CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 27 mai 2024

.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 } Published on 17 June 2024   SECOND SECTION Application no. 1911/24 Engin BALTACI against Türkiye lodged on 5 January 2024 communicated on 27 May 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the disciplinary fine imposed on the applicant by the Professional Football Disciplinary Board (“the Disciplinary Board”) of the Turkish Football Federation (“TFF”) for statements he made to the press after a football match and the independence and impartiality of the Arbitration Committee of the TFF which examined the applicant’s objection to the above-mentioned decision of the Disciplinary Board. The applicant was an executive member of the Beşiktaş football club at the material time. On 21 August 2023 he made statements to the press concerning the referees of a football match between Beşiktaş and another football club. On 24 August 2023 the Disciplinary Board imposed a disciplinary fine amounting to TRY 400,000 (equivalent to approximately EUR 14,000 at the material time) on the applicant on the grounds that his statements had intended to cast doubts on the integrity and impartiality of the referees or to discredit them, had exceeded the limits of criticism and had therefore been against sportsmanship. Invoking Articles 10 and 6 of the Convention, the applicant complains that (i)   in the absence of relevant and sufficient reasons, the above-mentioned disciplinary fine violated his freedom of expression since his statements fell within the scope of acceptable criticism, and (ii) he did not receive a fair hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal before the Arbitration Committee, as required by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression, contrary to Article 10 of the Convention, on account of the disciplinary fine imposed on him for his statements (see Naki and AMED Sportif Faaliyetler Kulübü Derneği v. Turkey , no. 48924/16, §§   32-39, 18   May 2021, and İbrahim Tokmak v. Turkey , no. 54540/16, §§   30-38, 18   May 2021)?   2.     Did the proceedings before the Arbitration Committee satisfy the requirements of independence and impartiality in accordance with Article   6   §   1 of the Convention, regard being had in particular to the amendments to the relevant legislation which entered into force following the Court’s findings in Ali Rıza and Others v. Turkey (nos. 30226/10 and 4   others, §§ 194-223, 28 January 2020)?