Précédent 1 / 25 Next

THIRD SECTION CASE OF GRA STIFTUNG GEGEN RASSISMUS UND ANTISEMITISMUS v. SWITZERLAND (Application no. 18597/13) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG 9 January 2018 FINAL 09/04/2018 This judgment has become final under Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.

Sélectionner le paragraphe cible3

● ● ●

Stiftung Gegen Rassismus und Antisemitismus v. Switzerland

Case Law

Country

Switzerland

Country Location

Latitude: 46.934601823058706

Longitude: 8.158761407698423

Country Location (Lié Case Law): Switzerland

Decision Date: 9 janv. 2018

Case Status: Affaire Résolue

Case Outcome (Procedural)

Dismissed
Motion Granted
Reversed Lower Court

Case Outcome (Disposition)

Law or Action Overturned or Deemed Unconstitutional

Keywords

Defamation
Political Expression
Racism

Judicial Body: European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)

Case Number: 18597/13

Case Summary: The European Court of Human Rights found that the Swiss courts had violated an NGO's right to freedom of expression when it decided that the NGO had infringed a young politician's personality rights by describing one of his speeches as "racist." The NGO (GRA Foundation against Racism and Anti-Semitism) had posted an entry on its website quoting the young politician’s speech about the banning of minarets in a section of the site entitled “Chronology – verbal racism.” Subsequently, the politician successfully filed a claim against the NGO before the domestic courts for the protection of his personality rights. The European Court of Human Rights found that the NGO's use of the term “verbal racism” was supported by a sufficient factual basis. It also took into account the fact that the politician's speech related to an intense public debate on whether the building of minarets should be banned in Switzerland. The European Court of Human Rights also noted that the penalty imposed on the NGO might have had a "chilling effect" on its ability to criticize political statements in the future. It concluded that, in this case, the domestic courts had not adequately balanced the right to respect for the politician’s private life against the NGO’s right to freedom of expression.

Case Significance: The decision establishes a binding or persuasive precedent within its jurisdiction.

Source Name and URL: Columbia Global Freedom of Expression

Collection

CIPIT

Date Updated: 15 mai 2024

Documents principaux

CASE OF GRA STIFTUNG GEGEN RASSISMUS UND ANTISEMITISMUS v. SWITZERLAND.pdf
English
Télécharger Vue

CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

Sélectionner le paragraphe cible3

Stiftung Gegen Rassismus und Antisemitismus v. Switzerland

Documents principaux

Notifications