News, Strasbourg: Grand Chamber hears Article 10 data protection case of Satamedia Oy v Finland

27 09 2016

satamediaOn 14 September 2016, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights held a hearing in the case of Satamedia Oy v  Finland. The judgment was reserved and is unlikely to be given for several months. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Ziembiński v. Poland (No. 2), Polish mayor’s private prosecution of local journalist for insult violated Article 10 – Ronan Ó Fathaigh

30 08 2016

img_3698The European Court’s Fourth Section has held in Ziembiński v. Poland (No. 2) that a newspaper editor’s conviction for describing local government officials as “dim-witted” and a “numbskull” violated the editor’s Article 10 right to freedom of expression. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: CICAD v Switzerland, Finding that allegation of “anti-semitism” was defamatory did not breach Article 10 – Calypso Blaj

27 07 2016

couv2_0In the case of CICAD v Switzerland (Judgment of 7 June 2016)(French only), the Third Section of the Court of Human Rights held that a judgment finding that an accusation of anti-semitism made by the applicant was unlawful did not violate Article 10.  The Court refused to engage with issues as to the definition of “anti-semitism” but accepted the conclusions of the national court that such a serious allegation could not be justified. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Kurski v. Poland: Ordering politician to publish apology for defaming Polish newspaper violated Article 10 – Ronan Ó Fathaigh

16 07 2016

gw 20130124-covThe European Court’s Fourth Section has held that a successful civil action by a newspaper against a Polish politician for alleging the newspaper had an “agreement” with an oil corporation to finance the newspaper’s “mass propaganda” against his political party, violated the politician’s freedom of expression. The opinion in Kurski v. Poland dealt with the unusual, but not rare, situation when a newspaper launches defamation proceedings against a politician for damaging its reputation, and the broader issue of ordering publication of apologies. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Salihu v. Sweden, Criminal conviction for purchasing illegal firearm as a form of ‘check it out’ journalism upheld – Dirk Voorhoof and Daniel Simons

6 07 2016

ExpressenInvestigative journalism sometimes operates at the limits of the law. This is especially true of what could be called ‘check it out’ journalism: reporting in which a journalist tests how effective a law or procedure is by attempting to circumvent it. A recent decision shows that those who commit (minor) offences during this type of newsgathering activity cannot count on (major) support from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Read the rest of this entry »





Case Comment, Strasbourg: Fürst-Pfeifer v Austria: “A one-sided, unbalanced and fundamentally unjust judgment”? – Stijn Smet

22 06 2016

bezirksblatt-6322In Fürst-Pfeifer v Austria, the majority of the Fourth Section of the ECtHR ruled that the applicant’s right to private life was outweighed by the freedom of expression of an online publication and offline newspaper. In one of the fiercest and most poignant dissenting opinions I have read to date, Judges Wojtyczek and Kūris label the majority judgment as “a one-sided, unbalanced and … fundamentally unjust judgment” that “panders to prejudice” against persons, like the applicant, “with a history of mental-health problems”. Read the rest of this entry »





Call for Papers: Restricted and Redacted – Where now for human rights and digital information control?

31 05 2016

ILPC_at_the_Institute_of_Advanced_Legal_StudiesThe Information Law and Policy Centre at IALS is calling for papers for its annual research workshop on 9 November 2016 in London, this year supported by Bloomsbury’s Communications Law journal. The first workshop was held in 2015. Read the rest of this entry »