Back

Themes: Freedom of speech Slovenia

Mladina D.D. Ljubljana v. Slovenia  | 2014

Magazine made to pay damages for criticising politician’s homophobic behaviour

Victory for freedom of expression [.]

Headline of Mladina, following the European court’s judgment, April 2014

Background

In June 2005 the magazine Mladina published an article harshly criticising a politician for his contribution to a debate in parliament.

The debate had been about the introduction of civil partnerships for same-sex couples. The politician had said that homosexuals were generally undesirable – whether as children, same-sex couples or parents.

The Mladina article described the politician as a “cerebral bankrupt”.

The politician sued the magazine for using these words, saying that they had offended him. The Slovenian courts found in favour of the politician, ordering the magazine to pay him €2,921 in damages. The magazine also had to publish part of the judgment.

Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

The European court said that limits on speech were wider when criticising a politician than a private person – especially when the politician had made controversial public remarks. The article had not been a gratuitous personal attack on the parliamentarian. It had been a response to his own public remarks, where he had sought to ridicule homosexuals. In the circumstances, the rulings of the Slovenian courts had been disproportionate, violating the magazine’s right to free speech.

We hope that today's decision of the European Court of Human Rights will affect the case-law in the direction of opening the field of expression of critical opinions and positions.

Matija Stepišnik, President of the Slovene Journalists Association, quoted by Mladina

Follow-up

To help protect free speech in Slovenia, the Constitutional Court changed its approach for deciding on similar cases by incorporating the case-law of the European court into its own case law. 

The magazine Mladina was awarded €2,921 in compensation, as well as legal costs.

Additional information

Themes:

Related examples

Legal attack on a newspaper highlights the need for free speech reforms

Before a presidential election, the newspaper The Day published articles criticising two of the candidates. The politicians sued the owners of the newspaper for damages and won. The European court found that the owners had been punished merely for publishing opinions, violating their right to free speech. The case influenced reforms to protect freedom of expression in Ukraine.

Themes: Freedom of speech Ukraine

Read more

Justice for magazine editor ordered to pay huge damages – and new rules to protect free speech

Retired journalist Veseljko Koprivica was ordered to pay huge damages after losing a defamation case. The European court ruled that the damages awarded were so excessive that they violated his right to free speech. A ruling by the Supreme Court of Montenegro specified that damages for defamation should not be high enough to discourage journalists from playing their key role in society.

Themes: Freedom of speech Montenegro

Read more

Free speech reforms after writer prosecuted for reporting allegations of police brutality

In the early 1980s Thorgeir Thorgeirson wrote articles claiming that there was a problem with police brutality in Reykjavik. His reporting was based on the prosecution of a police officer and various public allegations. Nevertheless, he was convicted for defaming the police. The European court ruled that this had violated his right to freedom of expression, leading to free speech reforms.

Themes: Freedom of speech Iceland

Read more