Saygılı and Falakaoğlu v. Turkey (39457/03)
| Date | 20081021 |
|---|---|
| Article | 10 |
| Decision | violation |
Violation of Article 10
Saygılı and Falakaoğlu v. Turkey (no. 39457/03)
The applicants, Fevzi Saygılı and Bülent Falakaoğlu, are Turkish nationals who were born in 1966 and 1974 respectively and live in Istanbul. They are the owner and editor of Yeni Evrensel, a newspaper published in Istanbul.
In February and March 2001 the applicants published an article on the issue of forced disappearances in south-east Turkey. In that article, Mr Büyükşahin, a politician, criticised the State for not doing enough to find those responsible for the disappearances. He also accused Colonel L.E. of threatening a HADEP (the People’s Democracy Party) member and implied that the Colonel had possibly been involved in the disappearance of two other HADEP members. The State Security Court considered that the article in question had been written with the aim of presenting Colonel L.E. as a target for terrorist organisations. Holding the applicants responsible for publishing those articles, they were sentenced to heavy fines and a temporary closure order of three days was imposed on the newspaper.
Relying in particular on Article 10 (freedom of expression), the applicants complained about their conviction, sentencing to a fine and temporary closure of their newspaper.
The Court noted in particular that, despite particularly libellous passages, the article read as a whole could not be construed as having incited violence against a public official or as having exposed the Colonel to a significant risk of violence. The Court therefore found that the interference with the applicants’ freedom of expression had not been based on sufficient reasons to show that it “had been necessary in a democratic society”. The Court therefore held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 10 on account of the applicants’ conviction and sentence. It further held that there was no need to examine separately the applicants’ remaining complaint under Article 10 concerning the temporary closure of the newspaper. The Court awarded EUR 664 to Mr Saygılı and EUR 332 to Mr Falakaoğlu in respect of pecuniary damage, and EUR 3,000, jointly, in respect of non-pecuniary damage. (The judgment is available only in English.)