www.Ecodex-Online.com

Home Page
Registration
Registration
Registration
Registration
Registration



SpanishGermanItalianFrenchRomanianPortuguese

Home Page | Subjects | Event | Media | Directory | Search | Registration | Links | Jobs | Log in
Presentation | FAQ | Contact | Security Info | General conditions | List of articles | Newsletters
Add Document | Alert | Directory Subscription

Commented ruling
Share on: Linkedin | Facebook | Twitter Go Print Send this article to a friend Back  Back

Title of Document: Reference to stereotyped image of roma in academic study and dictionary not discriminatory
Keywords: prohibition of discrimination, right to respect for private and family life, roms, stereotyped image
Author: cmiskp.echr.coe

Codex-online publication date: 07/29/2010 12:26:43 PM
Date of Original Publication: 07/27/2010
Country: Turkey
Summary: The European Court of Human Rights has notified in writing its Chamber judgment in the case of Aksu v. Turkey . The Court considers that the reference to stereotyped image of roma in academic study and dictionary not discriminatory .

The Court held a no violation of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) in conjunction with Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights.


Principal facts

The applicant, Mustafa Aksu, is a Turkish national who was born in 1931 and lives in Ankara. He is of Roma origin and alleged that two government-funded publications included remarks and expressions that reflect anti-Roma sentiment.

On behalf of the Turkish Gypsy associations, Mr Aksu filed a petition with the Ministry of Culture in June 2001, complaining that a book published by the Ministry, entitled “The Gypsies of Turkey”, contained passages that humiliated Gypsies. In particular, he claimed that the author stated that Gypsies engaged in criminal activities, living as “thieves, pickpockets, swindlers, robbers, usurers, beggars, drug dealers, prostitutes and brothel keepers”. Mr Aksu therefore requested that the sale of the book be stopped and all copies seized.

Informed by the Ministry of Culture that, according to its publications advisory board, the book reflected scientific research, and that the author would not allow any amendments, Mr Aksu brought civil proceedings against the ministry and the author of the book. He requested compensation and asked for the book to be confiscated and for its publication and distribution to be stopped. In September 2002, Ankara Civil Court dismissed the requests in so far as they concerned the author and decided that it lacked jurisdiction as regards the case against the Ministry. The Court of Cassation upheld the judgment and eventually dismissed Mr Aksu’s request for rectification in December 2003. In April 2004 the administrative court dismissed the complaint subsequently lodged by Mr Aksu against the ministry. Both the civil court and the administrative court held that the book was the result of academic research and that the passages in question were not insulting.

The second publication, a dictionary for school pupils, had been published in 1998 by a language association and had been funded by the Ministry of Culture. In April 2002 Mr Aksu sent a letter to the language association on behalf of the Confederation of Gypsy Cultural Associations, alleging that certain entries in the publication, such as “gypsyness” for stinginess and greediness, were insulting and discriminatory against Gypsies. He asked the association to remove a number of expressions from the dictionary.

Having received no reply, Mr Aksu brought civil proceedings against the association in April 2003, requesting that the expressions in question be removed and asking for compensation for the non-pecuniary damage he had suffered. In July 2003, the civil court dismissed the case, holding that the definitions in the dictionary were based on historical and sociological facts and that there had been no intention to humiliate or debase an ethnic group. It further noted that there were similar expressions in Turkish concerning other ethnic groups, which were also included in dictionaries. The judgment was upheld by the Court of Cassation in March 2004.
For the entire article, please see the attached file:
caz589A10.doc35 Kb

Back
 Back
 


Home Page | Subjects | Event | Media | Directory | Search | Registration | Links | Log in


Español|Deutsch|Italiano|Français|Romana|Portuguais
Spanish
 
German
 
Italian
 
French
 
Romanian
 
Portuguese
^


File Attachment Icon
caz589A10.doc