous Leak, wasN't implemented, not even 12 Years After that Deadly Explosion (2005-2017) !


>>> Later-on, a Team of Experts reportedly Found that Leaks might result from "Breaches" of Pipelines or other equipments "by Malicious individuals, for the purpose of Theft" (sic). Indeed, that Leak "involved a Highly Valuable Economic Commodity"...


=> Therefore, Turkish "Institutions" could "Not be expected to UnCover such Incidents, by their own efforts alone", and it's "highly ImProbable that Institutions would Not take Any Action to Stop such a Leak", ECHR noted.


* In other words, to put it in a nutshell, Thieves may have been Stealing NATO's Oil, under its installations in Turkey, during Decades, with Complicities from Turkish Authorities !


Perhaps that's a reason for which, Turkey's Cour de Cassation, curiously Claimed, afterwads, in this affair, that "it was Not Necessary to have the TortFeasor established with Certainty", but, on the Contrary, "a Guess" on his "Identity", within the bounds of a "Possibility", was "Sufficient to Bring an Action" via the Prosecutor, (etc), so that a Proprietor's  Application, which aWaited for such matters to be Clarified, should be Rejected as Out of Time, ECHR's Judgement points out.


Indeed, that private Owner prefered to Wait until such thorny Matters (as Cause and Damages : Comp. Supra) are further Clarified, with the Result, for his Application, to Delay More than a Year of "Time Limit" in such  cases. Thereby, it gave a Legal Pretext, for Turkish Courts, to Reject it...


>>> But, on the Contrary, ECHR's Judgement, published Today, points at the Need of an "Exact and Certain Information" about the "Identity of the TortFeasor", and Not "mere Suspicions and Guesses", in order to "Trigger" the Time-Limit for an Application to the Courts.


- In this regard, "the Applicant Complained that he had been Denied a Fair Trial, on account of the Dismissal of his Compensation Claim, as being Out of Time", ECHR observed. Indeed, "although Time-Limits are in principle legitimate procedural limitations on access to a court, their interpretation in Disregard of relevant Practical Circumstances, may result in Violations" of Human Rights, ECHR confirmed.

F.ex., in this case, "having regard to the nature of the Explosion, the Uncertainty of the Cause of the damage, the Complexity of the matter, as well as the Various Reports on the issue, the Court finds it Difficult to follow" the Turkish Courts, which "required" from the Applicant "to Institute Proceedings at a Moment when he could Not, realistically, have Sufficient Knowledge of the Cause of the Damage, or the Identity of those Responsible" ; I.e. something "very Formalistic", bearing in mind "particularly the possible Practical and Financial Implications, of such a Requirement, for the applicant".


>>> "Furthermore, the Court notes that the Appliqant Raised pertinent Questions, that Called for a Response", the Judgement stresses. (F.ex. about the still Remaining Risk for even More Explosions, since that Leakage had Not yet been Cleaned up : Comp. Supra ; and on the Identity of those Responsible for that Deadly Explosion, etc). Indeed, "his Attempts to Clarify those Important Matters, ...went to the very Core of his Right of Access to Court", and, in Consequence, "canNot be used Against him, in assessing ... the Time-LImit", ECHR found.


=> Thus, EuroJudges concluded that "there has been a Violation of the Applicant's Right of Access to a Court, under article 6§1 of the (PanEuropean) Convention (on Human Rights)", and awarded to the Victim 2.500 € for Non-Pecunuary Damage, as well as 3.000 € for the Costs, wityOut "Speculating" about "the Outcome of Proceedings", at the National Courts, "as regards Pecuniary Damage", in addition.  


In this regard, ECHR noted, indeed, the "Deprivation of Rental Income", the "Reduced Value of Property", and the "Risk of Further Explosions", since "necessary steps had Not yet been taken to clean the Oil Leak", as the applicant had Denounced, (Comp. Supra).

 

(../..)


------------------------------------
EUHorizonSMEtool

Statistics

Visiteurrs: 30140897

Archive

Login Form





Se souvenir de moi

Perdu votre mot de passe?
Pas encore de compte? Enregistrez-vous

Syndicate

RSS 0.91
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0
ATOM 0.3
OPML

Other Menu

swed_eu_400

    The incoming Swedish EU Presidency (July-December 2009) may still remain in favour of Turkey's controversial EU bid, despite June 2009 EU Elections' results, but it has "very strong demands on Turkey"'s obligation to respect EU Rules, said the Head of Swedish Foreign Ministry's Press Service, Cecilia Julin, to "EuroFora", reacting to critical Press reports.

    - "I know (that) the link is often made also to Sweden's position on Turkey"'s controversial EU bid. Indeed, "we (Swedish EU Presidency) are very much engaged in the future membership of Turkey, but not without fullfiling all the Criteria".

    - "It's very clear that we (Swedish EU Presidecny) have very Strong Demands on Turkey, in a sort of concept for Future membership of the Union, ...which will be a Long Process...", she stressed.

    This means, in particular, "the Copenhagen Criteria (on Human Rights, Democracy and Rule of Law), and also the adaptation to the Acquis of the European Union".

     - "If you listen to what Mr. Bildt (the Swedish Foreign Minister) says on Turkey at different occasions, it's very clear : We want Turkey to become part of the Union, in the Future. But we want it to fullfil all the Criteria : The Acquis of the European Union. That's very clear", she concluded.

    The Senior Official of the Swedish Foreign Ministry was reacting to critical Press Reports, from Brussels' Journalists invited by EU Commission's secretariat to Stockholm, who claimed that Bildt was abusing of a ..."Whip" (sic !) against Cyprus, by "threatening" the presence of UNO's Peace-keeping force at the "Green line" which separates the island's Government-controlled areas from the territories occupied by Ankara's army, if Nicosia didn't accept any political solution, regardless of Turkey's demands, before the end of 2009.

        Governing AKEL Party's new Secretary General, Andros Kyprianou, reacted by declaring that no-one can threat the People of Cyprus : -"We shall decide for our Future, and nobody else",  he reportedly said, asking to "keep calm". "In order to find a Solution soon, certain basic Principles must be respected", he stressed, calling those who feel an urgency to use their influence on Turkey. Other Political Parties were more critical.

    This was a reference to recently reported statements by Turkish Minister Bagis, Prime Minister Tayip Erdogan and Turkey's National Security Council (a Military-Political body), accused to push towards a partitionist "2 States" solution, contrary to UNO SC Resolutions for Cyprus' reunification.

    December 2009 is a crucial moment for EU's appraisal of Turkey's controversial EU bid, because EU Council has decided to review then Ankara's compliance with the European position on the recognition of Cyprus' Government, which was clearly set out by an EU reply of 21 September 2005 to Turkish Prime Minister Tayip Erdogan's claims, refusing to recognize even the existence of EU Member Cyprus, in controversial statements he made to London (former EU chair) on July 29, 2005.

    EU Parliament's latest Resolution on Turkey, adopted on March 2009 in Strasbourg, warned Ankara that "the non-fulfillment of Turkey's commitments... by December 2009, may further seriously affect the process of Negotiations" with the EU.

    In practice, the issue boils down to Ankara's "embargo" against Ships and Airplanes using Cyprus' seaports or airports at the strategic EU island, which traditionaly hosts one of the World's biggest Shipping flags. EU has already "freezed" 6 relevant Chapters in EU - Turkey Negotiations since December 2006, after Ankara refused to fullfil a commitment it had undertaken when EU had decided to open controversial "accession" negotiations with Turkey, back on December 2005.

    - "As far as EU - Turkey relations are concerned, it's clear that Turkey needs to fullfil its obligation of full, non-discriminatory implementation of the additional Protocol (to "EC-Turkey Association Agreement"),  This is an important issue....and should be addresseed as soon as possible as it clearly affects the pace of the accession negotiations.Issues covered by the Declaration of September 2005 will continue to be followed up, and progress is urgently awaited", warned earlier in Strasbourg the out-going Czech EU Presidency (former vice-Prime Minister Alexander Vodra).

    But the Head of the Swedish Foreign Ministry's Press Service, Cecilia Julin, dismissed "interpretations" by "some" that Foreign Minister Carl Bildt was reportedly "threatening" Cyprus with consequences on the UNFICYP, if it doesn't accept any solution until December 2009, while Turkey is reportedly delaying in an attempt to impose a partitionist "2 States" solution.

    On the contrary, Julin, stressed that "Sweden has strong demands on Turkey'"s respect of "Copenhagen Criteria and EU Acquis".

    Meanwhile, Sweden  is "concerned" about the risk of "Stalemate" in Cyprus' Talks, but is well aware that "the main responsibilities lie with the two leaders and the UNO", Europe playing only a role of "facilitator".

    After carefully verifying, the Head of Swedish Foreign Ministry's Press Service, stressed to "EuroFora" that Bildt's reference to UNFICYP "was not linked to a Threat", and dismissed those who "interpreted" it so.

    On the contrary, the Swedish EU Presidency acknowledged the fact that Peace Talks are mainly for the UN and the leaders of the Cypriot communities, EU's role being limited into that of a "facilitator".

    As for Turkey's reported attempts to impose a "2 States' solution", the Head of the Swedish Foreign Ministry's Press Service sharply replied by stressing that Turkey must respect the "EU Acquis" rules.

    In particular :

    - "Basically he (Bildt) underlined that it's the leaders of the two communities in Cyprus and the UN that have the main responsibilities for solving the problem", started to say the Swedish Senior Official to "EuroFora", referring to the above-mentioned "briefing".

    - "But the EU had a role in sort of pointing out the benefits and facilitating a little bit the outcome for the settlement of the whole Cyprus' issue", she added.

    - "And he did state the Fact, that the rest of the World (i.e. USA, etc) will, of course, look at the differend issues which are at the table, and the future of the UN Peace keeping force is part of what is at the table", she admitted.

    - "I understand that some have interpreted that as a Threat, by the Swedish Minister" "But", in reality, "it's a statement of a Fact, that, when we'll look at the differend issues, one of the issues on which we shall have to take a stand on, is the future of the UN Peace keeping force in Cyprus".

    Indeed, one of the questions usually raised for a Solution of Cyprus' issue is what International and/or European or other Guarantees, by a Peace-keeping force, might be needed afterwards, eventually for a transitory period.

    Questioned anew by "EuroFora" whether (according to critical Press Reports) this could be taken as a veiled warning that, if Cyprus didn't accept any Turkish demand for any solution whatever, it might be left alone to face Ankara's Military Invasion/Occupation, she denied :

    - "He (Bildt) didn't say it in that way"... "It was not linked to a threat, or anything like that", the Head of the Swedish Foreign Ministry's Press Service stressed.

    On the contrary, "he (Bildt) underlined that the main responsibility lies with the parties concerned on the island". "The EU can try to facilitate and show the benefits of reaching a settlement. But also, when the EU and the rest of the World (i.e. USA) will have to look at it, they will look at all the Facts on the table, and the presence of the UN Peace-keeping force is one".

    And "he (Bildt) didn't speak about that at all", she replied to "EuroFora" question on Turkey's reported attemps to impose, in one way of another, a partitionist "2 States solution".

    Asked whether Bildt's aim was to incite both parties to move forward efficiently, she agreed :

    - In fact, "the EU is really very concerned with the Stalemate in the situation. Yes !", the Head of Sweden's Foreign Ministry's Press Service anounced. That's why Bildt "was hoping for the two parties (i.e. for Turkey's also) to engage and break, a little-bit, the present stalemate, come to a solution of the issue" of Cyprus.

    But, replying  to a "EuroFora"s question on the risk, denounced by several politicians in case of strict Time Deadlines, for Turkey to provoke a stalemate and wait for the time to come to impose a partitionist "2 States' solution", she reacted by pointing at Turkey's obligation to respect "EU Acquis" :

    - "Turkey must fullfil the EU Acquis : That's clear !", the Swedish Senior Official stressed.

    More details are expected when Swedish Prime Minister Reinfeldt will debate his Programme with new MEPs at EU Parliament's plenary mid-July in Strasbourg, that he has visited already in 2008.

    Foreign Minister Carl Bildt became familiar with Strasbourg's CoE last year, when Sweden chaired the PanEuropean organization of Human Rights. As EU chairman-in-office, he will also chair the 27-member States strong EU Group inside the 47-member States strong CoE.

    Minister for EU affairs, Cecilia Malmstrom is well known at EU Parliament, where she has been an active MEP of the Liberal Group for many years, following also Press Freedom issues.

    Both have already made various statements at "EuroFora", on differend topical matters.

    ***

Polls

2009 EU Elections were won by Parties against Technocracy and Turkey's controversial EU bid, while the 1999-2004 Majority Abstention trend decelerated. What should be done in 2009-2014 ?

Résultats

SMF Recent Topics SA

Copyright (c) 2007-2009 EIW/SENAS - EuroFora.net. All rights reserved. ISSN 1969-6361.
Powered by Elxis - Open Source CMS.