The Dangerous Implications of the “Naked Rambler” Case: On FEMEN Activists and Throwing Paint on Atatürk Statues – Stijn Smet

21 11 2014

Femen PutinOn 28 October 2014, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the numerous convictions of Mr. Stephen Peter Gough – better known as “the naked rambler” – for insisting on appearing naked in public at all times, did not violate Mr. Gough’s freedom of expression. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Conviction of journalist for reporting about sex abuses violated Article 10 – Flutura Kusari and Dirk Voorhoof

13 11 2014

Iceland-DVIn Erla Hlynsdottir v. Iceland (No. 2), an Icelandic journalist had been convicted for defamation after reporting that the director of a Christian rehabilitation centre and his wife had been involved in sex games with patients of the centre. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Gough v United Kingdom, No violation of the Article 10 rights of the Naked Rambler – Hugh Tomlinson QC

1 11 2014

_61634359_45208169Stephen Gough, the so-called “Naked Rambler” has lost his Court of Human Rights application under Articles 10 and 8.  The Court held that his arrest, prosecution, conviction and imprisonment did not breach his rights to freedom of expression or respect for private life (Gough v United Kingdom, Judgment of 28 October 2014).  This is a long judgment in a difficult case.

Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Strasbourg, Stankiewicz v. Poland, Responsible public interest journalism protected by Article 10 – Hugh Tomlinson QC

28 10 2014

Rzeczpospolita_9-06-2010_paliwa_5-40In the case of Stankiewicz and Others v. Poland [2014] ECHR 1061, the Fourth Section of the Court of Human Rights held that there had been a violation of Article 10 where the domestic courts had found that an article about a demand for a bribe by a public official had breached the official’s rights.  This was a public interest story in relation to which the applicants had complied with the tenets of responsible journalism. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Firma EDV für Sie v Germany, Article 8, companies and the right to reputation – Hugh Tomlinson QC

9 10 2014

ARCHITECTURE STOCKThe decision in Firma EDV für Sie, EfS Elektronische Datenverarbeitung Dienstleistungs GmbH v Germany (App No, 32783/08, 2 September 2014) involved a consideration of the interesting question as to whether a company has a right to reputation under Article 8.  The Fifth Section of the Court proceeded on the basis that a company did have such rights. The application was, however, found to be inadmissible on the basis that a fair balance had been struck between Articles 8 and 10 by the domestic court. Read the rest of this entry »





Is this the best human rights correction ever or the worst? – Adam Wagner

29 09 2014

screen-shot-2014-09-29-at-13-11-53Even by the usual brazen standards of human rights reporting, this correction  which was published today by The Daily Mail stands out: Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Karácsony and Szél v. Hungary, sanctions on protesting parliamentarians breached Article 10 – Hugh Tomlinson QC

23 09 2014

HungarianParliamentBuildingIn the cases of Karácsony and v Hungary and Szél v.Hungary (applications nos. 42461/13 and 44357/13) decided on 16 September 2014 the Second Section of the European Court of Human Rights held that financial sanctions imposed by the Speaker on demonstrating members of the opposition in the Hungarian Parliament were a violation of Article 10. Read the rest of this entry »








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,988 other followers