European Court of Human Rights
17 May 2016
Facts
The applicants were members of the opposition in the Hungarian Parliament. They were fined amounts ranging from 170 euros to 600 euros for having gravely disputed parliamentary proceedings after they displayed billboards and used a megaphone accusing the government of corruption. The fines were imposed by the Parliament in plenary session without debate.
Complaint
The applicants complained that the decisions to fine them for their conduct during the parliamentary session infringed their right to freedom of expression as provided for in Article 10 of the Convention.
Court’s ruling
The Court found that the applicants’ conviction was an interference with their right to freedom of expression. It was prescribed in law and followed the legitimate aims of preventing disorder and protecting the rights of others. The Court focused on whether the interference was necessary in a democratic society. To that end, the Court emphasised the importance of considering the fairness of the proceedings and the procedural guarantees afforded to accused.
In the present case, the fines had been imposed for the manner in which the applicants had expressed themselves and not the substance of what they said. However, the fines imposed were not immediate sanctions such as the denial of the right to speak or exclusion from the session but were instead monetary sanctions regarded as disciplinary measures. Moreover, the applicants did not have any opportunity to be involved in the procedure, they were not heard, and the decisions to fine them did not contain any relevant reasons. Therefore, the interference with their freedom of expression was not proportionate and violated Article 10.