ECtHR – Judgment of 15.03.2011, Otegi Mondragón v. Spain, 2034/07 – «Article 10 ECHR – Freedom of expression – Limits – serious insult to the Head of State – Incitement to violence and hate speech» – The Limits to Freedom of Expression in the Political De
Keywords:
Freedom of speech, political debate, protection of reputation and personal honour, hate speechAbstract
The Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case Otegi Mondragon v. Spain, considered disproportionate the imposition of a prison sentence on Arnaldo Otegi by asserting that the King of Spain was “in charge of the torturers.» The resolution focuses on the exercise of freedom of expression in political debate and the restrictive interpretation of its limits when it comes to critical with state authorities. The ECHR displays its arguments based on an established jurisprudence on freedom of expression that is considered inherent to democracy and thus, a priority with respect to the protection of reputation and personal honour. The Court also reiterates that internal rules which provides to the head of State increased protection with regard to insults against him are not in keeping with the ECHR and states that the imprisonment penalty is disproportionate, except for the circumstances where other fundamental rights have been seriously impaired, as in the case of incitement to violence or hate speech, something the ECHR does not appreciate in the disputed statements.Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Downloads
How to Cite
Soto García, M. (2015). ECtHR – Judgment of 15.03.2011, Otegi Mondragón v. Spain, 2034/07 – «Article 10 ECHR – Freedom of expression – Limits – serious insult to the Head of State – Incitement to violence and hate speech» – The Limits to Freedom of Expression in the Political De. Revista De Derecho Comunitario Europeo, (42), 575–591. Retrieved from https://recyt.fecyt.es/index.php/RDCE/article/view/39522
Issue
Section
CASE LAW EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
License
Copyright
Submission of a manuscript to the RDCE implies having read and accepted the journal's editorial guidelines and instructions for authors. When a work is accepted for publication, it is understood that the author grants the RDCE exclusive rights of reproduction, distribution and, where appropriate, sale of his manuscript for exploitation in all countries of the world in printed version, as well as any other magnetic, optical and digital media.
Authors shall transfer the publishing rights of their manuscript to RDCE so that it may be disseminated and capitalised on Intranets, the Internet and any web portals and wireless devices that the publisher may decide, by placing it at the disposal of users so that the latter may consult it online and extract content from it, print it and/or download and save it. These activities must comply with the terms and conditions outlined on the website hosting the work. However, the RDCE authorises authors of papers published in the journal to include a copy of these papers, once published, on their personal websites and/or other open access digital repositories. Copies must include a specific mention of RDCE, citing the year and issue of the journal in which the article was published, and adding a link to the RDCE website(s).
A year after its publication, the works of the RDCE will be under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivative 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which allows third parties to share the work as long as its author and its first publication is indicated, without the right to commercial exploitation and the elaboration of derivative works.
Plagiarism and scientific fraud
The publication of work that infringes on intellectual property rights is the sole responsibility of the authors, including any conflicts that may occur regarding infringement of copyright. This includes, most importantly, conflicts related to the commission of plagiarism and/or scientific fraud.
Practices constituting scientific plagiarism are as follows:
1. Presenting the work of others as your own.
2. Adopting words or ideas from other authors without due recognition.
3. Not using quotation marks or another distinctive format to distinguish literal quotations.
4. Giving incorrect information about the true source of a citation.
5. The paraphrasing of a source without mentioning the source.
6. Excessive paraphrasing, even if the source is mentioned.
Practices constituting scientific fraud are as follows:
1. Fabrication, falsification or omission of data and plagiarism.
2. Duplicate publication.
3. Conflicts of authorship.
Warning
Any breach of these Rules shall constitute a ground for rejection of the manuscript submitted.
