TY - JOUR
T1 - Remarriage Restriction for Woman of 300 Days in Türkiye
T2 - Review of the ECtHR’s Nurcan Bayraktar v. Türkiye Judgment
AU - Yılmaz, Candan
PY - 2024/10/31
Y1 - 2024/10/31
N2 - On 27 June 2023, the European Court of Human Rights unanimously declared that the complaint of Nurcan Bayraktar was admissible and held that there has been a violation of Article 8 and Article 14 in conjunction with Article 12 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The violation arose from the application of Article 132 of the Turkish Civil Code which imposes a 300-day waiting period on divorced women to remarry, unless they lodge an application to a Family Court to lift the waiting period by proving with a medical report that they are not pregnant. The Court concludes that obligation to produce medical evidence to prove that the applicant was not pregnant - which can only be obtained by means of medical examination - constituted an interference with the applicant’s exercise of her right to respect for her private life, considering that it was not necessary in a democratic society. Moreover, the Court found that the obligation imposed on divorced women, due to the possibility of pregnancy, to wait 300 days amounts to direct discrimination on grounds of sex, which cannot be justified by the aim of preventing uncertainty as to the parentage of an unborn child. This study aims to summarise and review this judgment, which was delivered in French, in English for a wider audience, by providing a background information on Article 132 of the Turkish Civil Code.
AB - On 27 June 2023, the European Court of Human Rights unanimously declared that the complaint of Nurcan Bayraktar was admissible and held that there has been a violation of Article 8 and Article 14 in conjunction with Article 12 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The violation arose from the application of Article 132 of the Turkish Civil Code which imposes a 300-day waiting period on divorced women to remarry, unless they lodge an application to a Family Court to lift the waiting period by proving with a medical report that they are not pregnant. The Court concludes that obligation to produce medical evidence to prove that the applicant was not pregnant - which can only be obtained by means of medical examination - constituted an interference with the applicant’s exercise of her right to respect for her private life, considering that it was not necessary in a democratic society. Moreover, the Court found that the obligation imposed on divorced women, due to the possibility of pregnancy, to wait 300 days amounts to direct discrimination on grounds of sex, which cannot be justified by the aim of preventing uncertainty as to the parentage of an unborn child. This study aims to summarise and review this judgment, which was delivered in French, in English for a wider audience, by providing a background information on Article 132 of the Turkish Civil Code.
KW - European Court of Human Rights
KW - Right To Respect For Private and Family Life
KW - European Convention on Human Rights
KW - Waiting Period To Remarry
KW - Right To Marry
KW - Prohibition of Discrimination
U2 - 10.33629/auhfd.1485935
DO - 10.33629/auhfd.1485935
M3 - Article
VL - 73
SP - 2091
EP - 2117
JO - Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi
JF - Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi
IS - 3
ER -