European Court of Human Rights

 1
Topic: European Court of Human Rights
Paper Type: Coursework
Word Count: 1500 words
Pages: 06 pages
Referencing Style: Oxford Referencing
Educational Level: Graduation
European Court of Human Rights
[Writer’s Name]
[Institute’s Name]
2
European Court of Human Rights
The Article 10 in European court of Human rights is concerned with the freedom of
expression. It states that every individual has the right to express his/her freedom. A person can
deliver his opinion or communicate information without consulting with frontiers and public
authority. The Article does not restrict states from demanding the license of Television,
Broadcasting or cinema business. The court views that this freedom will lead towards the growth
of individual people and development of democratic societies. The Article does not absolutely
allow freedom but the state might interfere with regards to some conditions mentioned in
paragraph 2 of the article.
This study will discuss the three legal cases of Cynthia, Damian & Tracy against State of
Dystopia. Trevor Tate, the cultural minister at government of Dystopia is representing his state.
Cynthia vs. State of Dystopia
Case Brief: under this case, Trevor Tate delivers a speech in which he said that
government will not incur expenditures over Artistic works that are degenerate, immoral or
deviate. Cynthia is a journalist working at Recorder Newspaper of Dystopia. She publishes in the
weekly column of newspaper regarding Trevor Tate that he is most immoral and degenerate
politician. Trevor Tate has claims against Cynthia in a prosecution and she is impose fine of
Euros 20,000.
Discussion: In this case I am writing on Behalf of Cynthia. The Article allows full right
to Cynthia in publishing his views regarding Trevor Tate as although the Article does not prevent
Trevor Tate from acquiring the license of Recorder Newspaper. Firstly, the court will investigate
2 factors from side of Trevor Tate. Firstly, whether Cynthia has acquired publishing rights and 
3
secondly what was the purpose of publishing information and whether it meets the criteria laid
out in Paragraph 2 of the Article 10. If Cynthia is not able to deliver the publishing rights than
Trevor Tate will be in advantageous position and his claim would stood. In this occasion Cynthia
will be liable for fine of 20,000 Euros as she is defeated by Trevor Tate from the law not
preventing state to acquire license from the opposing party.
If Cynthia is able to show the publishing rights than the matter will be resolved through
second paragraph of article. The 2nd paragraph describes some criteria which the information
must meet. The information which protects the citizen rights such as prevention of crime, public
safety and health protection are allowed to communicate publicly. The information designed to
protect other rights and those mandatory for maintaining the power of judiciary is also
permissible. In this case it is difficult to assess that whether views of Cynthia falls in any of the
category. It is dependent upon the character of Trevor Tate. Trevor Tate might be involved in
any illegal activities or done unfairness with the state, hence the court should allow freedom to
Cynthia in order to express her views. Cynthia’s intention is to protect the rights of citizens and
the decision of Trevor Tate over public spending of art might reduce further public expenditures
in the future. This signifies that Cynthia’s aim was to ensure the smooth running of Art industry
in Dystopia rather than blaming Trevor Tate over his intentions. The court should urgently revert
back the claim against Cynthia.
Case Related Example: The Thorgeir Thorgeirson case in 1992 June, was concerned
with the applicant’s conviction as he published 2 articles in newspaper regarding alleged police
brutality. The court state that the applicant statements will protect other rights and public has the
4
right to ware with such information.1 Hence it can be stated that Cynthia’s publication was also
permissible.
Damian Vs State of Dystopia
Case Brief: In this case, Damian draws painting of Trevor Tate in which he was
considered as degenerate, immoral and deviate. The public decency law at Dystopia limits
Damian over placing such paintings in his Gallery. Damian views that these restrictions will not
achieve his objective as lesser people will be targeted.
Discussion: The Court has not provided exclusive freedom of expression. In this case, I
am writing on behalf of Trevor Tate. The State of Dystopia might intervene regardless of the
medium through which the views and information are expressed. Although Damian has adopted
the medium through his own gallery but the public decency laws and Article 10 restricts him
from placing these portraits in the Gallery.
The license provided by Damian might be discarded by the state because the Public
decency laws of Dystopia has imposed restrictions of timing and audie