EIT: Italian viranomaiset passiivisia perheväkivallan osalta; EIS 2, 3 ja 14 artiklan loukkaus kun mies tappoi lapsen ja yritti tappaa vaimonsa

2.3.2017 | Oikeusuutiset

Markku Fredman

Euroopan ihmisoikeustuomioistuin (EIT) on tänään antamassaan tuomiossa katsonut, että Italian viranomaiset olivat passiivisia eivätkä riittävällä tavalla suojelleet valittajaa ja hänen tytärtään vakavalta tiedossaan olleelta perheväkivallalta, jonka seurauksena perheen tytär murhattiin ja valittaja itse joutui murhan yrityksen kohteeksi.

EIT katsoi, että viranomaisten passiivisuus oli sallinut murhan ja murhan yrityksen, minä vuoksi todettiin EIS 2 artiklan loukkaus. Lisäksi viranomaiset eivät puuttuneet vakavaan väkivaltaan, minkä vuoksi todettiin EIS 3 artiklan loukkaus. Edelleen viranomaisten puuttumattomuuden katsottiin olleen syrjivää valittajaa kohtaan sen vuoksi, että tämä oli nainen, minkä johdosta todettiin EIS 14 artiklan loukkaus yhdessä EIS 2 ja 3 artiklan kanssa.

EIT:n lehdistötiedotteesta:

In today’s Chamber judgment in the case of Talpis v. Italy (application no. 41237/14) the European Court of Human Rights held:

– by six votes to one, that there had been a violation of Article 2 (right to life) of the European Convention on Human Rights on account of the murder of Ms Talpis’ son and her own attempted murder,
– unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) on account of the failure of the authorities in their obligation to protect Ms Talpis against acts of domestic violence, and
– by five votes to two, that there had been a violation of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) in conjunction with Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention.

The Court found, in particular, that by failing to take prompt action on the complaint lodged by Ms Talpis, the national authorities had deprived that complaint of any effect, creating a situation of impunity conducive to the recurrence of the acts of violence, which had then led to the attempted murder of Ms Talpis and the death of her son. The authorities had therefore failed in their obligation to protect the lives of the persons concerned.

The Court also found that Ms Talpis had lived with her children in a climate of violence serious enough to qualify as ill-treatment, and that the manner in which the authorities had conducted the criminal proceedings pointed to judicial passivity, which was incompatible with Article 3 of the Convention.

Finally, the Court found that Ms Talpis had been the victim of discrimination as a woman on account of the inaction of the authorities, which had underestimated the violence in question and thus essentially endorsed it.