Rights explained Article 10
Article 10 ECHR: Freedom of Expression, Its Limits and Leading Cases
Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights guarantees freedom of expression, including the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas. It is the main Convention basis for press freedom, and the Court's case law on it has reached sport through doping investigations, advertising rules and the protection of journalists' sources.
What does Article 10 protect?
Paragraph 1 begins: "Everyone has the right to freedom of expression." It continues that the right includes freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. States may still require the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
The Court's guide quotes Handyside v. the United Kingdom (1976) for the view that expression is one of the essential foundations of a democratic society. The same passage extends protection to ideas that offend, shock or disturb, which the Court links to pluralism and tolerance. The guide notes that the Court has repeated this formula many times since 1976, and that Handyside itself concerned the confiscation of a publication.
When can expression be restricted?
Paragraph 2 notes that the exercise of these freedoms carries duties and responsibilities, so it may be subject to formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties that are prescribed by law and necessary in a democratic society. The listed interests include national security, territorial integrity, public safety, prevention of disorder or crime, protection of health or morals, protection of the reputation or rights of others, preventing disclosure of information received in confidence, and maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
The guide stresses that these exceptions must be construed strictly and that the need for any restriction must be established convincingly.
Which sport cases have reached Strasbourg?
In Ressiot and Others v. France (28 June 2012), investigators searched the premises of L'Equipe and Le Point and the homes of journalists to identify the source of leaks in a doping investigation in cycle racing. The journalists were accused of breaching the confidentiality of a judicial investigation. The Court found a violation, holding that France had not shown a fair balance between the interests involved and that the measures were not reasonably proportionate to the legitimate aim, given the interest of a democratic society in press freedom.
In Hachette Filipacchi Presse Automobile and Dupuy v. France and a companion case (5 March 2009), magazine publishers were convicted for publishing photographs of a Formula 1 driver wearing a cigarette brand logo, contrary to tobacco advertising rules. The Court found no violation, citing the importance of protecting public health and the European consensus on banning tobacco advertising.
The publishers also complained of unequal treatment compared with audiovisual media broadcasting motor sport. The Court found no violation of Article 14 either, observing that it was not feasible at the time to hide logos on broadcast footage, whereas on a magazine page they could be left out or blurred. Article 10 is also subject to Article 16 of the Convention, which provides that Articles 10, 11 and 14 do not prevent restrictions on the political activity of aliens.
