CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 31 janvier 2023

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Published on 20 February 2023   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 13956/20 Oleg BREGA against Romania lodged on 2 March 2020 communicated on 31 January 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns an allegation that the applicant was subjected to an abusive identity check (legitimare) and body search as a result of his filming and live streaming on Facebook images of a group of police officers in a public place. He was also fined for refusing to show his identity papers and for allegedly insulting the police officers. On 5 May 2019 the applicant was filming a group of police officers checking the speed of vehicles on a street in Bucharest. At one point he was approached by two officers who asked for his identity papers. The applicant informed them that they were live on Facebook and asked for the reason of the identity check and for the officers’ own identification. The police officers argued that they had the right to check his identity without any reason and refused to show him any identification except for the metal badges attached to their uniforms. Since the applicant insisted that they did not have the right to check his identity without a valid reason and refused to show them his identity card until presented with such a reason, the police officers subjected him to a body search in order to find his identity card. After the search, one of the officers admitted on video that he had decided to check the applicant’s identity because he had been filming them. During the exchanges with the police officers, the applicant stated, inter alia , that their actions were abusive, that they acted like “Ceausescu’s militia” and that the Romanian police force was the “shame of Europe”. The police officers imposed a fine of approximately EUR 240 on the applicant on account of his refusal to comply with their demand to present his identity papers and for insulting them. He challenged the fine in court and lodged a criminal complaint against the police officers, without success in both cases. The applicant complains that the actions of the police officers amounted to a breach of his right to freedom of expression as guaranteed by Article 10 of the Convention. He also complains about the unlawful identity check, body search and fine which, in his view, amounted to a breach of Article 6 of the Convention. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been an interference with the applicant’s right to freedom of expression, within the meaning of Article   10 §   1 of the Convention?   If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article   10 §   2 (see Sabuncu and Others v. Turkey , no. 23199/17, § 230, 10 November 2020; Kenedi v. Hungary , no. 31475/05, § 44, 26 May 2009 and Morice v. France [GC], no. 29369/10, § 126, ECHR 2015)?   The Government are requested to submit a full copy of the case-files in the domestic proceedings.