While there are democratic principles across all of the free world, outside of the United States there is no First Amendment.
Which makes a recent ruling from the European Court of Human Rights upholding the freedom of speech for a pro-life activist in Germany significant.
The result came in the case involving the pro-life leafleting of a man identified only as Mr. Annen in Germany.
After handing out the leaflets in a neighborhood where two abortionists had a business, he was ordered by a regional court to stop mentioning the doctors’ names and other details.
But the human rights court reversed.
“In its decision, the European Court of Human Rights found that the German courts had failed to strike a fair balance between Mr. Annen’s right to freedom of expression and the doctor’s personality rights,” said a statement about the case from the European Center for Law and Justice.
The organization, a non-governmental group “dedicated to the promotion and protection of human rights in Europe and worldwide,” holds special consultative status before the United Nations.
It had filed a brief in the case on behalf of the man’s speech rights.
The court, the ECLJ reported, underlined that “there can be no doubt as to the acute sensitivity of the moral and ethical issues raised by the question of abortion or as to the importance of the public interest at stake.”
So, it concluded, freedom of expression in regard to abortion should enjoy full protection.
In a statement released by ECLJ chief Gregor Puppinck, he praised the court’s ruling that a prohibition on pro-life leafleting “violated the pro-life activist’s right to freedom of expression.”
“This decision is particularly welcomed because the ECHR in its case law has not always been very supportive of pro-life freedom of speech, especially when compared to cases concerning pro-abortion activism and discourses,” the ECLJ statement said.
The case developed starting in 2005 when Annen distributed leaflets that alleged the two doctors running the clinic were performing “unlawful abortions.”
“This statement was followed by an explanation in smaller letters stating that the abortions were allowed by the German [legislature] and were not subject to criminal liability. It continued: ‘The attestation of counselling protects the ‘doctor’ and the mother from criminal prosecution, but not from their responsibility before God.’”
The leaflet continued: “The murder of human beings in Auschwitz was unlawful, but the morally degraded NS State allowed the murder of innocent people and did not make it subject to criminal liability.”
There also was a link to Annen’s website, www.babycaust.de.
The court noticed that in the leaflets it was made clear that the abortions performed in the clinic were not subject to criminal liability, the ECLJ said, therefore, the statement that “unlawful abortions” were being performed in the clinic was correct from a legal point of view.
The ruling also said the German system “failed to examine any specific elements of [Annen’s] website and to apply standards which were in conformity with the procedural requirements of Article 10.”
The ruling, which is not yet final because of an appeals process, also ordered Germany to pay Annen nearly 13,700 euros for costs and expenses.
from PropagandaGuard https://propagandaguard.wordpress.com/2015/11/28/speech-rights-of-pro-life-activist-upheld/
from WordPress https://toddmsiebert.wordpress.com/2015/11/27/speech-rights-of-pro-life-activist-upheld/
No comments:
Post a Comment