blog banner


The Danish applicant was convicted for aiding and abetting the dissemination Jersild v Denmark (App no /89) ECHR 23 September (PDF, KB) . References: Times Oct, () 19 EHRR 1, [] ECHR 33, /89, Links: Bailii, Bailii Ratio: A journalist was wrongly convicted. JERSILD v. DENMARK. AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF. Application No. / 89 by Jens Olaf JERSILD against Denmark. The European Commission of.

Author: Goltijar Zujora
Country: Maldives
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Photos
Published (Last): 24 January 2015
Pages: 397
PDF File Size: 11.23 Mb
ePub File Size: 4.52 Mb
ISBN: 926-6-40632-435-5
Downloads: 8096
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Julmaran

Articles 4 and 5 of that Convention provide: There was no competition held between and, and This did not mean that extremist views could not be reported in the press, but such reports must be carried out in a more balanced and comprehensive manner than was the case in the television programme in question.

He had himself contacted the three youths and caused them to make assertions such as those previously made in Information, which he knew of and probably expected them to repeat.

However, even having regard to the manner in which the applicant prepared the Greenjackets item see paragraph 32 aboveit has not been shown that, considered as a whole, the feature was such as to justify also his conviction of, and punishment for, a criminal offence under the Penal Code.

In accordance with Article 51 para. January 15 — Rapper Mystikal is sentenced to six years in prison for sexual battery. The Government moreover disputed that the matter would have been dealt with differently had the Media Liability Act been in force at the material time. At the hearing on 20 April the Government invited the Court to hold that, as submitted in their memorial, there had been no violation of Article 10 art. In this connection the applicant had encouraged the Greenjackets to express their racist views, which, in so far as they were broadcast on television, in itself constituted a breach of Article b of the Penal Code.

Thursday, 27 December Kurt Nilsen wins World Idol.

Danmarks Radio paid the interviewees fees in accordance with its usual practice. It originated in an application no. The statements were broadcast without jersid counterbalancing comments, after the recordings had been edited by the applicant.

Bernhardt, as well as the other members of the Chamber being ex officio members of the Grand Chamber, the names of the additional nine judges were drawn by lot by the President in the presence of the Registrar on 24 February Rule 51 para. Just take a picture of a gorilla Negotiations initially focused on a comprehensive ban, but this was abandoned due to technical questions surrounding the detection of underground tests and Soviet concerns over the intrusiveness of proposed verification methods.


Convention, and if the internal law of the said Party allows only partial reparation to be made jerskld the consequences of this decision or measure, the decision of the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party. But the majority attributes much more weight to the freedom v.ddnmark the journalist than to the protection of those who have to suffer from racist hatred.

They can’t make anything out of that. A Did he report it to the police?

Jersild v Denmark, ECHR (1994)

Her second novel, Stella Descending was published in and her third novel Grace was published in The Government did not object to the above claims. A prominent literary critic, she also writes a column for Norway’s leading morning newspaper and has published six novels. He went on to announce that the object of the programme was to address aspects of the problem, by identifying certain racist individuals and by portraying their mentality and social background.

The Court would emphasise at the outset that it is particularly conscious of the vital importance of combating racial discrimination in all its forms and manifestations.

The Government contested this contention whereas the Commission upheld it. Bearbeitung, zuletzt am Advanced Search Search Tips. He lives in a rented room in Jerxild. As to the Law. Member feedback about Hans Engell: Whilst it is desirable to allow the press the best possible conditions for reporting on society, press freedom cannot be unlimited since freedom of expression is coupled with responsibilities.

Jersild v Denmark

There are a lot of people who say, but Having at that time a broadcasting monopoly, Danmarks Radio was under a duty to v.demnark all opinions of public interest in a manner that reflected the speaker’s way of expressing himself.

In this context, the Government pointed out that the former provision had been enacted in order to comply with the UN Convention. They are in there, all the ‘Perkere’, because of drugs, right.


It is moreover undisputed that the purpose of the applicant in compiling the broadcast in question was not racist. A Is that why you hear stories about people from out here fighting with knives etc. There has been pinching of videos, where the ‘Perkere’ have been our customers, so they have money.

The statements were broadcast without any counterbalancing comments, after the recordings had been edited by the applicant. Prior to the s China and Russia were on opposite ends of Siberia, which was populated by independent nomads. For practical reasons this annex will appear only with the printed version of the judgment volume of Series A of the Publications of the Courtbut a copy of the Commission’s report is obtainable from the registry.

Ryssdal, President, Mr R. The applicant’s item had not been a direct report on a meeting.

Jersild v Denmark, ECHR () | Human Rights and Drugs

Pursuant to section As regards the applicant, the City Court found that, following the article in Information of 31 Mayhe had visited the Greenjackets and after a conversation with Mr Axholt, amongst others, agreed that the three youths should participate in a television programme.

I don’t know where v.denark is, you jdrsild directions right. The Commission offered no comments. The statements, which would hardly have been punishable under Article b of the Penal Code had they not been made to a wide circle “videre kreds” of people, became clearly punishable as they were broadcast on television on the applicant’s initiative and with Mr Jensen’s approval.

In addition the applicant alleged that had jerslid Media Liability Act been in force at the relevant time he would not v.drnmark faced prosecution since under the Act it is in principle only the author of a punishable statement who may be liable. The applicant pointed out that he tried to show, analyse and explain to his viewers a new phenomenon in Denmark at the time, that of violent racism practised by inarticulate and socially disadvantaged youths.

The full text of the Commission’s opinion and of the two dissenting opinions contained in the report is reproduced as an annex to this judgment.