Spain / Higher Court of Madrid (ninth section of the Administrative Litigation Division) / No. 306/2014

Country

Spain

Title

Spain / Higher Court of Madrid (ninth section of the Administrative Litigation Division) / No. 306/2014

View full Case

Year

2014

Decision/ruling/judgment date

Tuesday, March 11, 2014

Incident(s) concerned/related

Incitement to violence or hatred

Related Bias motivation

Nationality

Groups affected

Migrants

Court/Body type

National Court

Court/Body

Higher Court of Madrid

Key facts of the case

In March 2014 The government prohibited a planned demonstration by extreme right wing parties in Lavapies, a multicultural neighbourhood in Madrid. The slogan of the call was: “Publicly rejecting mass immigration which is a real invasion of our fatherland, and demanding strong defense of our borders.” The groups that called for the protest had been involved in acts of violence in the neighbourhood and used social media to spread messages such as: “everyone with baseball bats that day, like the Bear Jew”, “let's cut off empty heads”, “stop, sons of bitches like you shall not pass”.

Main reasoning/argumentation

Banning a protest can be done when there are substantiated indications that it will create a disturbance of public order, with danger to people or property. The prohibition was based on objective data: during other demonstrations by right-wing groups in the same neighbourhood, serious public disorder occurred as a result of counter-demonstrations mobilised by left-wing groups; the same day an authorisation was requested for the demonstration, members of one of the organising parties lit a flare at the door of the NGO SOS Racism office, located in Lavapies, and placed a placard against this NGO.

Is the case related to the application of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia, the Racial Equality Directive?

Key issues (concepts, interpretations) clarified by the case

Public order and danger to persons and goods as limit to fundamental right to assembly.

The demonstration was planned for 8 March 2014, and shortly before, members of the convening organisations had been involved in serious altercations in the area. The place chosen for the demonstration is a neighbourhood of Madrid where most of the population is foreign and which is known for its multicultural and multi-ethnic character.

The violent actions and the xenophobic content of the calls and of the protests carried out by the organising bodies on occasions immediately prior to the request for authorisation, are circumstances which reveal the high likelihood that serious disturbance to public order may occur.

Results (sanctions, outcome) and key consequences or implications of the case

The appeal brought by the organisers was rejected and the ruling by the Government Delegate forbidding the protest was confirmed.

Key quotation in original language and its unofficial translation into English with reference details

“La protección anticipada de derechos e intereses concurrentes integra el fin perseguible por la decisión de la autoridad gubernativa, con la necesaria utilización de un razonamiento prospectivo, en el que aparezcan como factores primordiales la correcta valoración de las circunstancias existentes que puedan estimarse indiciarias de una situación latente de riesgo para las personas o bienes, con relación a una posible alteración del orden público”.

“The anticipated protection of competing rights and interests form the aim which requires the action of the law in the decision by the competent authority, with the necessary use of a prospective reasoning, in which the overriding factors are the correct evaluation of the circumstances which can be judged to indicate a latent situation of risk for people or property, with regards to a potential disturbance of public order.”

DISCLAIMERThe information presented here is collected under contract by the FRA's research network FRANET. The information and views contained do not necessarily reflect the views or the official position of the FRA.