CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 6 novembre 2007

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 102 November 2007 Lepojić v. Serbia - 13909/05 Judgment 6.11.2007 [Section II] Article 10 Article 10-1 Freedom of expression Conviction for defamation of a mayor: violation   Facts : In 2002 the applicant, who was the president of a local branch of the Demo-Christian Party in Serbia, published an article in the local newspaper entitled “A Despotic Mayor”. In his article, the applicant argued firstly that, because the mayor had been expelled from his political party, he was no longer allowed to remain in office. He further accused the mayor of committing “legal infractions amounting to crimes” and stated that the mayor was “nearly insanely” spending municipality money on sponsorships and gala lunches. In subsequent criminal proceedings instituted by the mayor, the applicant was convicted of defamation and sentenced to a suspended fine. The court found that the applicant had failed to prove the truth of the statements in question and had had no reasonable grounds to believe that they were true. The term “nearly insane” also implied that the mayor had a mental illness. The mayor then brought a separate civil action in damages, as a result of which the applicant was ordered to pay him significant compensation (approximately EUR 1,800). Law : The applicant had clearly written the impugned article in the run-up to an election and in his capacity as a politician. The target of the applicant's criticism was the mayor, himself a public figure, and the word “nearly insane” was obviously not used to describe the mayor's mental state but rather to explain the manner in which he had allegedly been spending local taxpayers' money. Although the applicant's article contained some strong language, it was not a gratuitous personal attack and had focused on issues of public interest rather than the mayor's private life. The reasoning of the criminal and civil courts, in ruling against the applicant, was not “sufficient”, given the amount of compensation and costs awarded (equivalent to approximately eight months wages in Serbia at the relevant time) and the suspended fine which could, under certain circumstances, have been converted into a prison term. Conclusion : violation (five votes to two). Article 41 – EUR 3,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage. See also Filipović v. Serbia (27935/05), which was delivered on 20 November 2007 and raises similar issues.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes