gough_uk201410
The applicant alleged that his repeated arrest, prosecution, conviction and imprisonment for being naked in public and his treatment in detention violated his rights under Articles 3, 5-1, 7-1, 8, 9 and 10 of the Convention.
Held: The application was dismissed. Going naked in public was the applicant’s chosen method of expressing himself, and as such came within the amibit of article 10. His repeated arrests and prosecutions were therefore an interference in his Article 10 rights.
However, the state had a wide margin of appreciation, and the measures met a pressing social need, and though cumulatively the measures became disproportionate, and having regard, in particular, to his own responsibility for his plight, the public authorities in Scotland had not unjustifiably interfered with his exercise of freedom of expression.
There appeared to be no support in any society for the applicant’s suggestion that the response had been an interference of any article 8 right.
Ineta Ziemele, P
49327/11 – Chamber Judgment, [2014] ECHR 1156
Bailii, Gazette
European Convention on Human Rights 3 5-1 7-1 8 9 10
Human Rights, Crime
Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.538215