Security and Duty of Protection

Süheyla Aydın v Turkey, 24 May 2005 [ECtHR]

Case no 25660/94

161.  The Court has already established that the Government have failed to account for the death of Necati Aydın (see paragraph 154 above) who was last seen alive in the hands of State agents and subsequently met with a violent death. It follows that there has been a violation of Article 2 of the Convention in respect of the killing of Necati Aydın. (...)

185.  In the light of the very serious shortcomings identified in its above-mentioned examination, the Court concludes that the domestic authorities failed to carry out any meaningful investigation, let alone an adequate and effective one, into the killing of the applicant’s husband as required by Article 2 of the Convention.

186.  The Court finds, therefore, that there has been a violation of Article 2 of the Convention under its procedural limb.


200.  The applicant submitted that her husband was killed on account of his trade union activities. Both she and her husband had been tried and acquitted for offences relating to membership of the PKK. Following their acquittal the authorities had then tried to have the two of them transferred out of the region. These transfers disrupted the work of Necati as leader of the Health Trade Union.

201.  The applicant argued that, where a person falls into a category of people who are at risk from unlawful violence from State officials on account of trade union activities, the issues under Article 2 and Article 11 need to be considered separately. She asked the Court to find a violation of Article 11 of the Convention ...

202.  The Government submitted that the trade union activities in which the applicant and her husband were involved were of no interest to the authorities and that they were only investigated in relation to their alleged links with the PKK.

203.  The Court notes that these complaints arise out of the same facts as those considered under Article 2. In the light of its conclusions with respect to Article 2 (see paragraphs 161 and 186 above), the Court does not consider it necessary to examine these complaints separately. 

Submit Information



Enter Keyword

Select one or several topic(s)



Criticism Physical attacks Pressure by private bodies Surveillance