Goekce (Deceased) v. Austria

Comm. No. 5/2005, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/39/D/5/2005 (2007)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Goekce (Deceased) v. Austria

Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
Comm. No. 5/2005, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/39/D/5/2005 (2007)

Facts

Şahide Goekce (plaintiff) was a victim of domestic violence in Austria (defendant) perpetrated by her husband, Mustafa Goekce. Mustafa first assaulted Şahide by choking and threatening to kill her in 1999. Although Şahide alerted the police, who expelled Mustafa from the apartment, she did not authorize Mustafa’s prosecution for the threats and did not want to testify. Mustafa was acquitted of injuring Şahide for lack of evidence. Mustafa attacked Şahide again in 2000. Police arrived in time to witness the assault, and Şahide later stated that Mustafa had threatened to kill her. Police expelled Mustafa from the apartment and asked the public prosecutor to detain Mustafa. However, Şahide told the public prosecutor that she had experienced an epileptic seizure and depression and denied Mustafa’s threats. Thus, the public prosecutor declined to detain Mustafa and halted the proceedings. Police responded to calls to Şahide’s apartment five additional times between 2001 and 2002. Another attack occurred in 2008, for which police expelled Mustafa from the apartment for a third time because Şahide reported that Mustafa had choked and threatened to kill her. Şahide pressed charges, and the police again asked the public prosecutor to detain Mustafa. A court issued an interim injunction preventing Mustafa from returning home for three months, but Şahide gave him a key. When the public prosecutor questioned Şahide about the assault, Şahide explained her injury and stated that Mustafa had threatened to kill her with regularity over the years. Therefore, the public prosecutor assumed that Mustafa’s threats were just a normal part of the couple’s arguments that would not be acted on and dropped the charges. The next day, Mustafa shot and killed Şahide with a gun he had purchased despite being on a prohibitive hold. Şahide had called the police hours earlier, but no officers were sent. Mustafa was prosecuted for Şahide’s murder. An organization authored a communication on Şahide’s behalf, alleging violations of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (the convention). Austria denied violating the convention or discriminating against Şahide as a woman, arguing that it had a comprehensive system designed to fight domestic violence and that Şahide was not protected because she did not cooperate with authorities. Austria also argued that detention must be evaluated considering a perpetrator’s rights to freedom of movement and a fair trial.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership