Application Number 34050/05
European Court of Human Rights
The applicant was, at the material time, deputy mayor of Lyon. In 2002, a ceremony took place on the occasion of an honorary event for the President of Jean Moulin Lyon III university. This event gave rise to a demonstration of people contesting the honor because of the complacency they attributed to him with regard to the racist and negationist ideas and theses defended within the university by some professors. One of the professors intervened and said:
“What you are saying is a scandal. I am proud to be Jewish and I am proud to be in Lyon III. “
The applicant (along with some others) replied:
“You are the shame of the community. “
She was convicted of publicly insulting a public official. The ECtHR found there to be a violation of Article 10.
Link: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-98346%22]}
Theme(s): Anti-Semitism, defamation
Date: 22 July 2010
Description of applicant(s): Deputy Mayor of Lyon
Brief description of facts: The applicant was, at the material time, deputy mayor of Lyon. In 2002, a ceremony took place on the occasion of an honorary event for the President of Jean Moulin Lyon III university. This event gave rise to a demonstration of people contesting the honor because of the complacency they attributed to him with regard to the racist and negationist ideas and theses defended within the university by some professors. One of the professors intervened and said:
“What you are saying is a scandal. I am proud to be Jewish and I am proud to be in Lyon III. ”
The applicant (along with some others) replied:
“You are the shame of the community. ”
And:
“We unfortunately know that there are Arabs who vote Le Pen and Jews who supported Hitler.
These statements were published and the applicant (and others) were summoned to appear before the Court for having uttered public insults against a public official. At the stage of the Court of Appeal, it was held that by declaring that the professor was “the shame of the community,” the applicant had meant that, because he worked at the Jean Moulin Lyon III University, he was unworthy of belonging to the Jewish community. The Court added that these comments implied that the staff of the said university were either anti-Semitic, revisionist or negationist.
The applicant was ordered to pay the civil party 2,500 Euro for costs not paid by the State.
(Alleged) target(s) of speech: Professor J-C.P and all professors of Lyon III.
The Court’s assessment of the impugned speech: In finding a violation of Article 10, the ECtHR noted that the impugned speech took place in the framework of a debate of general interest and thus the conviction of the applicant for public insult towards a public official could not be deemed necessary in a democratic society.
Important paragraph(s) from the judgment:
Para. 53: The Court therefore concluded that the disputed statements fell within the specific context of a national debate on a particularly sensitive subject. The remarks made by the applicant were made in the context of a demonstration which itself took place in the framework of a national, public and passionate debate and in response to a statement made by J.-C.P. himself to the protesters. Consequently, the disputed remarks seem to have been influenced by this statement.
ECHR Article: Article 10
Decision: Violation
Use of ‘hate speech’ by the Court in its assessment? No