CEDH · PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG — 20 septembre 2000

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s94935B0F { width:389.85pt; display:inline-block } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s2E9D8F73 { width:21.94pt; display:inline-block } .s4598CDF { width:70.9pt; display:inline-block } .sB70F9E4 { width:1.1pt; display:inline-block } .s23A41E03 { width:36pt; display:inline-block } .sCB27B9E { width:16.66pt; display:inline-block } .s85016119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:11pt } .s2CE7C1B9 { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS     620   20.9.2000   Press release issued by the Registrar   HEARING IN THE INTER-STATE CASE OF CYPRUS v. TURKEY   Wednesday 20 September 2000 at 9 a.m.     Summary of the facts   The case of Cyprus v. Turkey relates to issues arising out of the situation that has existed in Cyprus since July 1974 and concerns allegations that in this connection Turkey has continued to violate the European Convention on Human Rights after the adoption of two earlier reports by the European Commission of Human Rights.   Complaints   Cyprus alleges violations of the Convention under: Article 1 (obligation to respect human rights), Article 2 (right to life), Article 3 (prohibition of torture and degrading treatment or punishment), Article 4 (prohibition of slavery and forced labour), Article 5 (right to liberty and security), Article 6 (right to a fair trial), Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence), Article 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion), Article 10 (freedom of expression), Article 11 (freedom of assembly and association) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy); of Articles 1 (protection of property) and 2 (right to education) of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention; and of Articles 14 (prohibition of discrimination), 17 (prohibition of abuse of rights) and 18 (limitation on use of restrictions on rights) read in conjunction with all those provisions.   The complaints come under four different headings:   (a) Greek Cypriot missing persons and their relatives   In respect of missing persons it is alleged that, if any are still in Turkish custody, this would constitute a form of slavery or servitude contrary to Article 4 and a grave breach of their right to liberty under Article 5. In addition, Cyprus maintains, inter alia , that there has been a violation of Article 2 on account of Turkey’s failure to carry out an investigation into the disappearance of these persons.   In respect of the relatives of missing persons, Cyprus alleges, inter alia , violations of Articles   3, 8 and 10 on account of the Turkish authorities’ consistent failure to provide information on the fate of the missing persons.   (b) Home and property of displaced persons   Cyprus complains, inter alia , under Article 8 (the continued refusal to allow Greek Cypriots to return to their homes and families in northern Cyprus), Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (denial of access to and enjoyment of property, reallocation of property, withholding of compensation and deprivation of title), Article 13 of the Convention and Article 14. Cyprus further invokes Articles 17 and 18.   (c) Living conditions of Greek Cypriots in northern Cyprus   Cyprus relies on, inter alia , Articles 2 (denial of urgent medial treatment), 3 (with respect to alleged discriminatory treatment of Greek Cypriots in the “enclaved” Karpas area; in particular in view of their advanced age, the restrictions placed on them and methods of coercion used are said to amount to inhuman and degrading treatment), 5 (threat to security of person and absence of official action to prevent this), 6 (lack of a fair and public hearing before an independent and impartial tribunal for Greek Cypriots whose civil rights have been infringed), 8, 9, 10, 11, 13 and 14,   and Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No. 1.   (d) Complaints relating to Turkish Cypriots   Cyprus alleges, inter alia , violations in relation to Turkish Cypriots of Articles 5, 6 (trial by “military courts”), 8, (prohibition of Greek language newspapers and interference with right to freedom of expression), 11 (denial of the right to associate freely with Greek Cypriots), Article 1 of Protocol No.1 (failure to allow them to return to their properties in southern Cyprus). Violations are also alleged of Articles 3, 5, 8 and 13 and Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 in relation to the treatment of Turkish Cypriot gypsies.   Procedure   The application was lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 22   November 1994. It was declared admissible on 28 June 1996. Commission Delegates took evidence in Strasbourg (27 and 28   November 1997), Cyprus (21 to 24 February 1998) and London (22 April 1998). The Commission heard the parties’ oral submissions on 7 July 1998 in Strasbourg.   Having concluded that there was no basis on which a friendly settlement could be secured, the Commission adopted a report on 4 June 1999 in which it established the facts and expressed an opinion as to whether the facts disclosed the alleged breaches by Turkey of its obligations under the Convention.   The case was referred to the European Court of Human Rights by the Government of Cyprus under former Article 48 of the Convention and under Article 5 § 4 of Protocol No. 11. Composition of the Court   The case will be heard by the Grand Chamber composed as follows:   Luzius Wildhaber (Swiss), President , Elisabeth Palm (Swedish), Jean-Paul Costa (French), Luigi Ferrari Bravo [1] (Italian), Lucius Caflisch [2] (Swiss), Willi Fuhrmann (Austrian), Karel Jungwiert (Czech), Marc Fischbach (Luxemburger), Boštjan Zupančič (Slovenian), Nina Vajić (Croatian), John Hedigan (Irish), Margarita Tsatsa-Nikolovska (FYROMacedonia), Tudor Panţîru (Moldovan), Egils Levits (Latvian), Anatoly Kovler (Russian), judges ; Liam Hamilton ( ad hoc judge in respect of Cyprus), Kutlu Tekin Fuad ( ad hoc judge in respect of Turkey); Kristaq Traja (Albanian), Snejana Botoucharova (Bulgarian), Rait Maruste , (Estonian), substitute judges ;   and also Michele de Salvia , Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Applicant Government:   Alecos Markides , Agent , Ian Brownlie, David Pannick , Claire Palley , Malcolm Shaw , Stella Mary Joannides , Polyvios Polyviou and Pushpinder Saini , Counsel ,         Nicos Emiliou , Adviser .   Respondent Government: [Names of representatives not yet communicated.]   After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private. Judgment will be delivered at a later date.   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: (0)3 88 41 24 92) Fax: (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. On 1 November 1998 a full-time Court was established, replacing the original two-tier system of a part-time Commission and Court . [1] Judge elected in respect of San Marino. [2] Judge elected in respect of Liechtenstein.