Freedom of expression of journalists: analysis of the ECHR judgment "Skudaeva v. Russia"
The confrontation between the free media and the state, represented by its institutions, is a problem not only in modern Russia, but also in other countries. Somewhere this confrontation is long-term, systemic in nature, somewhere there are isolated, but nevertheless, acute con icts. The judgments of the European Court of Human Rights on complaints brought by journalists and the media on violations of article 10 of the Convention are not only a remarkable illustration of such con icts, but also reminder for national courts to ensure freedom of the media in accordance with domestic legislation and international obligations assumed by States. In the case of Skudaeva v. Russia, we can see a clearly de ned legal position of the ECtHR in application of article 10 of the Convention regarding freedom of expression of opinion of a journalist, assessing actions of the authorities. In its judgment, the European court stressed that national courts should seek a balance between freedom of speech and freedom of the media, on the one hand, and the right of a public person to the protection of honor and dignity, on the other hand. The court also recalled the importance of distinguishing between information on facts and the journalist’s value judgments in connection with the possibility of further evaluation of the journalist’s statements in terms of reliability. The court pointed to the need for increased tolerance of public persons to criticism, stressing that the activities of of cials can and should be criticized. The Court also noted that the restriction of freedom of expression is permissible, but in all cases must be justi ed by national courts in accordance with the principles and standards of article 10 of the Convention. In fact, the European Court has pointed out to national courts that it is inadmissible to prejudge the circumstances of a case in which a public person acts as a plaintiff, especially if he or she has public powers. In such disputes, the courts should be mindful of the role of the media in a democratic society, and if a journalist raised a socially signi cant issue by criticizing the authorities, the courts should take the part of him or her, despite the fact that the authorities might feel derogated.