(Commission) Decision on admissibility. Residents of Derry applied alleging inter alia that there had been a breach of the procedural obligation under article 2 to hold a full investigation into the ‘Bloody Sunday’ killings in 1972. They alleged inadequacies in the Widgery Report, an investigation conducted by the RUC and the inquest that had been held into the deaths. Attempting to get round the six month time limit for bringing a complaint they submitted that this was a continuing obligation.
Held: The Commission rejected that submission: ‘In so far as the applicants complain that they are victims of a continuing violation to which the six month is inapplicable, the Commission recalls that the concept of a ‘continuing situation’ refers to a state of affairs which operates by continuous activities by or on the part of the state to render the applicants victims (see, eg, [Montion v France (1987) 52 DR 227; Hilton v United Kingdom (1988) 57 DR 108; A P v United Kingdom (Application No 24841/94) (unreported) 30 November 1994]). Since the applicants’ complaints have as their source specific events which occurred on identifiable dates, they cannot be construed as a ‘continuing situation’ for the purposes of the six month rule. While the Commission does not doubt that the events of ‘Bloody Sunday’ continue to have serious repercussions on the applicants’ lives, this however can be said of any individual who has undergone a traumatic incident in the past. The fact that an event has significant consequences over time does not itself constitute a ‘continuing situation’ ‘.
Citations:
(1996) 85-A DR 134
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 2
Cited by:
Cited – McCaughey and Another, Re Application forJudicial Review SC 18-May-2011
The claimants sought a fuller inquest into deaths at the hands of the British Army in 1990 in Northern Ireland. On opening the inquest, the coroner had declined to undertake to hold a hearing compliant with article 2, and it had not made progress. . .
See Also – McDaid And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-Oct-2000
. .
See Also – McDaid v United Kingdom; Ward v United Kingdom; Giles v UK; Leece v UK; Shorters v UK; Thwaites v UK ECHR 17-Oct-2000
The court had previously found that the applicants’ rights to a fair trial had been infringed in the UK martial courts, in particular through the role of the convening officer. The court hearing that a friendly settlement had been reached with the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights
Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.439812