13.08.2013 Views

Factsheet Roma and Travellers - European Court of Human Rights

Factsheet Roma and Travellers - European Court of Human Rights

Factsheet Roma and Travellers - European Court of Human Rights

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Factsheet</strong> – <strong>Roma</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Travellers</strong><br />

Secic v. Croatia<br />

31.05.2007<br />

Cobzaru v. <strong>Roma</strong>nia<br />

26.07.2007<br />

Angelova <strong>and</strong> Iliev v. Bulgaria<br />

26.07.2007<br />

Petropoulou-Tsakiris v. Greece<br />

6.12.2007<br />

Stoica v. <strong>Roma</strong>nia<br />

04.03.2008<br />

Police ill-treatment <strong>of</strong> a 14-year old during a clash between <strong>of</strong>ficials <strong>and</strong> <strong>Roma</strong> outside a<br />

bar <strong>and</strong> subsequent lack <strong>of</strong> adequate investigation. The applicant alleged that the illtreatment<br />

<strong>and</strong> decision not to prosecute the police <strong>of</strong>ficer who had beaten him were<br />

motivated by racial prejudice.<br />

Two violations <strong>of</strong> Article 3 (prohibition <strong>of</strong> inhuman or degrading treatment <strong>and</strong> lack <strong>of</strong><br />

effective investigation)<br />

Violation <strong>of</strong> Article 14 (prohibition <strong>of</strong> discrimination) on account <strong>of</strong> investigation having<br />

been racially biased<br />

Mižigárová v. Slovakia<br />

14.12.2010<br />

Death <strong>of</strong> a <strong>Roma</strong> man during a police interrogation. He was shot in the abdomen with<br />

the lieutenant’s service pistol <strong>and</strong> the investigation concluded that he had forcibly taken<br />

the gun from the lieutenant <strong>and</strong> shot himself.<br />

Violation <strong>of</strong> Article 2 (death / investigation).<br />

No violation <strong>of</strong> Article 14. The <strong>Court</strong> was not persuaded that the objective evidence was<br />

sufficiently strong in itself to suggest the existence <strong>of</strong> a racist motive for the incident.<br />

Fedorchenko <strong>and</strong> Lozenko v. Ukraine<br />

20.09.2012<br />

The applicants alleged that a police major had threatened <strong>and</strong> hit Mr Fedorchenko <strong>and</strong><br />

then set his house on fire. Relying on Article 2 (right to life) the applicants complained<br />

that five <strong>of</strong> their relatives had died in the fire <strong>and</strong> that the State authorities had failed to<br />

conduct a thorough <strong>and</strong> effective investigation into the circumstances <strong>of</strong> their death <strong>and</strong><br />

<strong>of</strong> the police major’s involvement in the arson attack. They further relied on Article 14,<br />

alleging that the crime had had racist motives due to their <strong>Roma</strong>ni ethnicity.<br />

Violation <strong>of</strong> Article 2 (investigation)<br />

No violation <strong>of</strong> Article 2 (death)<br />

Violation <strong>of</strong> Article 14 in conjunction with Article 2 (investigation)<br />

Attacks on <strong>Roma</strong> villages <strong>and</strong> destruction <strong>of</strong> property<br />

Moldovan <strong>and</strong> Others v. <strong>Roma</strong>nia (no. 2)<br />

12.07.2005<br />

In September 1993 three <strong>Roma</strong> men were attacked in the village <strong>of</strong> Hădăreni by a large<br />

crowd <strong>of</strong> non-<strong>Roma</strong> villagers, including the local police comm<strong>and</strong>er <strong>and</strong> several <strong>of</strong>ficers:<br />

one burnt to death, the other two were beaten to death by the crowd. The applicants<br />

alleged that the police then encouraged the crowd to destroy other <strong>Roma</strong> properties: in<br />

total 13 <strong>Roma</strong> houses in the village were completely destroyed. Hounded from their<br />

village <strong>and</strong> homes, the applicants were then obliged to live in crowded <strong>and</strong> unsuitable<br />

conditions – cellars, hen-houses, stables. Following criminal complaints brought by the<br />

applicants, some were awarded damages ten years later. The <strong>Court</strong> could not examine<br />

the applicants’ complaints about the destruction <strong>of</strong> their houses <strong>and</strong> possessions or their<br />

expulsion from the village, because those events took place in September 1993, before<br />

4

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!