Fundamentos destacados: 41. Sin embargo, no hay pruebas que sugieran que el grupo en cuestión representara un peligro para el orden público, aparte de la posible perturbación del tráfico. Había un máximo de cincuenta personas que deseaban llamar la atención sobre un tema de actualidad. El Tribunal observa que la concentración comenzó alrededor del mediodía y finalizó con la detención del grupo en media hora. Le llama especialmente la atención la impaciencia de las autoridades al intentar poner fin a la manifestación, organizada bajo la autoridad de la Asociación de Derechos Humanos.
42. En opinión del Tribunal, cuando los manifestantes no participan en actos de violencia, es importante que las autoridades públicas muestren cierto grado de tolerancia hacia las reuniones pacíficas para que la libertad de reunión garantizada por el artículo 11 de la Convención no quede privada de todo contenido.
[Traducción de LP]
41. However, there is no evidence to suggest that the group in question represented a danger to public order, apart from possibly disrupting traffic. There were at most fifty people, who wished to draw attention to a topical issue. The Court observes that the rally began at about 12 noon and ended with the group’s arrest within half an hour. It is particularly struck by the authorities’ impatience in seeking to end the demonstration, which was organised under the authority of the Human Rights Association.
42. In the Court’s view, where demonstrators do not engage in acts of violence it is important for the public authorities to show a certain degree of tolerance towards peaceful gatherings if the freedom of assembly guaranteed by Article 11 of the Convention is not to be deprived of all substance.
[Idioma original]
COUR EUROPÉENNE DES DROITS DE L’HOMME
EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
SECOND SECTION
CASE OF OYA ATAMAN v. TURKEY
(Application n°. 74552/01)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
5 December 2006
FINAL
05/03/2007
In the case of Oya Ataman v. Turkey,
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Jean-Paul Costa, President,
András Baka,
Rıza Türmen,
Mindia Ugrekhelidze,
Elisabet Fura-Sandström,
Danutė Jočienė,
Dragoljub Popović, judges,
and Stanley Naismith, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 14 November 2006,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in an application (no. 74552/01) against the Republic of Turkey lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Turkish national, Ms Oya Ataman (“the applicant”) on 15 March 2001.
2. The applicant was represented by Mr G. Şan, of the Istanbul Bar. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) did not appoint an Agent for the purposes of the proceedings before the Court.
[Continúa…]
