CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 14 novembre 2006

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 91 November 2006 Metin Turan v. Turkey - 20868/02 Judgment 14.11.2006 [Section II] Article 11 Article 11-1 Freedom of association Compulsory transfer of civil servant on account of his trade union activities: violation   Article 13 Effective remedy No remedy whereby transfer of civil servant by governor of state-of-emergency region could be challenged: violation   Facts : The applicant, a civil servant, had been elected to the board of a public-sector trade union. The Governor of the region under the state of emergency penalised him for having participated in actions staged by the Federation of public-sector trade unions. The Governor considered that the applicant’s presence in that region had consequently become dangerous and had the effect of undermining public order. The applicant was accordingly relocated. Law : Article 11 – The applicant’s status, in principle, had implied the possibility of his being transferred to another department or another town in accordance with the requirements of the public service. The applicant had been able to participate in trade-union activities after his relocation. However, the decision to transfer him had been taken on account of his union membership and had thus constituted interference by the national authorities with the applicant’s right to engage in trade-union activities. Such a decision, relocating the applicant to a town in a different region because of his membership of a legal trade union, was not necessary in a democratic society. Conclusion : violation (six votes to one). Article 13 – There had been no remedy under Turkish law before a domestic court by which to dispute the decision taken by the Governor of the region under the state of emergency to relocate the applicant to a different region. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). Article 41 – EUR 2,500 for non-pecuniary damage.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes