| Tittel: | Avvägningen mellan yttrandefriheten och skyddet för privatliv i EMD:s praxis - lotteri eller enhetlig verksamhet? | | Ansvar: | Päivi Tiilikka | | Forfatter: | Tiilikka, Päivi  | | Materialtype: | Artikkel - elektronisk | | Signatur: | Nordisk tidsskrift for kriminalvidenskab | | Utgitt: | København : De nordiske kriminalistforeninger, 2013 | | Omfang: | S. 156-184 | | ISBN/ISSN: | 2446-3051 | | Serie: | Nordisk tidsskrift for kriminalvidenskab ; 2/2012 | | Innhold: | Abstract
This article examines the praxis of the European Court of Human Rights (ECrtHR)when balancing the protection of privacy and freedom of expression. As theECrtHR has constantly stated, the freedom of expression, as guaranteed in theECHR Article 10, constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and one of the basic conditions for its progress and for each individual’sself-fulfillment. The concept of private life, as guaranteed by the ECHR, Article 8 ,is a broad term, which covers the physical and psychological integrity of the person. It also covers the protection of reputation and honor, as well as the right topersonal information - which individuals can legitimately expect should not bepublished without their consent. This article discusses the protection of privacyonly in the latter sense.The text describes and analyzes the ECrtHR's case law regarding the balancing of freedom of expression and the right to privacy. Until the early 2000s, theprotection of private life was considered an acceptable limitation on the freedom of expression. However, in the current court practice, the right to privacy is considered as an equivalent right to freedom of speech. This has made the weightingand balancing between the protection of privacy and freedom of expression amore difficult task both in the national courts and in the ECHR.The article examines the key criteria which are important when balancing thefreedom of expression and the protection of private life, namely: the ECrtHR'sgeneral interpretation principles; the margin of appreciation; contribution to adebate of general interest; the public role of the person concerned; the subject of the news reporting; how information is obtained and verified; the content, formand consequences of the publication; the special characteristics of photography;and the proportionality of the sanctions imposed.The writer concludes that the application of the aforementioned criteria hasnot always been consistent. If the EC rtH R’s court practice is too inconsistent it can jeopardize the legal certainty and reduce the intelligibility and prestige of theECHR '.y praxis. At the same time it is increasingly difficult for the national courts to implement the praxis of the ECrtHR to the national jurisdiction. If the praxis o fthe European Court of Human Rights appears to be too contradictory or confusing it can undermine the respect of its judgments and lead to diminishing rebuke of its condemnatory judgments. | | Del av verk: | Nordisk tidsskrift for kriminalvidenskab 2/2012 |
|
|