Güler and Öngel v Turkey: Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Strasbourg’s discourse on the justified use of force

Natasa Mavronicola

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article discusses the discourse on the justified use of force in the Strasbourg Court’s analysis of Article 3. With particular focus on the judgment in Güler and Öngel v Turkey, a case concerning the use of force by State agents against demonstrators, it addresses the question of the implications of such discourse, found in this and other cases, on the absolute nature of Article 3. It offers a perspective which suggests that the discourse on the justified use of force can be reconciled with Article 3’s absolute nature.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)370-382
Number of pages13
JournalThe Modern Law Review
Volume76
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2013

Keywords

  • Article 3
  • absolute right
  • excessive force
  • proportionality
  • dignity
  • agency

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Güler and Öngel v Turkey: Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Strasbourg’s discourse on the justified use of force'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this