Slovakia / Regional Court in Bratislava Šamko, P. (2016), 'Prime Minister, Freedom of Speech and a Compact Muslim Community' (Predseda vlády, sloboda prejavu a ucelená moslimská komunita), Právne listy

Country

Slovakia

Title

Slovakia / Regional Court in Bratislava
Šamko, P. (2016), 'Prime Minister, Freedom of Speech and a Compact Muslim Community' (Predseda vlády, sloboda prejavu a ucelená moslimská komunita), Právne listy

View full Case

Year

2016

Decision/ruling/judgment date

Wednesday, April 06, 2016

Incident(s) concerned/related

Incitement to violence or hatred

Related Bias motivation

Religion

Groups affected

Muslims

Court/Body type

National Court

Court/Body

Regional Court in Bratislava

Key facts of the case

The complainant in the criminal complaint brought to the Prosecutor´s Office argued that the Slovak Prime Minister committed a crime of public defamation; incitement to hatred and intimidation. The complaint referred to public statements of the PM calling for preventing the formation of a "compact Muslim community" and stating "we do not want our women to be harassed in public space". The Regional Prosecutor refused the criminal complaint.

Main reasoning/argumentation

The Regional Prosecutor refused the criminal complaint for the lack of grounds to initiate prosecution. The Prosecutor´s reasoned by assessment of the context of the whole PM´s speech (migration crisis and terrorist attacks) and assessing the limits of freedom of speech. The Prosecutor concluded that even if the speech might be perceived as degrading to some, it is still within the limits of freedom of expression (as also according to jurisprudence of the ECtHR or Federal Constitutional Court of Germany)

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

Freedom of expression - even if the PM´s speech might be seen as degrading to some people, it is still within the limits of freedom of expression.

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

No sanctions. The initiation of prosecution has been refused.

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

"Sloboda prejavu je teda chránená nezávisle na tom, či je vyjadrenie racionálne alebo emotívne, odôvodnené alebo bezdôvodné, respektíve, či je ostatnými prijímané ako užitočné alebo škodlivé, hodnotné alebo bezcenné. Ústavná ochrana sa neobmedzuje iba na cenné názory, respektíve iba na názory, ktoré sú politicky korektné, prípadne, ktoré zdieľa väčšina obyvateľstva alebo väčšinová časť mediálneho priestoru."

"Freedom of speech is thus protected independently of whether the statement is rational or emotional, justified or unreasonable, or whether it is considered by others to be useful or harmful, valuable or worthless. Constitutional protection is not limited to only valuable opinions, or views that are politically correct, or eventually shared by the majority of the population or the majority in the media space. "

(Slovakia, Šamko, P. (2016), 'Predseda vlády, sloboda prejavu a ucelená moslimská komunita', Právne listy, 06 April 2016, p. 3, available at http://www.pravnelisty.sk/rozhodnutia/a452-predseda-vlady-sloboda-preja…

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.