Auszug aus EKMR, 09.12.1987 - 10942/84

The case is notably distinguishable from the Glasenapp and Kosiek cases (Applications Nos. 9228/80 and 9704/82 respectively) where the Commission considered that, on the facts of those cases, those applicants had been called upon "to express their opinions, make clear their attitudes and make a formal declaration of their allegiance to the Constitution", and that accordingly those cases came within the terms of Article 10 of the Convention.

For the avoidance of doubt the Government still dispute the basis upon which the Commission declared the two above mentioned applications (Nos. 9228/80 and 9704/82) admissible, and do not consider that the issue arising in any of these three cases exceeds the boundaries of the question of access to the civil service, a right not guaranteed by the Convention.

In this respect the present case is to be distinguished from Application No. 9228/80 Glasenapp v. the Federal Republic of Germany and Application No. 9704/82 Kosiek v. the Federal Republic of Germany.

The Commission recalls that it has held that in certain cases the reactions of the authorities to the opinions held or expressed by individuals, including those employed in public service, may raise issues under Articles 10 and 11 (Art. 10, 11) of the Convention (No. 9228/80, Comm. Rep. 11.5.84; No. 10293/83, Dec. 12.12.85 (to be published in DR 45); No. 11603/85, Dec 20.1.87 (to be published)).

Where the operation of loyalty control impinges on an individual's freedom of expression an issue arises under Article 10 (Art. 10) of the Convention notwithstanding that the individual concerned is or would wish to be a civil servant (No. 9228/80 Comm. Report 11.5.84, paras. 67-77; No. 9704/82 Comm. Report 11.5.84, paras. 60-70).

This approach was specifically confirmed by the Court in its judgments in those two cases in which it declined the respondent Government's renewed invitation to find those applicants' complaints incompatible with the Convention (Glasenapp judgment of 28 August 1986, Series A no. 104, paras. 49-50; Kosiek judgment of 28 August 1986, Series A no. 105, paras. 35-36).

Auszug aus EKMR, 09.12.1987 - 10942/84

The case is notably distinguishable from the Glasenapp and Kosiek cases (Applications Nos. 9228/80 and 9704/82 respectively) where the Commission considered that, on the facts of those cases, those applicants had been called upon "to express their opinions, make clear their attitudes and make a formal declaration of their allegiance to the Constitution", and that accordingly those cases came within the terms of Article 10 of the Convention.

For the avoidance of doubt the Government still dispute the basis upon which the Commission declared the two above mentioned applications (Nos. 9228/80 and 9704/82) admissible, and do not consider that the issue arising in any of these three cases exceeds the boundaries of the question of access to the civil service, a right not guaranteed by the Convention.

In this respect the present case is to be distinguished from Application No. 9228/80 Glasenapp v. the Federal Republic of Germany and Application No. 9704/82 Kosiek v. the Federal Republic of Germany.

Where the operation of loyalty control impinges on an individual's freedom of expression an issue arises under Article 10 (Art. 10) of the Convention notwithstanding that the individual concerned is or would wish to be a civil servant (No. 9228/80 Comm. Report 11.5.84, paras. 67-77; No. 9704/82 Comm. Report 11.5.84, paras. 60-70).

This approach was specifically confirmed by the Court in its judgments in those two cases in which it declined the respondent Government's renewed invitation to find those applicants' complaints incompatible with the Convention (Glasenapp judgment of 28 August 1986, Series A no. 104, paras. 49-50; Kosiek judgment of 28 August 1986, Series A no. 105, paras. 35-36).

Auszug aus EKMR, 09.12.1987 - 10942/84

The Commission recalls that it has held that in certain cases the reactions of the authorities to the opinions held or expressed by individuals, including those employed in public service, may raise issues under Articles 10 and 11 (Art. 10, 11) of the Convention (No. 9228/80, Comm. Rep. 11.5.84; No. 10293/83, Dec. 12.12.85 (to be published in DR 45); No. 11603/85, Dec 20.1.87 (to be published)).

Auszug aus EKMR, 09.12.1987 - 10942/84

The Commission recalls that it has held that in certain cases the reactions of the authorities to the opinions held or expressed by individuals, including those employed in public service, may raise issues under Articles 10 and 11 (Art. 10, 11) of the Convention (No. 9228/80, Comm. Rep. 11.5.84; No. 10293/83, Dec. 12.12.85 (to be published in DR 45); No. 11603/85, Dec 20.1.87 (to be published)).