БОРБА ПРОТИВ ТЕРОРИЗМА И ОГРАНИЧЕЊЕ СЛОБОДЕ ИЗРАЖАВАЊА: Нека разматрања о појединим пресудама Европског суда за људска права
Fight Against Terrorism And Limitation Of The Freedom Of Expression: Some Remarks On Recent Judgments Of The European Court Of Human Rights

Summary/Abstract: The paper compares three cases against Turkey involving terrorism and freedom of expression with a Montenegrin case involving a defamation of a public official in a matter of great public interest. It finds that in all four cases the ECtHR applied its standing scheme for supervising whether interference with the freedom of expression are justified. The Court neither saw a problem as to the legal basis for the interference, nor as to a legitimate aim to be pursued by the interference. It focused on exercising its supervisory function on whether Turkey and Montenegro used their margin of appreciation as to the interference complained of was necessary in a democratic society in order to pursue the legitimate aim. Since the Court in none of the three Turkish cases found an encouragement of the use of violence, it considered the measures of Turkey as disproportionate to the aims pursued as a consequence. In the Montenegrin case, the ECtHR accepted the applicant’s “robust clarification of a matter under discussion which was of great public interest” and found his freedom of expression violated considering the seriousness of the criminal sanction which was imposed on the applicant. Not terrorism as such and this context, but the call for violence makes the difference between a defamation case in a matter of great public interest and a terrorism case with regard to the freedom of expression.

• Details
• Contents