Article 10 and 11 Flashcards
what does art 10 say
freedom of expression
what essentially are the purpose and content of article 10
is a ‘significant instrument of freedom of conscience and self-fulfilment’
enables peoples to ‘contribute to debates about social and moral issues’
allows ‘political discourse which aspires democracy’
‘facilitates artistic and scholastic endeavour of all sorts’
what happened in the case of sunday times v UK
article examined the background to the introduction of a drug
questioned the testing procedures of the drug
due to pending litigations related to the alleged negligence
AG obtained injunction prevening publication
what did the ECtHR hold in the case of sunday times v uk
freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society - it is applicable not only to information or ideas that are favourably received or regarded inoffensive or as a matter of indifference… but also to those that offend, shock or disturbs the state or any sector of the population
what does art 11 say
freedom of assembly and association
what does it mean by freedom of association
the right of an individual to join whichever organisations they wish, implies that the state shall not impose unjustified restrictions on the existence of such groups
what does it mean by freedom of assembly
refers to the right of an individual to meet with others in public or private and, in concert with them to march or demonstrate in support of whichever cause they may wish to further
so essentially what is art 11
it protects the right to organise and meet peacefully with others for a propagation of ideas such as political, social, cultural or economic ideas
it expressly guarantees the right to join a trade union
what happened in the case of ezelin v france
E, a french lawyer, took part in a public demonstration to protest against two judgments… he was reprimanded under professional rules and a disciplinary penalty was imposed on him - he was found not responsible for any graffiti but was punished for failing to leave the demonstration in order to dissociate himself from actions
what did the ECtHR hold in the case of ezelin v france
punitive measures taken after a meeting or assembly might be in the restrictions under art 1 - in this case particular rules governing the profession of a lawyer provided unequivocally that any lawyer, had special obligations including the respect due to judicial authorities
obligations were sufficiently precise to enable the consequences of an action to be foreseen and according were ‘prescribed by law’.
the prevention of disorder was a legitimate aim to justify the interference of rights under art 11
the applicant had therefore been punished for no dissociating himself from incidents occurred in the demonstration - could have been inferred that the applicant, as a lawyer, endorsed and actively supported such excesses
what else was said by the ECtHR in the case of ezelin v france
taking part in the demonstration in issue, he exercised both his freedoms in art 11 - the proportionality principle demanded that a balance be struck between the requirements of the purposes of art 11(2)
freedom to take part in a peaceful assembly was such importance that it could not be restricted in anyway even for a lawyer - accordingly the interference, conflicted with article 11
