CEDH · PRESS;GENERAL;ENG — 20 septembre 2001

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s5FFF0A77 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:1pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s94935B0F { width:389.85pt; display:inline-block } .s33510801 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; widows:0; orphans:0 } .sB220F3F2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; widows:0; orphans:0 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sD35C6159 { width:1.54pt; display:inline-block } .s38DD6A04 { width:18.2pt; display:inline-block } .sCB27B9E { width:16.66pt; display:inline-block } .sC5412BEF { width:51.05pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s3133A7C8 { font-family:Arial; color:#0069d6 }   EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS     637   20.9.2001   Press release issued by the Registrar   HEARING IN THE CASE OF NIKULA v. FINLAND   20 September 2001 at 9.30 a.m.     The applicant   The case concerns an application brought by a Finnish national, Anne Nikula, who was born in 1962 and lives in Helsinki. She is a lawyer.   Summary of the facts   In her written submissions as defence counsel the applicant criticised prosecutor T.'s decisions to press charges against a former co-suspect (thereby preventing the applicant's client from hearing him as a witness) and not to charge another person (who was therefore able to testify against the applicant’s client). The Kokkola District Court dismissed the objection of the defence as to hearing the prosecution witness.   A superior prosecutor having decided not to bring defamation charges against the applicant for her criticism of T.’s prosecution strategy, T. initiated private prosecution proceedings. The Vaasa Court of Appeal convicted the applicant of public defamation “without better knowledge”, i.e. negligent defamation, to be distinguished from public defamation “despite better knowledge”, that is to say intentionally imputing an offence on T. whilst knowing that he had not committed it (rather than voicing a mere suspicion that he had). The applicant was sentenced to a fine of FIM 4,260 (about EUR 700). She was further ordered to pay damages to T. of FIM 3,000 (about EUR 500) for his suffering, and to compensate his costs of FIM 8,000 (about EUR 1,350). She was finally ordered to pay FIM 300 (about EUR 50) in costs to the State.   The Supreme Court, with a majority of one vote, upheld the Court of Appeal's reasons but waived the applicant's sentence, considering that her offence had been minor in nature. Accordingly, the fine imposed on her was lifted but her obligation to pay damages and costs was confirmed.   Complaint   The applicant complained that her freedom of expression guaranteed under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights has been violated.           Procedure   The application was lodged on 20 May 1996 and declared partly admissible on 30 November 2000.   On 8 February 2001 Interights was granted leave to file written third-party observations of a general nature.     Composition of the Court   The case will be heard by a Chamber composed as follows:   Georg Ress (German), President , Antonio Pastor Ridruejo (Spanish), Lucius Caflisch [1] (Swiss), Ireneu Cabral Barreto (Portuguese), Volodymyr Butkevych (Ukrainian), Nina Vajić (Croatian), Matti Pellonpää (Finnish), judges,   and also Vincent Berger , Section Registrar .     Representatives of the parties   Government:   Arto Kosonen , Agent; Asko Välimaa, Adviser;   Applicant:   G.O. Zacharias Sundström , Matti Kauppi, Counsel   ***   After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private. Judgment will be delivered at a later date.   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: (0)3 88 41 24 92)   Emma Hellyer (telephone: (0)3 90 21 42 15) Fax: (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. On 1 November 1998 a full-time Court was established, replacing the original two-tier system of a part-time Commission and Court. [1] .     Judge elected in respect of Liechtenstein.