The Scale Matters: The ECtHR Grand Chamber Finds That Prohibition of Mass Publication of ‘Raw’ Taxation Data Does Not Infringe Right to Freedom of Expression

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 127-134
Author(s):  
M. Jozwiak
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
Taxation Data

Freedom of Expression versus Privacy and the Right to Reputation

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dirk Voorhoof
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Media Freedom ◽  
Investigative Journalism ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Right Of Privacy ◽  
The One ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact

The normative perspective of this chapter is how to guarantee respect for the fundamental values of freedom of expression and journalistic reporting on matters of public interest in cases where a (public) person claims protection of his or her right to reputation. First it explains why there is an increasing number and expanding potential of conflicts between the right to freedom of expression and media freedom (Article 10 ECHR), on the one hand, and the right of privacy and the right to protection of reputation (Article 8 ECHR), on the other. In addressing and analysing the European Court’s balancing approach in this domain, the characteristics and the impact of the seminal 2012 Grand Chamber judgment in Axel Springer AG v. Germany (no. 1) are identified and explained. On the basis of the analysis of the Court’s subsequent jurisprudence in defamation cases it evaluates whether this case law preserves the public watchdog-function of media, investigative journalism and NGOs reporting on matters of public interest, but tarnishing the reputation of public figures.

Introductory Note

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guido Raimondi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Introductory Note ◽  
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Right ◽  
Very High

In 2015 the Strasbourg Court decided many cases of legal significance. The most important were given by the Court’s Grand Chamber of the Court, which issued a total of nineteen judgments on the merits during the year. The article lists all the Grand Chamber judgments published in 2015 and mentions the relevant subject matters. The following four cases established important points of European human rights law. 1) Lambert v. France had already attained a very high media profile when it was filed with the Court in mid-2014, concerning the right to life and the end of life. 2) Perinçek v. Switzerland brought before the Court a difficult question about the limits of freedom of expression, concerning in particular freedom of expression and the denial of genocide. 3) Chiragov and Others v. Armenia, and Sargsyan v. Azerbaijan concerned the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. The Grand Chamber decided to hear these cases in parallel considering in particular: (i) the extraterritorial jurisdiction—Armenian jurisdiction over Azen territory and (ii) the presumption of jurisdiction over the entire national territory.

Perinçek v. Switzerland (Eur. Ct. H.R.)

2016 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 627-719 ◽  
Author(s):  
Uladzislau Belavusau
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Armenian Genocide ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Historical Fact ◽  
Grand Chamber

On October 15, 2015, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights delivered its judgment in the case of Perinçek v. Switzerland. The judgment contested a criminal provision applied in Switzerland against a Turkish politician who had publicly denied a historical fact of the Armenian genocide. Notwithstanding variations in reasoning, the outcome in the Grand Chamber is similar to the previous decision of the Chamber on this case in 2013. The Swiss criminal provision applied in the context of the denial of the Armenian genocide was again found irreconcilable with freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

Satakunnan Markkinapörssi Oy and Satamedia Oy v. Finland (Eur. Ct. H.R.)

2018 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-489 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan McCully
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Media Outlet ◽  
Data Protection Law ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Right ◽  
First Time

On June 27, 2017, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (GC) delivered its judgment in Satakunnan Markkinapörssi Oy and Satamedia Oy v. Finland. It was the first time that the GC considered whether the application of data protection law to the publishing activities of a media outlet had violated the right to freedom of expression under the European Convention on Human Rights (Convention). In its judgment, the GC found that a prohibition on two companies publishing the taxation data of 1.2 million identifiable individuals had not violated the right to freedom of expression.

scholarly journals Politically Motivated Prosecutions and Detentions: Grand Chamber judgment in the case of Selahattin Demirtaş v. Turkey (no. 2)

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-30
Author(s):  
Ozgur H. Cinar
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Attention ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Right ◽  
Article 5

This is a commentary paper by focusing on the European Court of Human Rights’ judgment in the case of Selahattin Demirtaş v. Turkey (no. 2). It is a controversial judgement which has received substantial international attention. In this case, the Court has been given the opportunity to reiterate its key positions on a highly important aspect of freedom of expression (Article 10), the right to liberty and security (Article 5) and the right to free elections (Article 3 of Protocol No. 1). 

When the State Speaks, What Should It Say?

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corey Brettschneider
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
The State ◽  
Hate Groups ◽  
New Approach ◽  
State Action ◽  
Democratic State ◽  
Theory Of Value ◽  
The Right ◽  
Equal Citizenship ◽  
The Ideal

How should a liberal democracy respond to hate groups and others that oppose the ideal of free and equal citizenship? The democratic state faces the hard choice of either protecting the rights of hate groups and allowing their views to spread, or banning their views and violating citizens' rights to freedoms of expression, association, and religion. Avoiding the familiar yet problematic responses to these issues, this book proposes a new approach called value democracy. The theory of value democracy argues that the state should protect the right to express illiberal beliefs, but the state should also engage in democratic persuasion when it speaks through its various expressive capacities: publicly criticizing, and giving reasons to reject, hate-based or other discriminatory viewpoints. Distinguishing between two kinds of state action—expressive and coercive—the book contends that public criticism of viewpoints advocating discrimination based on race, gender, or sexual orientation should be pursued through the state's expressive capacities as speaker, educator, and spender. When the state uses its expressive capacities to promote the values of free and equal citizenship, it engages in democratic persuasion. By using democratic persuasion, the state can both respect rights and counter hateful or discriminatory viewpoints. The book extends this analysis from freedom of expression to the freedoms of religion and association, and shows that value democracy can uphold the protection of these freedoms while promoting equality for all citizens.

Media Baru dan Fenomena Komunikasi Politik pada Pemilukada di Provinsi Banten 2011

2011 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 23-34
Author(s):  
Afdal Makkuraga Putra
Keyword(s):  
New Media ◽  
Political Communication ◽  
Communication Technology ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
New Order ◽  
Surprising Result ◽  
Information And Communication ◽  
Use Of Internet ◽  
New Phase ◽  
Fair Balance

Political system in Indonesia after New Order regime has entered into a new phase, which is both fundamentally and practically different. With the growth of freedom of expression and the rise of information and communication technology (ICT), the use and practices of political communication is also striking a fair balance, two-ways direction, no longer dominated by government-only apparatuses. The use of internet and New Media in political communication realm has been pioneered since 1997, and has been growing ever since, thanks to the new practices of local election (Pilkada). This paper will address firstly, the theoretical framework of political communication in e-Democracy, and secondly, the application of New Media (website, blog, and social media sites) in local-based political communication, namely Pilkada in Banten at October 23, 2011. Having analysed the phenomenon in question, a surprising result appears. Even though all candidates of Governor and Deputy Governor of recent Pilkada Banten have used New Media as their communication and campaign media, nevertheless the interactivity factor embedded within those “New Media use” are largely neglected. Keywords: e-Democracy, political communication, New Media, interactivity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document