France / High Administrative Court / N° 478441
-
France / High Administrative Court / N° 478441
Key facts of the case:
The applicant organisations challenged the article 3 of the Regulation (EU) 2021/784 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2021, which relates to combating the dissemination of terrorist content online. This article allows Member States to issue a removal order requiring hosting service providers to remove terrorist content or to block access to such content in all Member States. On this basis, Decree No. 2023-432 of 3 June 2023 was adopted. This was the text that was challenged before the High Administrative Court.
The applicants argued that the European Regulation of 29 April 2021 infringed the freedom of expression and information guaranteed by Articles 11 and 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, read in the light of Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
They also argued applicants argued that the decree, by implementing the EU Regulation, infringed the rights to respect for private life and to the protection of personal data guaranteed by Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter, as it required hosting service providers to adopt measures liable to result in a general analysis of content. In their view, these obligations led to excessive and insufficiently regulated processing of personal data.
Key legal question raised by the court:
Compliance of Regulation (EU) 2021/784 (and thus of the decree implementing it) with fundamental freedoms (freedom of expression and information, the right to privacy, and the right to the protection of personal data), as guaranteed by Articles 11, 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, read in the light of the relevant provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The existence and effectiveness of judicial remedies provided by the legal avenues available against removal orders and decisions imposing specific measures, in light of the right to an effective remedy (Article 47 of the Charter).
Outcome of the case:
The High Administrative Court held that the Regulation is not contrary to the freedom of expression and information as guaranteed by Articles 11 and 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, read in the light of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The obligations to remove or block terrorist content are justified by a legitimate objective of protection against the immediate risks posed by such content, and the procedural safeguards provided are deemed sufficient.
Similarly, it rejected the argument that the Regulation would violate the right to respect for private life and the right to the protection of personal data (Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter). The Regulation excludes any obligation to carry out generalized monitoring of non-public content, imposes targeted and proportionate measures, and does not provide for the automated creation of personal data processing.
Regarding the right to an effective remedy, the Conseil d’État considered that the provisions of Articles 9 and 10 of the Regulation, which organize judicial remedies against removal orders and decisions concerning specific measures, do not infringe the right to an effective remedy before an impartial tribunal guaranteed by Article 47 of the Charter and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It notably recalled that the absence of automatic suspensive effect is not, in itself, contrary to these guarantees and that each Member State remains free to organize its procedures
-
Paragraphs referring to EU Charter
7. ...Freedom of expression and communication is all the more precious as its exercise is a condition of democracy and one of the guarantees of respect for other rights and freedoms. Content inciting the commission of terrorist acts constitutes an abuse of freedom of expression and communication likely to seriously undermine, in particular, national security and public safety.
...
11. ...neither the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union nor the provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms require that the authority competent to issue the injunctions to remove terrorist content provided for in Article 3 of the Regulation be institutionally independent of the Government.
...
20. ...On the one hand, the suspensive effect of an appeal against administrative decisions is not among the procedural guarantees required in all circumstances by Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; on the other hand, it is for the internal legal order of each Member State to designate the courts having jurisdiction and to lay down the procedural rules governing judicial remedies intended to ensure the protection of the rights which litigants derive from the direct effect of Community law and, now, European Union law.
-
Paragraphs referring to EU Charter (original language)
7. ...La liberté d'expression et de communication est d'autant plus précieuse que son exercice est une condition de la démocratie et l'une des garanties du respect des autres droits et libertés. Les contenus incitant à commettre des actes terroristes constituent des abus de la liberté d'expression et de communication susceptibles de porter gravement atteinte, notamment, à la sécurité nationale et à la sûreté publique.
...
11. ...ni la charte des droits fondamentaux de l'Union européenne, ni les stipulations de la convention européenne de sauvegarde des droits de l'homme et des libertés fondamentales n'impliquent que l'autorité compétente pour prononcer les injonctions de retrait de contenus terroristes prévues à l'article 3 du règlement soit organiquement indépendante du Gouvernement.
...
20. ...d'une part, le caractère suspensif d'un recours contre les décisions administratives n'est pas au nombre des garanties de procédure exigées en toutes circonstances par l'article 47 de la charte des droits fondamentaux de l'Union européenne et d'autre part, il appartient à l'ordre juridique interne de chaque État membre de désigner les juridictions compétentes et de régler les modalités procédurales des recours en justice destinés à assurer la sauvegarde des droits que les justiciables tirent de l'effet direct du droit communautaire et, désormais, du droit de l'Union européenne.