Hudoc Grand Chamber – Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of Art. 10; Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings
The applicant was the major shareholder a Turkish company owning a weekly review entitled Haberde Yorumda Gercek published in Istanbul. The review published letters very critical of the Army in the conduct of the war against the PKK.
Held: The court convicting the applicant had not been sufficiently independent of the prosecuting authorities, including as it did military officers as members. Freedom of expression is one of the core rights protected by the Convention. It ‘constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and one of the basic conditions for its progress and for each individual’s self-fulfilment’. The exceptions in article 10(2) must therefore be ‘construed strictly and the need of any restrictions must be established convincingly’.
P Wildhaber P
 ECHR 51, 26682/95, (1999) 7 BHRC 339
European Convention on Human Rights 6-1 10
Cited – Lord Carlile of Berriew QC, and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 12-Nov-2014
The claimant had supported the grant of a visa to a woman in order to speak to members of Parliament who was de facto leader of an Iranian organsation which had in the past supported terrorism and had been proscribed in the UK, but that proscription . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights, Media, Armed Forces
Updated: 31 December 2021; Ref: scu.165735