Çam v. Turkey (application no. 51500/08) (AİHS md. 14 ve Birinci Protokol md. 2)

Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi’ne göre, “Görme engelli bir öğrenciyi müzik akademisine kaydetmeyi reddetmek, Sözleşmeyi ihlal etmiştir.” 

23.02.2015 tarihli Çam v. Turkey başvurusunda, Bayan Çam, ulusal müzik akademisine öğrenci olarak kaydedilmiştir; çünkü görme engellidir. Mahkemeye göre, Bayan Çam, akademiye kabul edilmek için tüm koşulları taşıyorsa bile salt görme engelli olduğundan akademiye kaydı reddedilmiştir. Bu nedenle, ulusal otoriteler, görme engelli olması nedeniyle, Bayan Çam’ı müzik eğitimiden yararlanmaktan, herhangi bir nesnel ve makul gerekçe olmaksızın, mahrum bırakmıştır. Sonuç olarak, AİHS md. 14, Birinci Protokol md. 2 ile birlikte, ihlal edilmiştir.

Çam v. Turkey kararı, “http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/” adresinden erişilebilirdir.

Çam v. Turkey kararının basın duyurusu,
“http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/app/conversion/pdf?library=ECHR&id=003-5307099-6607283&filename=Judgment%20%C7am%20v.%20Turkey%20-%20refusal%20to%20enrol%20a%20blind%20student%20in%20a%20music%20academy%20.pdf” adresinden erişilebilirdir.

Bu basın duyurusunun özeti, İngilizce haliyle, aşağıdaki gibidir:

Refusal to enrol a blind student in a music academy violated the Convention

In today’s Chamber judgment1 in the case of Çam v. Turkey (application no. 51500/08) the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been:
a violation of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of the European Convention on Human Rights
in conjunction with Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 (right to education) to the Convention.
The case concerned a refusal to enrol Ms Çam as a student at the Turkish National Music Academy because she was blind.
The Court found in particular that Ms Çam’s exclusion had been based on the music academy’s rules of procedure. Although Ms Çam was completely qualified for admission to the academy, the refusal to enrol her had been based solely on the fact that she was blind. Furthermore, the Court considered that the discrimination on grounds of disability also extended to the refusal to make reasonable accommodation to facilitate access by persons with disabilities to education. Such accommodation was vital for the exercise of human rights. By refusing to enrol Ms Çam without considering the possibility of accommodating her disability, the national authorities had prevented her, without any objective and reasonable justification, from benefiting from a musical education, in breach of the Convention.