The International Press Institute today welcomed the fact that the European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that Romania had violated Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention of Human Rights when it found a journalist guilty of criminal libel and sentenced him to 3 months’ imprisonment (suspended).

The case concerned a Romanian journalist, Ionel Dalban, who ran a local weekly magazine, Cronica Romascana. In September 1992 Dalban published an article in his magazine about a series of frauds allegedly committed by the chief executive of a State-owned agricultural company. Dalban’s story, which was based on Fraud Squad reports, also cast suspicion on a Senator. The European Court noted in its judgement on September 28 that the articles “concerned a matter of public interest: the management of State assets and the manner in which politicians fulfil their mandate.”

Johann P. Fritz, Director of the International Press Institute, said today in Vienna, “The European Court has struck a blow for press freedom. Public figures cannot be allowed to use draconian libel legislation to shield themselves from scrutiny.”

The Court noted that the interest of democratic society could best be served by enabling the press to exercise its essential role of “public watchdog” and to impart information of serious public concern. “It would be unacceptable for a journalist to be debarred from expressing critical value judgements unless he or she could prove their truth,” the judges said.

As there was no proof that the article was totally untrue or designed to fuel a defamation campaign against the plaintiff, the Court held that the conviction could not be considered “necessary in a democratic society”. Addressing the key issue of proportionality, the Court felt that “convicting Mr Dalban of a criminal offence and sentencing him to imprisonment had amounted to disproportionate interference with the exercise of his freedom of expression as a journalist.”

This judgement now becomes a part of the substantial body of case law, established by the Court and the European Commission of Human Rights, which places ‘restrictions on the restrictions’ to freedom of expression indicated in Article 10, paragraph 2 on the Convention. All member states of the Council of Europe are legally obliged to consider freedom of expression cases in light of this case law.

“We very much hope that this judgement heralds the beginning of the end of criminal defamation in Europe and elsewhere,” Fritz said. “Punishments must be proportionate to the alleged offence committed. Prison sentences, suspended or otherwise, for the peaceful expression of an opinion, can never be a commensurate punishment. Civil codes provide adequate redress for any citizen who feels wrongfully harmed.”

“Unfortunately Ionel Dalban passed away last year so didn’t live long enough to see his name cleared,” Fritz said. “Hopefully this vindication provides some solace for his widow. He will be remembered by the international journalist community as a principled figure who took a stand for freedom of expression.”