- 11- 35. Given the increasing vulnerability of the individual in our violent world, which has not learned the lessons of the past, the right to life calls for greater protection of the individual, as advocated by this Court in the "Street Children" case (supra). Another example, along the same lines, is to be found in the recent case law of the European Court of Human Rights: in Cyprus v. Turkey (judgment of May 10, 2001), for example, the European Court established that the right to life (Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights) had been violated, owing to the failure of the respondent State to comply with the procedural obligation to investigate the whereabouts of the disappeared persons.27 36. In its judgments in three other recent cases against Turkey – Kaya (February 19, 1998),28 Ogur (May 20, 1999)29 and Irfan Bilgin (July 17, 2001)30 – the European Court also maintained that Article 2 of the European Convention (right to life) had been violated owing to the failure of the respondent State to conduct an “effective investigation” into the circumstances of the death of the respective victims. In Kiliç v. Turkey (judgment of March 28, 2000), the European Court established that this right had been violated owing to the failure of the public authorities to take “reasonable measures available to them to prevent a real and immediate risk to the life of Kemal Kiliç";31 the Court took identical decisions in the Mahmut Kaya (Judgment of March 28, 2000)32 and Akkoç (Judgment of October 10, 2000)33 cases, both relating to Turkey. 37. In Velikova v. Bulgaria (Judgment of October 4, 2000), the European Court again declared that Article 2 of the Convention (right to life) had been violated owing to the lack of an “effective investigation” into the death of the victim;34 that Court considered that: "(...) the right to life ranks as one of the most fundamental provisions in the Convention. In the light of the importance of the protection afforded by Article 2, the Court must subject to the most careful scrutiny complaints about deprivation of life."35 38. In Nachova and others v. Bulgaria (Judgment of February 26, 2004), when deciding that Article 2 of the European Convention (together with Article 14) had been violated, the European Court reaffirmed the fundamental nature of the non-derogable right to life (under Article 2 of the Convention), and added that: 280-281 and 83-89, respectively. 27 ECourtHR, petition No. 25781/94, Cyprus v. Turkey, paras. 132-136. 28 ECourtHR, petition No. 158/1996/777/978, Kaya v. Turkey, para. 92. 29 ECourtHR, petition No. 21594/93, Ogur v. Turkey, para. 93. 30 ECourtHR, petition No. 25659/94, Irfan Bilgin v. Turkey, para. 145. 31 ECourtHR, petition No. 22492/93, Kiliç v. Turkey, para. 77. 32 ECourtHR, petition No. 22535/93, Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, para. 101. 33 ECourtHR, petitions Nos. 22947/93 and 22948/93, Akkoç v. Turkey, para. 94. 34 35 ECourtHR, petition No. 41488/98, Velikoca v. Bulgaria, para. 84. Ibid., para. 68.