AVRUPA İNSAN HAKLARI MAHKEMESİ'NİN AKKOÇ V. TÜRKİYE DAVASINDA VERDİĞİ KARARIN KOLLUK ve DİĞER KAMU GÖREVLERİ BAKIMINDAN İRDELENMESİ

This article is generally concerned with the relationship between the public authorities including the poliçe and humarı rights. As we know, the role of the poliçe is important in democratic countries for the realisation of human rights. It is specifıcally about the examination of the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) in the case of Akkoç v. Turkey. In that case, the Court holds t ha t Turkey has violated Article 2 (right to life) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) as well as Article 3 (prohibition of torture) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) of the ECHR. Finally, it holds that Turkey is to pay the applicant 35,000 pounds for pecuniary damage and 40,000 pounds for non-pecuniary damage, 13 648 pounds for the costs and expenses. In conclusion, necessary steps should be taken in the area of 1) putting in place effective criminal law-provisions, 2) taking preventive operational measures to protect individuals whose life are at risk from the criminal acts of another individual (positive obligation). As far as the fındings are concerned, academiciansl lawyers have lold that Turkey should consider the reasons of the judgement. Whereas soıne lawyers have offered that in Turkey, the preliminary investigation of the case is able to be made direclly by the public prosecutor, the others have emphasised the unity of education between the officers of the poliçe and the gendarme, and that the public prosecutor must take serious the application of the individual who says that that his or her life is at risk. Obviously, the Turkish. poliçe should consider the reasons of the judgement concernin