Events
Applicant, including a group of around 250 people to Ankara intercity terminal operator’s (AŞTI) come together and negotiations over collective bargaining to be made on Sunday-about a kilometer away is located the Ministry of labour and Social Security (molss) to the building of a delegation of the Confederation to be involved in the discussions, along with a press statement in front of the building and walk to collectively wanted to make. Law enforcement officers warned the group to disperse because the meeting and walking route was not within the areas allowed by the Governor’s Office and the group closed the entire road to vehicle traffic, and set up barricades to prevent the march. Despite the warnings, the group was interfered with by the law enforcement authorities due to the fact that the group, which did not disperse despite the warnings, was loaded with police shields to walk, and the applicant was detained.
The applicant itself which interfere with law enforcement, with supervisors who are responsible for the Ankara Provincial Police Director, the minister of the interior and the governor of Ankara injury and abuse intentional about Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s office with a request for investigation of crimes (DA) was applied. The Prosecutor General’s Office decided to separate the investigation into the Minister and the Governor due to the fact that they are subject to different procedures, and against law enforcement officers and their supervisors, it decided that there is no room for prosecution. The appeal of the applicant to the aforementioned decision was firmly rejected by the magistrate’s office.
Count
The applicant claimed that his right to organize meetings and demonstration marches had been violated due to the fact that demonstration marches were not allowed in accordance with the decision taken by the trade union.
Evaluation Of The Court
The right to hold meetings and demonstration marches, is among the most fundamental values of a democratic society and individuals of common ideas together to announce it to the others and defend it aims to prevent the possibility of being able to come together. This right, which is used in a collective way and gives people who want to express their thoughts the opportunity to express their thoughts using methods that exclude violence, ensures the emergence, protection and dissemination of different thoughts that are mandatory for the development of pluralistic democracies. Accordingly, mandatory meetings and demonstration marches right intervention does not meet a social need, or if it is not mandatory to meet the needs of a society in accordance with the requirements of the Democratic social order commensurate with cannot be regarded as an intervention.
The organs that uses the power of public laws-notably the use of the right of the meeting, the degree will make it harder – solid interpreting legislation have not been fully met the prescribed procedures alone does not eliminate suggesting that the peaceful nature of the meeting or demonstration. The existence of this situation cannot justify the violation of the right to assembly. It is the dec of pluralistic democracy for the state to show patience and tolerance for non-violent and non-violent behavior that does not pose a danger to public order when using the right of people who have come together for peaceful purposes to meet.
In the concrete case, the group, including the applicant, wanted to make a demonstration walk of about a kilometer to the place where the collective bargaining agreement negotiations would be held. Participants walk the aforementioned economic and social status for the purpose of improving working conditions collectively to express ideas, at that time, to make calls to government officials in batch MLSs building has entered into for the purpose of being heard. In that case, it is necessary to accept that the implementation of the march subject to the application, especially on the date of the interviews, has a special importance for the participants. The meetings and demonstration marches planned to be held for the aforementioned purpose should be met with respect in a democratic society.
However, it has been determined that the walking route is not on one of the busiest streets in Ankara, but rather one of the many rather narrow alleys leading to the DECSGB building was chosen. No statement was made in the minutes regarding the image recording solution other than the information that the road was completely closed to traffic. Hence, the extent of the traffic aksattik the demonstrators during the meeting, the tool for the advancement of the absence of alternative routes, traffic, public order and the protection of the rights and freedoms of others are lagging while within the framework of the danger of harm or damage if faced with any difficult or impossible, requiring it to be tolerated due to the nature of the walk exceeds the acceptable limit as to whether any assessment has been made. Considering that the route planned for the walk is about a kilometer away and there are many alleyways in the same area, the traffic will only be disrupted for a short time if the walk is not dec.
In the concrete event, participants were allowed to make a press statement on the ground, provided that they did not walk en masse, did not carry banners and streamers, and left the meeting area individually. The right to organize meetings and demonstration marches is a right that is used in a collective way to jointly defend the common ideas of individuals and make them known to others. The importance of the collective exercise of the right mentioned in the incident subject to the application – from the point of view of economic and social rights – has also not been taken into account.
On the other hand, ceases to be evaluated when not entirely peaceful, and enjoy the rights of participants experiencing any violence demonstration of an undetermined as to ensure that no reasonable reason not to show more tolerance in the absence of administration was evaluated.
When the facts are taken into consideration and reflected reference is considered to be a peaceful demonstration in a public area to prevent should be distributed to participants, and intervention with the bulk of the applicants to be taken into custody shaped in this way deprived of the right to express their ideas and perform a demonstration to be left as they do not meet a social need for mandatory, therefore, the intervention has not been evaluated in accordance with the requirements of the Democratic social order.
The Constitutional Court has decided that the right to organize meetings and demonstration marches has been violated on the grounds described.
You can read our other articles and petition examples by clicking here