CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 11 septembre 1995

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }       The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),        Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Jersild case delivered on 23 September 1994 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;        Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 15890/89) against Denmark lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 25 July 1989, under Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention by Mr Jens Olaf Jersild, a Danish national, and that the Commission declared admissible his complaint that his conviction violated his right to freedom of expression under Article 10 (art. 10) of the Convention;        Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission and, thereafter, by the Government of Denmark on 9 September and 11 October 1993, respectively;        Whereas in its judgment of 23 September 1994 the Court:        - held, by twelve votes to seven, that there had been a violation of Article 10 (art. 10) of the Convention;        - held, by seventeen votes to two, that Denmark was to pay the applicant, within three months, 1 000 Danish kroner in compensation for pecuniary damage; and for costs and expenses, the sums resulting from the calculations to be made in accordance with paragraph 45 of the judgment;        - dismissed, unanimously, the remainder of the claim for just satisfaction;        Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention;        Having invited the Government of Denmark to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 23 September 1994, having regard to Denmark's obligation under Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention to abide by it;        Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of Denmark gave the Committee information about the measures taken in consequence of the judgment, which information appears in the appendix to this resolution;        Having satisfied itself that the Government of Denmark paid the applicant, within the time limit set, the sum provided for in the judgment of 23 September 1994,        Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of Denmark, that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this case.                  Appendix to Resolution DH (95) 212           Information provided by the Government of Denmark            during the examination of the Jersild case                   by the Committee of Ministers        Following the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Jersild case, the Danish Supreme Court acquitted, in a judgment of 28 October 1994, a journalist who had been charged with invasion of privacy by entering without permission an area which was not accessible to the public.   The journalist had, together with a cameraman and a soundman, been covering a demonstration which was heading towards the house of the Danish Minister for Environmental Questions.   When the demonstration entered the minister's garden and started to dig up the lawn, the journalist followed them and continued her reporting.        In the City Court of Copenhagen and in the Eastern Division of the High Court the journalist was found guilty as charged.   She was sentenced to pay day-fines (dagböter) totalling 500 Danish kroner, or, alternatively, five days' imprisonment.   However, the Supreme Court acquitted the journalist as it found that this result was most in keeping with the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights concerning Article 10 (art. 10).   In this connection the Supreme Court made a special reference to the Jersild judgment as the latest authority.        This example is but one of quite a number of judgments from the Supreme Court and the High Courts in recent years which demonstrate that the courts are directly inspired by the European Convention on Human Rights and the Strasbourg case-law in their interpretation of Danish law (see, inter alia, the numerous cases cited in Betaenkning No. 1220 from 1991: "On the Incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in Danish Law").   There is, accordingly, no reason to doubt that also the interpretation of the 1991 Media Liability Act (Medieansvarsloven, 1991: No. 348) will be based on the principles which emerge from the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Jersild case.        It should also be pointed out that following the Jersild judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, the Special Court of Revision has decided on 24 January 1995 to allow the case against, inter alia, Mr Jersild to be reopened.