CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 23 mai 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 23 May 2018   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 28083/08 Rovshan MAHMUDOV against Azerbaijan lodged on 21 May 2008 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns criminal convictions of a chief editor and a journalist of an opposition-oriented newspaper for publishing an allegedly defamatory article concerning J.A., a prominent political figure in Azerbaijan. Following a private prosecution claim brought by J.A., by a judgment of 16 May 2007 the Yasamal District Court convicted the applicants under Articles 147.1 (slander) and 147.2 (slander by accusation of having committed a serious criminal offence) of the Criminal Code and sentenced each of them to two years and six months’ imprisonment. After a series of appeals, the applicants’ convictions and sentences were upheld by the final decision of the Supreme Court of 8 January 2008. Prior to the delivery of the Supreme Court’s final decision, the applicants were released from serving the remainder of their prison sentences pursuant to a presidential pardon decree of 28 December 2007. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to freedom of expression, contrary to Article   10 of the Convention? In particular, was the interference justified in terms of Article 10 §   2? Were the sanctions imposed on the applicants proportionate to the aims pursued (see Cumpǎnǎ and   Mazǎre v. Romania [GC], no.   33348/96, ECHR 2004 ‑ XI, and Mahmudov and Agazade v. Azerbaijan , no. 35877/04, 18 December 2008)?   2.     The parties are requested to submit a translation into English or French of the specific extracts of the impugned article which led to the applicants’ criminal convictions.