Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  IBRAGIM IBRAGIMOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression-general (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just ...

Kurzfassungen/Presse

• lto.de (Kurzinformation)

  Verstoß gegen Religions- und Meinungsfreiheit: russisches Verbot von islamischen Büchern gekippt

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (7)Neu Zitiert selbst (17)

• EGMR, 05.10.2006 - 72881/01

  BRANCHE DE MOSCOU DE L'ARMEE DU SALUT c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 1413/08

  In the Court's opinion, the use of military metaphors in the text, in the absence of the other elements mentioned in paragraph 99 above, is insufficient to make that text amount to "hate speech" or calls to violence (compare Moscow Branch of the Salvation Army v. Russia, no. 72881/01, § 92, ECHR 2006-XI).
• EGMR, 15.09.2015 - 29680/05

  DILIPAK c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 1413/08

  It has also stressed that statements expressing deep-seated and irrational hatred towards identified persons may be interpreted as likely to encourage violence (see, mutatis mutandis, Dilipak v. Turkey, no. 29680/05, § 62, 15 September 2015, with further references).
• EGMR, 11.12.2019 - 33629/06

  VAJNAI AGAINST HUNGARY AND 5 OTHER CASES

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 1413/08

  Whilst such sentiments are understandable, they alone cannot set the limits of freedom of expression (see, for a similar approach, Vajnai v. Hungary, no. 33629/06, § 57, ECHR 2008).

 
• EGMR, 03.10.2017 - 42168/06

  DMITRIYEVSKIY v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 1413/08

  Attacks on persons committed by insulting, holding up to ridicule or slandering specific groups of the population can be sufficient for the authorities to favour combating xenophobic or otherwise discriminatory speech in the face of freedom of expression exercised in an irresponsible manner (see Dmitriyevskiy v. Russia, no. 42168/06, § 99, 3 October 2017, with further references).
• EGMR, 23.04.1992 - 11798/85

  CASTELLS v. SPAIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 1413/08

  The Court notes that it has previously found a violation of Article 10 of the Convention on account of a breach of equality of arms in freedom-of-expression cases, in particular in situations where the applicants had been hindered in adducing evidence in support of their position (see Castells v. Spain, 23 April 1992, § 48, Series A no. 236, and Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 95, ECHR 2005-II) or where the domestic courts had dismissed all the arguments in the applicant's defence in a summary manner, thereby stripping him of the procedural protection that he had been entitled to enjoy by virtue of his rights under Article 10 of the Convention (see Dmitriyevskiy, cited above, § 116).
• EGMR, 27.11.2007 - 6587/03

  NUR RADYO VE TELEVIZYON YAYINCILIGI A.S. c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 1413/08

  Thus, the Court has held that it may be considered necessary in certain democratic societies to sanction or even prevent all forms of expression which spread, incite, promote or justify hatred based on intolerance (including religious intolerance), provided that any "formalities", "conditions", "restrictions" or "penalties" imposed are proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued (see Gündüz v. Turkey, no. 35071/97, § 40, ECHR 2003-XI; Nur Radyo Ve Televizyon Yayinciligi A.S. v. Turkey, no. 6587/03, § 28, 27 November 2007; and Kutlular, cited above, § 47).
• EGMR, 04.12.2003 - 35071/97

  GUNDUZ v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 1413/08

  Thus, the Court has held that it may be considered necessary in certain democratic societies to sanction or even prevent all forms of expression which spread, incite, promote or justify hatred based on intolerance (including religious intolerance), provided that any "formalities", "conditions", "restrictions" or "penalties" imposed are proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued (see Gündüz v. Turkey, no. 35071/97, § 40, ECHR 2003-XI; Nur Radyo Ve Televizyon Yayinciligi A.S. v. Turkey, no. 6587/03, § 28, 27 November 2007; and Kutlular, cited above, § 47).
• EGMR, 22.10.2007 - 21279/02

  LINDON, OTCHAKOVSKY-LAURENS ET JULY c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 1413/08

  Accordingly, many laws are inevitably couched in terms which, to a greater or lesser extent, are vague, and whose interpretation and application are questions of practice (see, for example, Lindon, Otchakovsky-Laurens and July v. France [GC], nos. 21279/02 and 36448/02, § 41, ECHR 2007-IV; Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, § 141, ECHR 2012; and Delfi AS, cited above, § 121).
• EGMR, 14.12.1999 - 38178/97

  SERIF c. GRECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 1413/08

  Accordingly, the role of the authorities in such circumstances is not to remove the cause of tension by eliminating pluralism, but to ensure that the competing groups tolerate each other (see Serif v. Greece, no. 38178/97, § 53, ECHR 1999-IX, and Leyla Sahin, cited above, § 107).
• EGMR, 28.06.2001 - 24699/94

  VgT VEREIN GEGEN TIERFABRIKEN c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 1413/08

  The Court reiterates that the expression "prescribed by law" in the second paragraph of Article 10 not only requires that the impugned measure should have a legal basis in domestic law, but also refers to the quality of the law in question, which should be accessible to the person concerned and foreseeable as to its effects (see, among other authorities, VgT Verein gegen Tierfabriken v. Switzerland, no. 24699/94, § 52, ECHR 2001-VI; Gaweda v. Poland, no. 26229/95, § 39, ECHR 2002-II; Maestri v. Italy [GC], no. 39748/98, § 30, ECHR 2004-I; and Delfi AS v. Estonia [GC], no. 64569/09, § 120, ECHR 2015).
• EGMR, 01.07.2014 - 43835/11

  Gesichtsschleier-Verbot rechtens
• EGMR, 07.02.2012 - 40660/08

  Caroline von Hannover kann keine Untersagung von Bildveröffentlichungen über sie …
• EGMR, 25.05.1993 - 14307/88

  KOKKINAKIS c. GRÈCE
• EGMR, 07.12.1976 - 5493/72

  HANDYSIDE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 20.09.1994 - 13470/87

  OTTO-PREMINGER-INSTITUT v. AUSTRIA
• EGMR, 17.02.2004 - 39748/98

  MAESTRI c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 14.03.2002 - 26229/95

  GAWEDA v. POLAND

• EGMR, 14.02.2023 - 21884/18

  "Lux-Leaks": Informant Halet zu Unrecht bestraft

  S'agissant plus précisément de l'article 10 de la Convention, la Cour souligne qu'un raisonnement insuffisant ou des lacunes dans le raisonnement des juridictions internes ont également pu la conduire à constater une violation de cette disposition, dès lors que ces lacunes avaient pour effet de l'empêcher d'exercer un contrôle effectif sur la question de savoir si les autorités nationales ont correctement appliqué les normes établies par sa jurisprudence (voir, par exemple, Ergündogan c. Turquie, no 48979/10, § 33, 17 avril 2018, et Ibragim Ibragimov et autres c. Russie, nos 1413/08 et 28621/11, §§ 106-111, 28 août 2018).
• EGMR, 14.06.2022 - 44652/18

  PONTA c. ROUMANIE

  Or la Cour estime qu'en exigeant du requérant qu'il prouve la véracité de ses propos tout en lui déniant une possibilité effective de produire des éléments à l'appui de sa défense, les juridictions roumaines ont excédé la marge d'appréciation dont elles disposaient (voir, entre autres et mutatis mutandis, Jerusalem c. Autriche, no 26958/95, §§ 45-46, CEDH 2001-II ; Flux c. Moldova (no 2), no 31001/03, § 44, 3 juillet 2007 ; et Ibragim Ibragimov et autres c. Russie, nos 1413/08 et 28621/11, § 108 in fine, 28 août 2018).

  Enfin, les arrêts cités au paragraphe 62 de l'arrêt (Jerusalem c. Autriche, no 26958/95, §§ 45-46, CEDH 2001 II, Flux c. Moldova (no 2), no 31001/03, § 44, 3 juillet 2007, et Ibragim Ibragimov et autres c. Russie, nos 1413/08 et 28621/11, § 108 in fine, 28 août 2018) ne semblent pas pertinents car il était question dans ces affaires de juridictions internes qui n'avaient pas correctement tenu compte d'éléments de preuve qui avaient été présentés, alors qu'en l'espèce aucun élément de ce type n'a été produit.

• EGMR, 11.02.2020 - 4493/11

  ATAMANCHUK v. RUSSIA

  It is the interplay between the various factors rather than any of them taken in isolation that determines the outcome of a particular case (see Mariya Alekhina and Others v. Russia, no. 38004/12, §§ 217-21, 17 July 2018, and Ibragim Ibragimov and Others, nos. 1413/08 and 28621/11, § 99, 28 August 2018).

  1413/08 and 28621/11, § 124, 28 August 2018).

 
• EGMR, 14.12.2021 - 37508/12

  CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY MOSCOW AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  1413/08 and 28621/11, §§ 41-47, 28 August 2018.

  The Court will therefore examine the present case under Article 10 read in the light of Article 9 (see Ibragim Ibragimov and Others, cited above, nos. 1413/08 and 28621/11, § 78).

• EGMR, 07.06.2022 - 32401/10

  TAGANROG LRO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  The Court reiterates that preference for one's own religion, the perception of it as unique and the only true one or as a "superior explanation of the universe" is a cornerstone of almost any religious system, as is the assessment of the other faiths as "false", "wrong" or "not conducive to salvation" (see Ibragim Ibragimov and Others v. Russia, nos. 1413/08 and 28621/11, §§ 116-17, 28 August 2018).
• EGMR, 22.06.2021 - 5869/17

  ERKIZIA ALMANDOZ c. ESPAGNE

  L'incitation à la haine n'implique pas nécessairement un appel explicite à un acte de violence ou à d'autres actes criminels (Féret c. Belgique, no 15615/07, § 73, 16 juillet 2009, Vejdeland et autres c. Suède, no 1813/07, § 55, 9 février 2012, Dmitriyevskiy c. Russie, no 42168/06, § 99, 3 octobre 2017, Ibragim Ibragimov et autres c. Russie, nos 1413/08 et 28621/11, § 94, 28 août 2018, et Atamanchuk c. Russie, no 4493/11, § 52, 11 février 2020).
• EGMR, 30.06.2020 - 21768/12

  PETRO CARBO CHEM S.E. c. ROUMANIE

  Il s'ensuit que la mise en balance des intérêts concurrents effectuée par les juridictions internes n'a pas été suffisamment inspirée par les critères ressortant de la jurisprudence citée au paragraphe 40 ci-dessus (voir, mutatis mutandis, Ibragim Ibragimov et autres c. Russie, nos 1413/08 et 28621/11, §§ 107-111, 28 août 2018).