ECtHR’s scandalous verdict on HDP: HDP does not have victim status 

2020-11-26 16:11:24


	ANKARA - European Court of Human Rights ruled that the application that HDP made concerning the arrest of its parliamentarians following the lifting of their immunities was “inadmissible” claiming that “HDP was not the victimized party of the case.  

	European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) deemed the application on behalf of HDP “inadmissible”. The verdict stated that the individual applications of the deputies are pending and that HDP shall not be deemed as a victim of the case. 

	 

	DETAILS OF THE VERDICT 

	 

	In the application made by HDP Legal Commission member lawyer Kenan Maçoğlu on behalf of the party following the arrest of HDP politicians on 7 December 2016, it was highlighted that Articles 10, 11 and 18 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and 3 of Protocol No.1 were violated and the criminal proceedings initiated against HDP deputies stemmed from their political statements regarding the Kurdish issue.

	 

	ECtHR, in its decision which pointed out that HDP did not apply to the Constitutional Court (AYM), stated that "Thus, the court does not deem it necessary to make a judgment on this issue because the complaint cannot be withdrawn for any other reason".

	 

	The verdict stated that in order to apply to the court, a natural person, non-governmental organization or a group of individuals must be able to claim to be a victim of a violation of the rights recognized in the Convention.

	 

	ECtHR stated that it observed that the complaints expressed by the HDP are related to the measures taken against its members. “Hence, the complaint is concerning the lifting of immunity of deputies in 2016 and their imprisonment” the court stated and added that: “Recalling that there are several pending applications before the Court by those directly affected by these alleged violations, and in the light of all the above considerations, the Court concluded that the HDP could not claim to have victim status.”

	 

	Accordingly, ECtHR ruled that HDP’s application was inadmissible