CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 27 janvier 2025

.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 } .s10FEB019 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; widows:0; orphans:0 } Published on 17   February 2025   FIRST SECTION Application no.   42079/23 Birgit KRAATZ against Italy lodged on 28   November 2023 communicated on 27   January 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the publication of allegedly defamatory statements by the domestic authorities. The applicant is a German journalist who worked as correspondent in Italy between 1968 and 1998. In two subsequent reports, published in 2001 and 2017 and issued respectively by the Committee of inquiry into terrorism in Italy and by the Parliamentary Commission of inquiry into the kidnapping and death of Aldo Moro (the “Aldo Moro Commission”), the applicant was listed as a member of a terrorist organisation. According to the reports, this information was based on a document provided by the German Federal Police. Consequently, the applicant filed two requests to amend the 2017 report, addressed to the President of the Aldo Moro Commission, claiming that it contained false and defamatory information against her. On 8   May 2018 she also filed a complaint to the President of the Chamber of Deputies. On 24   October 2018, the applicant provided the general office ( ufficio stralci ) of the Aldo Moro Commission with documents received by the German Federal Police denying her affiliation to a terrorist organisation. She requested that they be attached to the report for rectification. On 23   November 2023, the secretary of the Chamber of Deputies informed the applicant that, as her requests for corrections had been received after the conclusion of the work of the Aldo Moro Commission, they could not be attached to the report and had only been included in the private correspondence of the secretary of the Commission. In the meantime, on 5   April 2023, the Bologna Court of Assize issued judgment no.   4/2022, quoting the section of the 2017 report of the Aldo Moro Commission referring to the applicant. The applicant, who was not part of the proceedings, took knowledge of the content of the judgment on 29   July 2023 and subsequently requested a copy of the judgment in question. The applicant complains that the accusation of being a member of a terrorist organisation and the lack of an internal remedy to correct mistakes made by the Aldo Moro Commission, and the subsequent use of the report in relation to her by the Bologna Court of Assize, amount to a violation of her right to reputation under Article   8 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     In respect of the alleged violation of her right to reputation both by the Aldo Moro Commission and the Bologna Court of Assize, has the applicant exhausted all effective domestic remedies, as required by Article   35 §   1 of the Convention (compare Cordova v.   Italy (no.   1) , no.   40877/98, §§   47 ‑ 71, ECHR   2003-I and, mutatis mutandis , Contrada v.   Italy (no.   4) , no.   2507/19, §§   50-74, 23   May 2024)?   With specific regard to the alleged violation of her rights by the Aldo Moro Commission, the parties are requested to explain the functioning of the parliamentary commissions and clarify which remedies were available to the applicant.   2.     In respect of the alleged violation of her rights under Article   8, both by the Aldo Moro Commission and the Bologna Court of Assize, has the applicant complied with the time-limit laid down in Article   35 §   1 of the Convention ( Jeronovičs v.   Latvia   [GC], no.   44898/10, §   75, 5   July 2016)?   3.     In light of the statements contained in the reports of the Aldo Moro Commission and in judgment no.   4/2022 of the Bologna Court of Assize, has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for her reputation, contrary to Article   8 of the Convention (see Jishkariani v.   Georgia , no.   18925/09, §§   41-46, 20   September 2018, and Vicent Del Campo v.   Spain , no.   25527/13, §§   36-38, 6   November 2018)?