Search icone
Search and publish your papers

Socialist Party of Turkey

Or download with : a doc exchange

About the author

General public

About the document

Published date
documents in English
case study
5 pages
General public
0 times
Validated by
0 Comment
Rate this document
  1. Socialist Party of Turkey
  2. The Strasbourg judgement
  3. ECHR

M.Levinet indicates that Shariah is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. His religious principles have a stable and invariable. But this is contrary to pluralism defended by the Convention. In effect, the Court defends a reading of principles constantly changing. In addition, statements containing explicit references to the Shari'a are contrary to democracy. Echoing the 72 of the previous case from 2001, judges recall that "it is difficult both to declare one's respect for democracy and human rights and to support a regime based on Sharia."

Moreover, this text is, on the other hand, contrary to the rules of criminal law and procedure, particularly with regard to respect for physical integrity (Article 3 ECHR). Upon the decision of the Plenary Court Soering against United Kingdom of 7 July 1989 ( 88), it is recalled that this right is "one of the fundamental values of democratic societies making up the Council of Europe." In addition, Tyer off against UK 25 April 1978 on blows to a person and Jabari off against Turkey of 11 July 2000 on stoning, or the D et al Adde off against Turkey 22 June 2006 on the lash, to mention only these examples reaffirm the rejection by the Court of inhuman treatment. These same inhuman treatment are authorized by the Shariah.

[...] It is part of the European public order. It is best to ensure he continues, "the religious supremacy of politics" from the moment the "religious" and a "political" tool becomes Trojan horse threatening the values principles common of the "House of Europe" and the European vision. " The Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe enshrines secularism as a European value. The principle of secularism in Turkey is a founding principle of the state. Thus, 104 specifies that "an attitude fails to respect that principle will not necessarily be accepted as part of freedom to manifest religion and would not benefit from the protection of Article 9 of the ECHR." Continuing the control in concreto, judges rely on the principle of equality and pluralism of convictions to control the formal elements such as the statutes and the official program to capture the real intensions of the party. [...]

[...] Accordingly, each State Party "may legitimately prevent the rules of private faith-based law affecting public order and values democracy" such as introducing the gender discrimination 128) are applied to its territory. The latter may take a position based on its historical experience against "political movements based on religious fundamentalism" 124). Yet such is the case of the species. The state has the duty to protect the guaranteed rights, it may impose on political parties' duty to respect and safeguard the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention "and" the obligation not to put forward a political program in contradiction with the fundamental principles of democracy 103). [...]

[...] are attributable to the whole party." This is the end of this analysis, the Court concludes that the model advocated is "incompatible with the concept of a democratic system." Is a necessary quality control and validity of the law, compliance of national law with the provisions of the Convention, the legitimate aim, necessity and proportionality of the measures charged to the State. The fact remains that the Court reviews "interference" of the potential beneficiary of freedom. A political party may, it seems, for his opinions and attitudes, be regarded as an "interference". Control of this interference is done in relation to the principle of secularism. [...]

[...] This is, concretely, a control "the quality and attitude of authority". Thus, "the freedoms guaranteed by Article 11 and by Articles 9 and 10 of the Convention does not deprive the authorities of a State in which an association, through its activities, jeopardizes the institutions, the right to protect them 96). This is a restrictive state interference as it is regulator of Rights and Freedoms because in its action, it is "neutral and impartial organizer of the exercise of various religions . [...]

Similar documents you may be interested in reading.

The issue of enlargement towards Turkey

 Politics & international   |  European union   |  Presentation   |  09/29/2010   |   .doc   |   14 pages

Turkey's potential EU membership

 Economics & finance   |  Economics   |  Presentation   |  09/29/2010   |   .pdf   |   16 pages

Top sold for educational studies

The impact of the marketing environment: Greggs

 Social studies   |  Educational studies   |  Case study   |  07/06/2015   |   .doc   |   8 pages

Compare and contrast essay: Apocalypse Now and Full Metal Jacket, two views on the Vietnam war

 Social studies   |  Educational studies   |  Case study   |  09/05/2012   |   .doc   |   4 pages