Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 24.07.2012 - 40721/08   

Sie müssen eingeloggt sein, um diese Funktion zu nutzen.

Sie haben noch kein Nutzerkonto? In weniger als einer Minute ist es eingerichtet und Sie können sofort diese und weitere kostenlose Zusatzfunktionen nutzen.

| | Was ist die Merkfunktion?
Ablegen in
Benachrichtigen, wenn:




 
Alle auswählen
 

Zitiervorschläge

https://dejure.org/2012,27194
EGMR, 24.07.2012 - 40721/08 (https://dejure.org/2012,27194)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 24.07.2012 - 40721/08 (https://dejure.org/2012,27194)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 24. Juli 2012 - 40721/08 (https://dejure.org/2012,27194)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2012,27194) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    FÁBER v. HUNGARY

    Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 11, Art. 11 Abs. 1 MRK
    Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression -General (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression) read in the light of Article 11 - (Art. 11) Freedom of assembly and association (Article 11-1 - Freedom of peaceful assembly) (englisch)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    FÁBER v. HUNGARY - [Deutsche Übersetzung] summary by the Austrian Institute for Human Rights (ÖIM)

    [DEU] Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression -General (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression) read in the light of Article 11 - (Art. 11) Freedom of assembly and association (Article 11-1 - Freedom of peaceful assembly);Non-pecuniary damage - award ...

Kurzfassungen/Presse (2)

Sonstiges

 
Sortierung



Kontextvorschau





Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (34)

  • EGMR, 15.10.2015 - 27510/08

    Leugnung des Völkermords an Armeniern von Meinungsfreiheit gedeckt

    Another factor has been whether the statements, fairly construed and seen in their immediate or wider context, could be seen as a direct or indirect call for violence or as a justification of violence, hatred or intolerance (see, among other authorities, Incal v. Turkey, 9 June 1998, § 50, Reports 1998-IV; Sürek (no. 1), cited above, § 62; Özgür Gündem v. Turkey, no. 23144/93, § 64, ECHR 2000-III; Gündüz v. Turkey, no. 35071/97, §§ 48 and 51, ECHR 2003-XI; Soulas and Others, cited above, §§ 39-41 and 43; Balsyte-Lideikiene, cited above, §§ 79-80; Féret, cited above, §§ 69-73 and 78; Hizb ut-Tahrir and Others, cited above, § 73; Kasymakhunov and Saybatalov, cited above, §§ 107-12; Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, §§ 52 and 56-58, 24 July 2012; and Vona, cited above, §§ 64-67).
  • EGMR, 18.12.2012 - 3111/10

    Menschenrechtsgerichtshof verurteilt Türkei wegen Online-Zensur

    The political and historical nature of the publications on Atatürk should also have been taken into account (for the differences between a speech on "established historical facts" and an ongoing debate on historical facts, see my separate opinion in Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, 24 July 2012).
  • EGMR, 17.12.2013 - 27510/08

    Leugnung des Völkermords an den Armeniern kann von Meinungsfreiheit gedeckt sein

    Under particular circumstances (see, conversely, Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, 24 July 2012) such remarks, combined with negationist discourse, might have resulted in a clear and present danger of incitement to hatred, the standard applied by the Court in similar cases for finding that the interference of the criminal law was proportionate (see Gül and Others v. Turkey, no. 4870/02, § 42, 8 June 2010).

    [36] See Judge Pinto de Albuquerque's separate opinion in Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, 24 July 2012.

  • EGMR, 09.07.2013 - 35943/10

    VONA v. HUNGARY

    Voir mon opinion dissidente jointe à l'arrêt Fáber c. Hongrie, no 40721/08, 24 juillet 2012.
  • EGMR, 15.05.2014 - 19554/05

    TARANENKO v. RUSSIA

    To sum up, the Court reiterates that any measures interfering with freedom of assembly and expression other than in cases of incitement to violence or rejection of democratic principles do a disservice to democracy and often even endanger it (see Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, § 37, 24 July 2012).

    On the clear and imminent danger test see the opinion of Judge Pinto de Albuquerque in Faber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, 24 July 2012.

  • EGMR, 15.11.2018 - 29580/12

    Alexei Anatoljewitsch Nawalny

    It appears that the nuisance caused by the applicant and his fellow protestors caused a certain disruption to ordinary life but did not in the concrete circumstances exceed that level of minor disturbance that follows from normal exercise of the right of peaceful assembly in a public place (see Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, § 47, 24 July 2012; Bukta and Others v. Hungary, no. 25691/04, § 37, ECHR 2007-III; cf. Kudrevicius and Others, cited above, §§ 149, 164-75).

    See, for example, about revisionism, Garaudy v. France (dec.), no. 65831/01, 24 June 2003; Perinçek v. Switzerland [GC], no. 27510/08, ECHR 2015 (extracts), promoting totalitarian ideas; Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, 24 July 2012, hate speech; Norwood v. the United Kingdom, (dec.), no. 23131/03, ECHR 2004-XI, incitement to violence; and Hizb Ut-Tahrir and Others v. Germany (dec.), no. 31098/08, 12 June 2012.

  • EGMR, 04.12.2014 - 76204/11

    NAVALNYY AND YASHIN v. RUSSIA

    In particular, where irregular demonstrators do not engage in acts of violence the Court has required that the public authorities show a certain degree of tolerance towards peaceful gatherings if the freedom of assembly guaranteed by Article 11 of the Convention is not to be deprived of all substance (ibid., § 42; see also see Bukta and Others v. Hungary, no. 25691/04, § 34, ECHR 2007-III; Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, § 49, 24 July 2012; Berladir and Others v. Russia, no. 34202/06, § 38, 10 July 2012; Malofeyeva v. Russia, no. 36673/04, §§ 136-37, 30 May 2013, and Kasparov, cited above, § 91).

    1, paragraph 34; see also, finally, the opinion of Judge Pinto de Albuquerque in Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, 24 July 2012, reiterated in the opinion of Judges Raimondi, Jociene and Pinto de Albuquerque in Kudrevicius and Others v. Lithuania, no. 37553/05, 26 November 2013, the opinion of Judges Pinto de Albuquerque, Turkovic and Dedov in Taranenko, cited above, and the opinion of Judges Pinto de Albuquerque and Turkovic, in Primov and Others, cited above).

  • EGMR, 17.07.2018 - 38004/12

    Mariya Alekhina u.a. ./. Russland - "Pussy Riot"-Urteil verletzt Meinungsfreiheit

    Another factor has been whether the statements, fairly construed and seen in their immediate or wider context, could be seen as a direct or indirect call for violence or as a justification of violence, hatred or intolerance (see, among other authorities, Incal v. Turkey, 9 June 1998, § 50, Reports 1998-IV; Sürek (no. 1), cited above, § 62; Özgür Gündem v. Turkey, no. 23144/93, § 64, ECHR 2000-III; Gündüz v. Turkey, no. 35071/97, §§ 48 and 51, ECHR 2003-XI; Soulas and Others, cited above, §§ 39-41 and 43; Balsyte-Lideikiene, cited above, §§ 79-80; Féret, cited above, §§ 69-73 and 78; Hizb ut-Tahrir and Others v. Germany (dec.), no. 31098/08, § 73, 12 June 2012; Kasymakhunov and Saybatalov, cited above, §§ 107-12; Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, §§ 52 and 56-58, 24 July 2012; and Vona v. Hungary, no. 35943/10, §§ 64-67, ECHR 2013).
  • EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 21613/07

    KASPAROV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    In particular, where irregular demonstrators do not engage in acts of violence the Court has required that the public authorities show a certain degree of tolerance towards peaceful gatherings if the freedom of assembly guaranteed by Article 11 of the Convention is not to be deprived of all substance (ibid., § 42; see also Bukta and Others v. Hungary, no. 25691/04, § 34, ECHR 2007-III; Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, § 49, 24 July 2012, and Berladir and Others v. Russia, no. 34202/06, § 38, 10 July 2012).
  • EGMR, 07.02.2017 - 57818/09

    LASHMANKIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    It is thus the duty of Contracting States to take reasonable and appropriate measures to enable lawful demonstrations to proceed peacefully (Plattform "Ärzte für das Leben" v. Austria, 21 June 1988, §§ 32 and 34, Series A no. 139; Barankevich v. Russia, no. 10519/03, §§ 31 and 32, 26 July 2007; and Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, §§ 38-40, 24 July 2012).
  • EGMR, 05.01.2016 - 74568/12

    Russland verurteilt: 25.000 Euro wegen Festnahme nach Demo

  • EGMR, 21.07.2015 - 931/13

    Keine Verletzung des Rechts auf Meinungsäußerung durch Verbot der

  • EGMR, 15.09.2015 - 29680/05

    DILIPAK c. TURQUIE

  • EGMR, 30.05.2013 - 36673/04

    MALOFEYEVA v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 17.01.2017 - 10851/13

    KIRÁLY AND DÖMÖTÖR v. HUNGARY

  • EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 2653/13

    YAROSLAV BELOUSOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 37553/05

    KUDREVICIUS AND OTHERS v. LITHUANIA

  • EGMR, 26.04.2016 - 25501/07

    NOVIKOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 02.02.2017 - 29580/12

    NAVALNYY v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 21.10.2014 - 9540/07

    MURAT VURAL v. TURKEY

  • EGMR, 15.10.2015 - 60259/11

    GAFGAZ MAMMADOV v. AZERBAIJAN

  • EGMR, 13.03.2018 - 51168/15

    Spanien: Foto des Königspaares verbrannt - Strafe unzulässig

  • EGMR, 22.05.2018 - 27585/13

    UNITED CIVIL AVIATION TRADE UNION AND CSORBA v. HUNGARY

  • EGMR, 19.12.2017 - 60087/10

    ÖGRÜ ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE

  • EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 20347/07

    EGITIM VE BILIM EMEKÇILERI SENDIKASI ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE

  • EGMR, 27.02.2018 - 39496/11

    SINKOVA v. UKRAINE

  • EGMR, 11.02.2016 - 69234/11

    IBRAHIMOV AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

  • EGMR, 13.12.2016 - 51988/07

    KASPAROV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (No. 2)

  • EGMR, 23.01.2018 - 19620/12

    AKARSUBASI ET ALÇIÇEK c. TURQUIE

  • EGMR, 06.10.2015 - 15450/03

    MÜDÜR DUMAN v. TURKEY

  • EGMR, 28.03.2017 - 42878/05

    SOLARI c. RÉPUBLIQUE DE MOLDOVA

  • EGMR - 77400/14 (anhängig)

    AYOUB c. FRANCE

  • EGMR - 34532/15 (anhängig)

    BENEDETTI ET OEUVRE FRANCAISE c. FRANCE

  • EGMR - 34550/15 (anhängig)

    GABRIAC ET JEUNESSES NATIONALISTES c. FRANCE

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Neu: Die Merklistenfunktion erreichen Sie nun über das Lesezeichen oben.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht