Art 10 - Right to Freedom of Expression

Question 1

Intro

Answer 1

• Art 10 = freedom to hold opinions, impart info and receive info/ideas, without state interference, regardless of frontiers (Autronic AG v Switzerland)
• Qualified
• Fundamental
• Broadly interpreted = wide margin (Handyside v UK)
• Importance
  –> Inform parl of public opinion
  –> Influence law reform
  –> Makes people heard

Question 2

Freedom to hold opinions

Answer 2

• Absolute (cannot limit)
• Cannot interfere with/indoctrinate/force to share by state
• State cannot discriminate (Vogt v Germany)

Question 3

Freedom for express opinions and impart info/ideas

Answer 3

• Freedom of press (narrow)
  –> Not have to disclose source (Goodwin v UK)
  –> Cannot breach statute (SpyCatcher)
  –> Often conflicts Art 8 (Axel Springer v Germany)
  |–> Consider = public interest, notoriety, prev behaviour, truth, consequence, sanction severity
• Political expression (narrow)
  –> Debates/elections = bedrock of society
  –> ECtHR encourages criticism (watchdog)
  –> Better to criticise politicians than normal people (Lingens v Austria)
• Artistic expression (wide)
  –> Multiculturalism (Otto Preminger v Austria)
  –> Frequent conflict (Art 9 - religion)
  –> Outraging public decency (Muller v Switzerland, Gibson + Slyviere)
  –> Obscene political art satirical (BBK v Austria)
• Civil/public interest (wide)
  –> Right to be properly informed (Sunday Times v UK)
  –> Right to protest as matter of public interest (Morris v UK)
  –> Includes offensive/shocking/controversial expression of views (Jersild v Denmark, Monnat v Switzerland)
• Incitement of hatred (wide)
  –> Not cover hate speech (undermines ECHR)
  –> Interfere for legit aims (Garaufy v France)

Question 4

Freedom to receive info/ideas

Answer 4

• Right to gather/seek info from lawful sources
• Not demand state provide info (Guerra v Italy)
• State provided info must be fair + impartial

Question 5

Art 10(1) - Scope

Answer 5

• Speaking
• Writing (books, newspapers, journals)
• Art (paintings, dance, theatre, music)
• Social media
• Press (newspapers, TV, radio)
• Civil/political matters (marches, protests)

Question 6

Art 10(2) - Limitations

Answer 6

• In accordance with law
  –> Breach of confidence
  –> Defamation
  –> Outraging public decency
  –> Obscene Publications Act 1959
  –> Theatres Act 1968
  –> Broadcasting Act 1990
  –> Defamation Act 2013
• Necessary in a democratic society
  –> Meet pressing social need
• Proportionate to legit aim
  –> National security (SpyCatcher, Off Sec Act)
  –> Territorial integrity/public safety (border protection, Shaylar (no defence of pub interest))
  –> Crime/disorder (Garaudy v France, Brind v UK, Howell, POA 1986)
  –> Health/morals (public decency (Gibson), obscene publications (Muller v Switzerland, Lady Chatterley’s Lover))
  –> Oth rights/freedoms (6>10 - Bedat v Switzerland)
  –> Prev conf disc (sig pub interest/PA wrongdoing > confidentiality (Heinisch v Germany)
  –> Judicial authority/impartiality
  |–> Restrict press before trial (Sunday Times v UK, Bedat v Switzerland)
  |–> Offence to record in Ct (Contempt of Ct Act 1981, Pinto Coelho v Portugal)
  |–> Jury equity (can’t discuss decision)