Conţinutul numărului revistei |
Articolul precedent |
Articolul urmator |
914 18 |
Ultima descărcare din IBN: 2024-05-11 09:50 |
SM ISO690:2012 PÎRLOG, Vitalie. Conţinutul libertăţii de exprimare protejate de Convenţia Europeană a drepturilor omului. In: Revista Moldovenească de Drept Internaţional şi Relaţii Internaţionale, 2011, nr. 4, pp. 90-102. ISSN 1857-1999. |
EXPORT metadate: Google Scholar Crossref CERIF DataCite Dublin Core |
Revista Moldovenească de Drept Internaţional şi Relaţii Internaţionale | ||||||
Numărul 4 / 2011 / ISSN 1857-1999 /ISSNe 2345-1963 | ||||||
|
||||||
Pag. 90-102 | ||||||
|
||||||
Descarcă PDF | ||||||
Rezumat | ||||||
The freedom of expression, in particularly through the mass-media, is a powerful instrument that carries specific obligations and responsibilities. If it is vital to protect the right for freedom of expression because of its power to promote democracy, to discover abuses and to help the political, artistic, scientific and commercial progress, it is also important to recognize that the free expression can be used equally to cause violence, spread hatred, and to violate the individual's private space and safety.
The interpretation of substantial number of articles of the Convention and the description of the protected rights often involves an exercise of balance between the applicant's interests and those of other individuals or the public as a whole. This is particularly correct for the freedom of speech, taking in consideration the power of media in modern society. It is possible to argue, in connection with several judgments and decisions that the Commission and Court did not assessed the balance correctly. Some commentators would consider that the judicial precedent of the Convention allows the state too broad the discretion to place limits on freedom of expression, while others will criticize some decisions as being too friendly with the media at the expense of individual rights to private space and freedom to make statements of racist hate. However, it remains clear that the consecration of freedom of expression in the text of the European Convention on Human Rights is an asset for democracy and promoting of human values. The existence of a large number of cases in the Court confirms the actuality of the human right and a permanent fight for its consecration, promotion and protection.
Another example of democracy is evidenced by the fact that expression is allowed in various forms, whether political, artistic or commercial, so a very large circle of people can choose the way how to exteriorize the transmitted message.
Because the Convention provides protection of this right for each person in the Court, as a plaintiffs appear different groups of people, the fact that permitted during the time the formation of a judicial precedent characteristic of each category and separate attitudes from the Court referred to each category.
As we analyzed, journalists are given the highest degree of protection, while politicians lowest degree of protection. Journalists receive this protection because their role in a society is to represent the public interest and public opinion, of those who are affected by the government's decisions. There are no specific provisions for the protection of media in accordance with the Convention; the press regime enjoys general protection provided by Article 10. Once a journalist will offer supporting evidence that has acted in good faith in the public interest, even if presented information that offend or shock, it will be protected by the Convention.
Obviously, freedom of expression is a right that is interconnected with other rights, and expands its scope till the sphere of other legal action. For example, it requires special attention when freedom of expression comes to limit privacy. In this context, it should be analyzed each situation and outlined the circumstances of each case.
Once enshrined in the Convention, this right offered to the individuals from the Member States of the Council of Europe, a real opportunity to defend themselves against state actions. Once enshrined in the Convention, the Convention itself as a regional instrument comes to meet the needs of those to whom it is addressed, and comes to establish a leading example for other regions, which subsequently adopted the human rights protection documents.
Given the generality of Article 10 and the different interpretations given by the judges of the Court in various cases, it may require some amendment of Article 10 and a concretization of its provisions. |
||||||
|