Helga Law Journal

Ukioqatigiit
Ataaseq assigiiaat ilaat

Helga Law Journal - 01.01.2021, Qupperneq 111

Helga Law Journal - 01.01.2021, Qupperneq 111
Helga Law Journal Vol. 1, 2021 116 117 expression was that a provision where the conditions for interfering with the freedom of expression were added to the Icelandic provision in accordance with Article 10 paragraph 3 of the ECHR.37 After the modification of the Constitution in 1995 a number of judgements have been concluded regarding the freedom of expression, and some of them involving specifically the right to protest. In the case Hrd. 1999, p. 3386 (65/1999) the right to gather and protest was put to the test. In the case eight men had claimed compensation from the Icelandic state on the grounds that they had been unlawfully arrested when they were protesting at the same time an American television show, Good Morning America, was being filmed and broadcasted, in front of the Parliament of Iceland. The protest were directed against the American Government. The men had with them flags and signs with various slogans. They had yelled some slogans and were arrested within a half a minute. They were taken in for questioning and then released three hours later when filming of the show was over. The court stated that the right to protest was both protected by the provisions on freedom of expression and the freedom to assembly in the Icelandic constitution. In their conclusion the Court stated that: “This right would not be restricted unless on lawful grounds and for the sake of upholding general rules and to protect the state, health and morals of individuals, and be necessary and in accordance to democratic traditions, cf. article 73, paragraph 3, cf. also Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, enacted in Iceland with law no. 62/1994.” The conclusion of the case that the law which allowed the police to arrest individuals who were protesting was not clear enough, as the laws that restricted the freedom of expression should be very clear. In a more recent judgement, Hrd. 28th of May 2015 (802/2014), also regarded an individual who claimed compensation from the Icelandic state on the grounds of an unlawful arrest while protesting. The complainant had been arrested twice. The first time was regarded as necessary but the second one was regarded as unlawful as the law provision that the police based its arrest on did not apply. The Court did not specifically cite the ECHR, but both the plaintiff and appellee pointed out that political views are protected by article 73 of the Constitution, cf. Article 10 of the ECHR. Also, that an arrest is a great interference with the right to hold a meeting which is protected by Article 74 of the Constitution, cf. Article 11 of the ECHR. It could be concluded that in light of this judgement that the interpretation of the right to protest with regards to the ECHR has become a norm for the Icelandic Courts. This is also evident in the case Hrd. 28th of May 2015 (820/2014) (Gálgahraun) where protesters were arrested. The court found that the arrests had been lawful. The defence of the accused relied upon that actions of the police 37 ibid 400. that the intention of the legislator was that Icelandic courts of law would interpret the constitution in light of international commitments.29 In the practice of Icelandic courts, it is acknowledged as a rule that the courts should seek to interpret national law in accordance to international commitments, in general.30 For example in the judgement by the Supreme Court of Iceland in the case Hrd. 1998, p. 401 (274/1991), it states that certain Icelandic law provisions should be interpreted with regard to international agreements, for example the ECHR.31 The Icelandic courts did rarely apply or refer to the provisions of the ECHR following its ratificiation in 1953. But in the case Hrd. 1990, p. 2 (120/1989) there was a shift in the influence of the ECHR. This case was epoch-making regarding the use of the Convention in interpreting Icelandic law.32 The first case where the Court referred to the Convention regarding the freedom to expression33 was the case Hrd. 1992, p. 401 (274/1991). In this case a journalist was indicted for offensive comments and defamatory imputations towards a civil servant. The comments were annuled by the court. In its conclusion the court states that a certain provision in The General Penal Code34 should be explained with regards to Article 72 [now article 73] of the Constitution: Those provisions should be explained with regards to the commitments on protection of honor, freedom of the individual and freedom of expression in international agreements that Iceland is a part of. The court then specifically mentions that the ECHR should be used in those interpretations. A few years after the judgement Hrd. 1992, p. 401 (274/1991), in the case of Thorgeir Thorgeirsson vs. Iceland35, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) came to the conclusion that the Icelandic state had been in violation of Article 10 of the ECHR. Subsequently the Minister of Justice appointed a committee to examine if it was timely to enact the ECHR as law in Iceland. It was decided to do so and in their reasoning the committee emphasized that the provision on freedom of expression in the Constitution did not secure the rights of individuals properly, as it did only cover the freedom of the press. The enactment of the ECHR would therefore serve the purpose to bridge the gap in the Icelandic law.36 One of the changes that was made on the provision regarding freedom of 29 Thorarensen, Stjórnskipunarréttur. Mannréttindi (n 1) 107. 30 Davíð Þór Björgvinsson, ‘Beiting Hæstaréttar á lögum um Mannréttindasáttmála Evrópu’ (2003) 4 Tímarit lögfræðinga 348. 31 See also case Hrd. 1994:2497. 32 Björg Thorarensen, ‘Áhrif Mannréttindasáttmála Evrópu á vernd tjáningarfrelsis að íslenskum rétti’ (2003) 4 Tímarit lögfræðinga 392-393. 33 ibid 393. 34 Act No. 19/1940. (ICE). 35 Þorgeir Þorgeirsson v. Iceland (1992) Series A no. 239. 36 Thorarensen ‘Áhrif Mannréttindasáttmála Evrópu á vernd tjáningarfrelsis að íslenskum rétti’ (7) 394-395. International Legal Research Group
Qupperneq 1
Qupperneq 2
Qupperneq 3
Qupperneq 4
Qupperneq 5
Qupperneq 6
Qupperneq 7
Qupperneq 8
Qupperneq 9
Qupperneq 10
Qupperneq 11
Qupperneq 12
Qupperneq 13
Qupperneq 14
Qupperneq 15
Qupperneq 16
Qupperneq 17
Qupperneq 18
Qupperneq 19
Qupperneq 20
Qupperneq 21
Qupperneq 22
Qupperneq 23
Qupperneq 24
Qupperneq 25
Qupperneq 26
Qupperneq 27
Qupperneq 28
Qupperneq 29
Qupperneq 30
Qupperneq 31
Qupperneq 32
Qupperneq 33
Qupperneq 34
Qupperneq 35
Qupperneq 36
Qupperneq 37
Qupperneq 38
Qupperneq 39
Qupperneq 40
Qupperneq 41
Qupperneq 42
Qupperneq 43
Qupperneq 44
Qupperneq 45
Qupperneq 46
Qupperneq 47
Qupperneq 48
Qupperneq 49
Qupperneq 50
Qupperneq 51
Qupperneq 52
Qupperneq 53
Qupperneq 54
Qupperneq 55
Qupperneq 56
Qupperneq 57
Qupperneq 58
Qupperneq 59
Qupperneq 60
Qupperneq 61
Qupperneq 62
Qupperneq 63
Qupperneq 64
Qupperneq 65
Qupperneq 66
Qupperneq 67
Qupperneq 68
Qupperneq 69
Qupperneq 70
Qupperneq 71
Qupperneq 72
Qupperneq 73
Qupperneq 74
Qupperneq 75
Qupperneq 76
Qupperneq 77
Qupperneq 78
Qupperneq 79
Qupperneq 80
Qupperneq 81
Qupperneq 82
Qupperneq 83
Qupperneq 84
Qupperneq 85
Qupperneq 86
Qupperneq 87
Qupperneq 88
Qupperneq 89
Qupperneq 90
Qupperneq 91
Qupperneq 92
Qupperneq 93
Qupperneq 94
Qupperneq 95
Qupperneq 96
Qupperneq 97
Qupperneq 98
Qupperneq 99
Qupperneq 100
Qupperneq 101
Qupperneq 102
Qupperneq 103
Qupperneq 104
Qupperneq 105
Qupperneq 106
Qupperneq 107
Qupperneq 108
Qupperneq 109
Qupperneq 110
Qupperneq 111
Qupperneq 112
Qupperneq 113
Qupperneq 114
Qupperneq 115
Qupperneq 116
Qupperneq 117
Qupperneq 118
Qupperneq 119
Qupperneq 120
Qupperneq 121
Qupperneq 122
Qupperneq 123
Qupperneq 124
Qupperneq 125
Qupperneq 126
Qupperneq 127
Qupperneq 128
Qupperneq 129
Qupperneq 130
Qupperneq 131
Qupperneq 132
Qupperneq 133
Qupperneq 134
Qupperneq 135
Qupperneq 136
Qupperneq 137
Qupperneq 138
Qupperneq 139
Qupperneq 140
Qupperneq 141
Qupperneq 142
Qupperneq 143
Qupperneq 144
Qupperneq 145
Qupperneq 146
Qupperneq 147
Qupperneq 148
Qupperneq 149
Qupperneq 150
Qupperneq 151
Qupperneq 152
Qupperneq 153
Qupperneq 154
Qupperneq 155
Qupperneq 156
Qupperneq 157
Qupperneq 158
Qupperneq 159
Qupperneq 160
Qupperneq 161
Qupperneq 162
Qupperneq 163
Qupperneq 164
Qupperneq 165
Qupperneq 166
Qupperneq 167
Qupperneq 168
Qupperneq 169
Qupperneq 170
Qupperneq 171
Qupperneq 172
Qupperneq 173
Qupperneq 174
Qupperneq 175
Qupperneq 176
Qupperneq 177
Qupperneq 178
Qupperneq 179
Qupperneq 180
Qupperneq 181
Qupperneq 182
Qupperneq 183
Qupperneq 184
Qupperneq 185
Qupperneq 186
Qupperneq 187
Qupperneq 188
Qupperneq 189
Qupperneq 190
Qupperneq 191
Qupperneq 192
Qupperneq 193
Qupperneq 194
Qupperneq 195
Qupperneq 196
Qupperneq 197
Qupperneq 198
Qupperneq 199
Qupperneq 200
Qupperneq 201
Qupperneq 202
Qupperneq 203
Qupperneq 204
Qupperneq 205
Qupperneq 206
Qupperneq 207
Qupperneq 208
Qupperneq 209
Qupperneq 210
Qupperneq 211
Qupperneq 212
Qupperneq 213
Qupperneq 214
Qupperneq 215
Qupperneq 216
Qupperneq 217
Qupperneq 218
Qupperneq 219
Qupperneq 220
Qupperneq 221
Qupperneq 222
Qupperneq 223
Qupperneq 224

x

Helga Law Journal

Direct Links

Hvis du vil linke til denne avis/magasin, skal du bruge disse links:

Link til denne avis/magasin: Helga Law Journal
https://timarit.is/publication/1677

Link til dette eksemplar:

Link til denne side:

Link til denne artikel:

Venligst ikke link direkte til billeder eller PDfs på Timarit.is, da sådanne webadresser kan ændres uden advarsel. Brug venligst de angivne webadresser for at linke til sitet.