Original scientific paper
https://doi.org/10.31141/zrpfs.2021.58.142.1055
Preservation of the authority and impartiality of the judiciary as a permissible restriction of the right to freedom of expression - Croatian and Convention perspective
Maša Marochini Zrinski
orcid.org/0000-0002-8441-2277
; Pravni fakultet Sveučilišta u Rijeci, Rijeka, Hrvatska
Anamarija Kvaternik
orcid.org/0000-0002-4207-4126
Abstract
Freedom of expression, as one of the foundations of a democratic society, is a qualified Convention right that can always, when the preconditions are met, be subjected to restrictions. One of the permissible restrictions, i.e. legitimate aim stated in Art. 10 of the Convention, is maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary. Also, the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia guarantees freedom of expression in Art. 38, while Art. 16 prescribes the permissible restrictions on freedoms from the Constitution, although it does not mention specifically maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary. Despite the small number of cases examining restrictions on freedom of expression in order to maintain the authority and impartiality of the judiciary, authors consider those cases significant and will therefore present both the domestic practice at all levels of the judiciary and the practice of the European Court. The authors presented the mentioned cases primarily through two groups of cases: those where the persons who considered that their freedom of expression had been violated were journalists, as well as those where they were lawyers, who exercised their freedom of expression inside or outside the courtroom.
Keywords
freedom of expression; maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary; permissible restrictions of freedom of expression; national courts; European Court of Human Rights
Hrčak ID:
265074
URI
Publication date:
27.10.2021.
Visits: 1.803 *