english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Home 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

Parašė ACM
Tuesday, October 30, 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

Lankytojai: 29232106

Archive

Login Form





Prisiminti mane

Pamiršote slaptažodį?
Nesate prisiregistravęs? Prisiregistruoti

Syndicate

RSS 0.91
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0
ATOM 0.3
OPML

Other Menu

 imag0076_400

Facing a 70% Abstention threat in 2009 Election, EU endorses EuroFora's idea for Citizens' debates on crucial EU decisions !

- Different views on "Europe's Future", should be debated among Citizens at June 2009 EU Elections, thanks to political Parties' "Manifestos", says EU Parliament's Report


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
A main idea, initiated and promoted by EuroFora's founders since 1997: the vital need to develop European Citizens' democratic right to actively participate in multilingual debates on EU decisions, is formally endorsed by the EU from 2009 !

The move is a key attempt to overcome "catastrophic" Polls which warn that only ...30% of Citizens are ready to vote in the forthcoming June 2009 EU Election !  This was revealed by EU Commission's vice-president, in charge of Communication policy, Margot Wallstrom, during a "hot" meeting of EU Parliament's Committee on Culture and Education, during the December 2008 Strasbourg session.

Wallstrom faced criticism, but also suggestions from various MEPs, naturally worried by Abstention threats which herself found even "worse" than in 1999 or 2004...

A Report on "Active Dialogue with Citizens",examined at the same time, presented some useful practical tips, on "facilitating Interviews"; etc., but also a  potentialy important call to "incorporate the conclusions of ...debates...into (EU) policies, and take into consideration the expectations that Citizens have of the EU when deciding". An amendment even implies that Citizens' participation in debates on EU decisions is a democratic "Right".

More importantly, it finds that  a Debate "on the Future of Europe", (as French President Nicolas Sarkozy has asked since 2007), would be a good idea " for the 2009 European parliamentary Elections", because "clarifying the political differences between the EU political parties would help citizens to identify themselves with, and choose between various concepts", for which "all parties (should) present their Manifesto".

A "Joint political declaration on Communicating Europe in Partnership", co-signed by "the European Parliament, Council and ... Commission", confirms that they "attach the utmost importance to improving communication on EU issues", by "enabling European citizens to exercise their right to participate in the democratic life of the Union, in which decisions are taken as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizens, observing the principles of pluralism, participation, openness and transparency".

This should "enable Citizens to exercise their right to express their views and to participate actively in the public Debate on European Union issues", while also "promoting the respect of multilingualism". In this regard, EU confirms its "wish to develop synergies with national, regional and local authorities as well as with representatives of Civil Society".

    It's since 1997 that a group of EuroFora's founders have officially presented a pioneer Project (then called "EIW", for "Europe in the World"), which aimed to develop Strasbourg's "Polyphonic music", by providing "Interactive information", on "main issues ... during the Decision-making process of European Organizations which engage in Transparent and Public Democratic Debates"

    This should be done, inter alia, by "exploring the potential of New Communication Tools (mainly Internet)", as well as classic-form debates, the 1997 EIW pioneer project's anounced in its "Synopsis". It was formally "accepted for evaluation" by EU Commission in Brussels in order to be examined for a grant in the framework of the "Research/Technology/Development (RTD) Programme in the field of Information Technologies", then called "ESPRIT", as a "Best Practice Pilot Project".

eiw_project_eu_program_esprit_ds_1997.._400

        But the vital, urgent Political need for EU to search new, efficient ways to reach the People and interact with European Citizens, was really felt in Brussels and elsewhere only after the unprecedented in History 1999 and 2004 Majority Abstention in EU Elections, followed by 3 "NO" in Referenda in France, the Netherlands and Ireland, on 2005 and 2008...
    In this New Political Landscape, we prepared a new, actualised and more developed version of our initial idea, in a simplified and more efficient form, thanks also to a large Experience accumulated during many years of EU/CoE/UNO Press work and Multi-lingual debates, with the New project "EuroFora" :

    On 2006 we presented in Public its main lines during Questions/Replies that we raised at two Press Conferences by EU Commission President, Jose Baroso, and mainly EU Commission's vice-President, in charge of Communication policy, Margot Wallstrom, together with EU Parliament's vice-president, Alejo Vidal-Quadras, in Strasbourg, (Videos available), and we reminded it at various brief contacts with Commissioner Wallstrom in 2007 and 2008.

    Meanwhile, a new Text was also presented for "EuroFora" Project mainly to certain Political and other personalities, at European, National or Regional/Local level, mainly in 2007, but also in 2008..

    Now, after the unexpected 2008 Irish "NO", and before the 2009 EU Elections, which are due to be of exceptionally crucial importance for Europe's Future, the moment has obviously come to launch that project, progressively, but in real practice.

    Whoever really cares for Europe and its Citizens is welcome to join, in one way or another. Only anti-European, anti-democratic, obscure or ignorant groups might oppose or attempt to "steal" and deviate the main idea.

    But European Citizens, incited by enlightened political leaders, are those who will finally write the real History.

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 ?

Rezultatai

SMF Recent Topics SA

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