Back

Justice for man who was fined for writing an article

Themes: Freedom of speech

Russian Federation

Grinberg v. Russia | 2005

Justice for man who was fined for writing an article

The point is not the money, it’s the enforcement of the law that matters to me

Isaak Ginsberg, reported in "Arguments and Facts", 24^th July 2014 - © Photo AIF

Background

Isaak Grinberg wrote an article for the Guberniya newspaper. It accused the Governor of the Ulyanovsk Region of “waging war” against the free press, and referred to the governor’s support for a colonel who had killed an 18-year-old girl. It concluded with the words, “no shame and no scruples!”

The governor sued Mr Grinberg for defamation, solely on the basis of the final words of the article, “no shame and no scruples!” He claimed that these words were insulting and could not be proved.

The governor won the case. Mr Grinberg was ordered to pay a fine.

Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

The court noted that value judgments are impossible to prove. A legal requirement to prove the truth of a value judgment is an infringement of freedom of expression.

The words “no shame and no scruples!” were a classic example of a value judgment. Furthermore, the article had concerned a matter of public interest and its factual allegations had not been contested. Therefore, making Mr Grindberg liable for defamation because he had published these words had violated his right to free speech.

Follow-up

After the Strasbourg court agreed to review the case, the Supreme Court of Russia issued a decree seeking to apply Council of Europe rules on freedom of expression to Russian law. This highlighted the need for public officials to accept that they will be subject to public scrutiny and criticism. It also directed the courts to distinguish between statements of fact and value judgments when assessing claims for defamation.

Mr Grindberg was awarded €1,120 in compensation.

The Committee of Ministers continues to monitor issues related to defamation and freedom of speech in Russia.

Additional information

Judgment ECHR Grinberg v. Russia 2005 and press release of the European Court of Human Rights
Resolution of the Committee of Ministers | DH (2008) 18

Themes: Freedom of speech

Russian Federation

Related examples

Excessive police operation against journalists leads to reforms to protect media sources

Four Belgian journalists were targeted by the police in a huge search and seizure operation aimed at identifying the source of leaked government information. The Strasbourg court ruled that the operation had been unjustified and disproportionate. The case influenced new legislation to improve protections for journalists and their sources.

Themes: Privacy Freedom of speech

Belgium

Nurse compensated after being fired for whistleblowing

Brigitte Heinisch was a geriatric nurse. She claimed that practices in the old people’s home where she worked were putting patients at risk. After she made her allegations public, she was fired. Yet, the German courts found that her dismissal was lawful - so Mrs Heinisch took her case to Strasbourg. Her case was then re-opened and she won compensation.

Themes: Freedom of speech

Germany

Justice for man made to pay huge fine for publishing criticism of a public official

Zoran Lepojić wrote an article saying that a mayor had wasted public money. The mayor successfully brought defamation charges, and Mr Lepojić was fined more than 8 average monthly salaries. The Strasbourg court ruled that this had been unreasonable, violating Mr Lepojić’s right to free speech. The Supreme Court of Serbia took steps to protect freedom of expression in such circumstances.

Themes: Freedom of speech

Serbia

Greater protections for free speech after journalist sued for reporting on alleged political corruption

In July 2000 Ilnar Gorelishvili wrote an article about a politician who owned various expensive properties. She questioned how he had bought these whilst working in public service on a moderate salary. The politician sued her for defamation and won. The European court ruled that Georgian law had not properly protected Ms Gorelishvili’s right to give her opinion.

Themes: Freedom of speech

Georgia

Reforms to protect free speech after journalists sued

Matti Paloaro and Pentti Eerikäinen were journalists. They reported on the prosecution of a businesswoman, who had abused public funds and was later sentenced to prison. The businesswoman sued the journalists, claiming they had invaded her privacy by publicising her prosecution. The businesswoman won in the Finnish courts – but the Strasbourg court ruled in favour of the journalists.

Themes: Freedom of speech

Finland

Journalist convicted for asking questions wins free speech case at European court

In a report on alleged corruption in Portuguese football, José Manuel Colaço Mestre asked questions to an interviewee about the dual role played by Mr Pinto de Costa, who was then both Chairman of FC Porto and President of the Portuguese Football League. Because of these questions, Mr Colaço Mestre and his employer were both found guilty of criminal defamation in the Portuguese courts.

Themes: Freedom of speech

Portugal

Senator put in prison for criticising the government

Senator Miguel Castells wrote an article claiming that the government was failing to investigate a series of murders. He was convicted of insulting the government and sentenced to a year in prison. The European court ruled that his right to free speech had been violated. The Spanish Constitutional Court then developed its case law to provide greater protection to free speech in Spain.

Themes: Freedom of speech

Spain

Newspaper’s free speech victory leads to reforms

In 1988 the local newspaper Bladet Tromsø published claims by a government inspector alleging misconduct by certain seal hunters. The Norwegian courts found the newspaper liable for defamation, saying that it had relied too heavily on government reports. The Strasbourg court ruled that this violated the paper’s right to free speech – leading to reforms to protect freedom of expression.

Themes: Freedom of speech

Norway

Justice for animal rights campaigners who had pamphlets seized by police

Elina Goussev and Michael Marenk were protesting against the fur trade. Police searched their homes and seized campaign materials. The Strasbourg court ruled that this had breached their right to free speech, as the seizure had not been clearly justified by Finnish law. After the case had been submitted to the court, reforms were made to prevent arbitrary seizures.

Themes: Freedom of speech

Finland

Greater protection for the media after journalist fined for refusing to reveal the identity of his source

Journalist William Goodwin was given leaked information about a company. The company wanted to sue the source of the leak - but Mr Goodwin refused to reveal their identity. The UK courts fined Mr Goodwin 5,000 pounds for contempt of court. The Strasbourg court ruled this had violated his right to receive and give out information.

Themes: Freedom of speech

United Kingdom

Reforms to protect media freedom after a journalist was convicted for a report about extremists

Jens Jersild is a journalist. He was convicted for filming a news report in which extremists made racist remarks. The Strasbourg court found that convicting Mr Jersild for his work was disproportionate and violated his right to free speech. The case helped improve legal protections for media freedom in Denmark.

Themes: Freedom of speech

Denmark

Legal challenge brings an end to the state monopoly on TV and radio

During the 1970s and 1980s, various Austrians wanted to set up local TV or radio stations. However, Austrian law banned them from doing so, as it gave the Austrian Broadcasting Company a monopoly. The Strasbourg court ruled that the ban was disproportionate and violated the right to free speech. The judgment led to the opening up of broadcasting regulations.

Themes: Freedom of speech

Austria

Journalist wins freedom of speech case in Strasbourg

Björk Eidsdottir is a journalist who claimed that the owner of a strip club was making his staff work as prostitutes. The issue was a matter of public interest, and her article was published in good faith and with due diligence. Nevertheless, the club owner sued Ms Eidsdottir for defamation and won. The Strasbourg court held that this had breached the journalist’s right to free speech.

Themes: Freedom of speech

Iceland

Fairer television coverage for small political parties

Small political parties received virtually no television news coverage, and were banned from TV advertising. The Strasbourg court ruled that this left the Pensioner’s Party no way of transmitting its message on TV, violating its right to freedom speech. Reforms were made to political broadcasting rules, requiring the national broadcaster to include smaller parties in its TV coverage.

Themes: Freedom of speech

Norway

Reforms made after pensioner given unreasonable punishments

Sofija Tešić received a monthly pension equivalent to 170 euros. After she lost a defamation case, every month two-thirds of her pension was taken to pay off her debt – leaving her without money to pay for medication. The Strasbourg court ruled that this had been disproportionate. The Serbian courts changed their case law to limit defamation awards, and enforcement proceedings were also...

Themes: Freedom of speech

Serbia

Reforms made after man convicted for waving a satirical placard

Hervé Eon waved a satirical sign at President Sarkozy. He was then charged with offending the President of France, a crime dating from the 19th Century. Mr Eon was convicted and given a suspended fine. The Strasbourg court ruled that this had breached Mr Eon’s right to free speech. The offence of insulting the President of France was abolished later that year.

Themes: Freedom of speech

France