![]() ![]() The Court is not convinced by the argument, also stressed by the national courts see paragraphs 14 and 18 abovethat the Greenjackets item was presented without any attempt to counterbalance the extremist views expressed. The minority, on the other hand, considered that the right to information overrode the interests protected by Article b of the Penal Code. It is common ground that the measures giving rise to the applicant’s v.denmak constituted an interference with his right to freedom of expression. R v.denmarkk S topic This is part of a list of students of music, organized by teacher.Īcquitting the applicant and Mr Jensen could only be justified by reasons clearly outweighing the wrongfulness of their actions. It was too subtle to assume that viewers would not take the remarks at their face value. ![]() ![]() I just wouldn’t accept it, if she was mugging old women and stealing their handbags. 89 by Jens Olaf JERSILD against Denmark. References: Times Oct, () 19 EHRR 1, ECHR 33, /89, Links: Bailii, Bailii Ratio: A journalist was wrongly convicted. The Danish applicant was convicted for aiding and abetting the dissemination Jersild v Denmark (App no /89) ECHR 23 September (PDF, KB). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |