SPECIAL COLLECTION OF THE CASE LAW ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION II. Introduction The right to freedom of expression has been described by the ECtHR —in the case of Von Hannover v. Germany (No. 2)— as “…one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and one of the basic conditions for its progress and for each individual’s self-fulfillment”. However, as with any right, it is subject to limitations. In any case, any interference with this right, to be legitimate, must be prescribed by law, pursue a legitimate aim, and be necessary and proportionate, in the context of a democratic society, to achieve its aim. One of the legitimate aims that may justify the limitation of freedom of expression—as long as the other criteria are met—is the right to privacy. Privacy has been defined by the IACtHR —in Fontevecchia and D’amico v. Argentina— as a fundamental right that guarantees “being free and immune to invasions or abusive or arbitrary attacks by third parties or public authority and may include, among other dimensions, the freedom to make decisions related to various areas of a The border between a person’s life, a peaceful personal space, the option of reserving certain aspects of private life, and control robust exercise of freedom of the dissemination of personal information to the of expression and proper public”. protection of the right to privacy has been a matter of intense judicial scrutiny by numerous courts around the world. The border between a robust exercise of freedom of expression and proper protection of the right to privacy has been a matter of intense judicial scrutiny by numerous courts around the world. This paper aims to provide a brief outlook on how the protection of privacy by courts can also reinforce the protection of freedom of expression, and the case law where the protection of privacy has come into conflict with the exercise of such right. In this paper, we have decided to include emblematic cases about the protection of privacy, that although do not explicitly analyze freedom of expression, provide robust protection to the aforementioned right due to the interdependence between privacy and freedom of expression. For instance, in cases where courts have acknowledged the negative impact of systems of mass surveillance, or overly broad data collection, on the right to privacy, the scope of freedom of expression expanded too, by providing an advantageous legal framework against the potential chilling effect that constant or large-scale vigilance has on citizens, among other things. In fact, the reader will be able to learn from this paper that worldwide case law on the protection of the right to privacy from indiscriminate communication surveillance, has become fundamental to the free exercise of speech, particularly for critical journalism and public debate. Other areas where the protection of privacy reinforces freedom of expression are the protection 9