Monthly archive May, 2016

Genocide denial and freedom of expression in the Perinçek Case: A European overruling or a new approach to negationism?

1. Criminalization of negationism v freedom of expression in the Perinçek case and in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights has been called to rule about the legitimacy of a criminal conviction of a Turkish citizen, Mr Dogu Perinçek, for his statements...

Focus sur Perinçek c Suisse. La question de la limitation à la liberté d’expression nécessaire dans une société démocratique

1. Introduction La décision de la Grande Chambre de la Cour Européenne des Droits de l’Homme dans l’affaire Perinçek c Suisse confirme, sans pour autant reprendre les mêmes raisonnements, l’arrêt de la Deuxième Section qui condamna la Suisse pour violation de l’article 10 de la Convention.[1] Cette affaire est la première prise de position de...

Brief remarks on the balancing method ‘truly’ adopted by the ECtHR Grand Chamber in Perinçek c Switzerland

According to the Grand Chamber, in Perinçek, the historical memory of a group is protected by Article 8 of the ECHR, which provides the right to respect for private and family life. This amounts to a ‘legitimate aim’ under Article 10(2) of the ECHR, which allows interferences and restrictions on freedom of expression, if they...

When is a criminal prohibition of genocide denial justified? The Perinçek Case and the risk of a double standard

Introduced by Gabriele Della Morte   ‘La memoria no es lo que recordamos, sino lo que nos recuerda’* (Octavio Paz)     During the same period that the commemoration of the 100 years from the Medz Yeghern (literally: the ‘Great Crime’), it is apt that the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights...