CASE OF İZZETTİN DOĞAN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY
Hearing: Izzettin Dogan and Others v. Turkey (no. 62649/10)  (Grand Chamber hearing, 2015-06-03 00:00:00)
Application no.: 62649/10
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2016-04-26 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0426JUD006264910
Respondent state: TUR
Articles of the Convention: 9;9-1;9-2;14;14+9-1;41
Judges: András Sajó;André Potocki;Dean Spielmann;Guido Raimondi;Helen Keller;Johannes Silvis;Jon Fridrik Kjølbro;Josep Casadevall;Julia Laffranque;Ledi Bianku;Mark Villiger;Paul Lemmens;Robert Spano;Yonko Grozev
Represented by: SOFUOGLU N. ; SAVASIR I. ; TOPCU S. ; KARA F.; SUCUOGLU GONEN J. ; SAHBAZ I. ; AYDIN M.
Issue: Law no. 677 ; Section 1 of Law no. 633 ; Articles 2 and 24 of the Turkish Constitution
Strasbourg case-law cited: Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v. the United Kingdom, 28 May 1985, § 71, Series A no. 94;Arrowsmith v. the United Kingdom, no. 7050/75, Commission’s report of 12 October 1978, DR 19;Ásatrúarfélagid v. Iceland, no. 22897/08, 18 September 2012;Association Cultuelle du Temple Pyramide v. France, no. 50471/07, §§ 34 35, 31 January 2013;Association des Chevaliers du Lotus d’Or v. France, no. 50615/07, §§ 33 34, 31 January 2013;Association Les Témoins de Jéhovah v. France, no. 8916/05, § 53, 30 June 2011;Bayatyan v. Armenia [GC], no. 23459/03, ECHR 2011;Buscarini and Others v. San Marino [GC], no. 24645/94, § 34, ECHR 1999-I;Campbell and Cosans v. the United Kingdom, 25 February 1982, § 36, Series A no. 48;Carson and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 42184/05, § 61, ECHR 2010;Case “relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of languages in education in Belgium” (merits), 23 July 1968, p. 34, § 9, Series A no. 6;Cha’are Shalom Ve Tsedek v. France [GC], no. 27417/95, ECHR 2000 VII;Cumhuriyetçi Eğitim ve Kültür Merkezi Vakfi v. Turkey, no. 32093/10, 2 December 2014;D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic [GC], no. 57325/00, § 175, ECHR 2007 IV;Darby v. Sweden, 23 October 1990, § 45, Series A no. 187;Delfi AS v. Estonia [GC], no. 64569/09, § 120, ECHR 2015;Dogru v. France, no. 27058/05, § 72, 4 December 2008;E.B. v. France [GC], no. 43546/02, § 48, 22 January 2008;Eweida and Others v. the United Kingdom, nos. 48420/10, 59842/10, 51671/10 and 36516/10, ECHR 2013;Fernández Martínez v. Spain [GC], no. 56030/07, ECHR 2014 (extracts);Folgerø and Others v. Norway [GC], no. 15472/02, ECHR 2007 III;Gorzelik and Others v. Poland [GC], no. 44158/98, § 92, ECHR 2004 I;Hämäläinen v. Finland [GC], no. 37359/09, § 107, ECHR 2014;Hasan and Chaush v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 30985/96, ECHR 2000 XI;Hasan and Eylem Zengin v. Turkey, no. 1448/04, § 66, 9 October 2007;Kalaç v. Turkey, 1 July 1997, § 27, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997 IV;Kimlya and Others v. Russia, nos. 76836/01 and 32782/03, § 86, ECHR 2009;Kokkinakis v. Greece, 25 May 1993, Series A no. 260-A;Kurić and Others v. Slovenia [GC], no. 26828/06, §§ 388-389, ECHR 2012 (extracts);Leyla Şahin v. Turkey [GC], no. 44774/98, §§ 105-121, ECHR 2005-XI;Magyar Keresztény Mennonita Egyház and Others v. Hungary, nos. 70945/11, 23611/12, 26998/12, 41150/12, 41155/12, 41463/12, 41553/12, 54977/12 and 56581/12, § 108, ECHR 2014 (extracts);Maktouf and Damjanović v. Bosnia and Herzegovina [GC], nos. 2312/08 and 34179/08, § 94, ECHR 2013 (extracts);Manoussakis and Others v. Greece, 26 September 1996, Reports 1996 IV;Mansur Yalçın and Others v. Turkey, no. 21163/11, §§ 70-74, 16 September 2014;Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia and Others v. Moldova, no. 45701/99, ECHR 2001-XII;Miroļubovs and Others v. Latvia, no. 798/05, § 90, 15 September 2009;Moscow Branch of the Salvation Army v. Russia, no. 72881/01, ECHR 2006 XI;Mouvement raëlien suisse v. Switzerland [GC], no. 16354/06, § 50, ECHR 2012 (extracts);Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria [GC], nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98, § 145, ECHR 2005 VII;Perry v. Latvia, no. 30273/03, § 55, 8 November 2007;Pretty v. the United Kingdom, no. 2346/02, § 82, ECHR 2002 III;Religionsgemeinschaft der Zeugen Jehovas and Others v. Austria, no. 40825/98, 31 July 2008;S.A.S. v. France [GC], no. 43835/11, § 55, ECHR 2014 (extracts);Savez crkava “Riječ života” and Others v. Croatia, no. 7798/08, 9 December 2010;Serif v. Greece, no. 38178/97, § 53, ECHR 1999-IX;Sinan Işık v. Turkey, no. 21924/05, § 46, ECHR 2010;Sindicatul “Păstorul cel Bun” v. Romania [GC], no. 2330/09, §§ 136-138, ECHR 2013 (extracts);Stec and Others v. the United Kingdom (dec.) [GC], nos. 65731/01 and 65900/01, § 40, ECHR 2005-X;The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. the United Kingdom, no. 7552/09, § 34, 4 March 2014;Vallianatos and Others v. Greece [GC], nos. 29381/09 and 32684/09, ECHR 2013 (extracts);Valsamis v. Greece, 18 December 1996, § 27, Reports 1996 VI;X and Others v. Austria [GC], no. 19010/07, § 94, ECHR 2013;Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom, 13 August 1981, § 63, Series A no. 44;Ždanoka v. Latvia [GC], no. 58278/00, § 96, ECHR 2006 IV
External sources: “Joint Guidelines on the Legal Personality of Religious or Belief Communities”
Conclusion: Violation of Article 9 - Freedom of thought conscience and religion (Article 9-1 - Freedom of religion);Violation of Article 14+9-1 - Prohibition of discrimination (Article 14 - Discrimination) (Article 9-1 - Freedom of religion;Article 9 - Freedom of thought conscience and religion);Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Separate opinion: TRUE