CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 20 janvier 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both }     Communicated on 20 January 2016   THIRD SECTION Application no. 50228/06 Anna Vladimirovna SMIRNOVA against Russia lodged on 1 November 2006 STATEMENT OF FACTS 1.     The applicant, Ms Anna Vladimirovna Smirnova, is a Russian national, who was born in 1972 and lives in Vologda. She is a journalist and head of the news agency SeverInfo. 2.     The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. 3.     The applicant was an editor of the newspaper Nash region plus . 4.     On 15 February 2006 the newspaper published an article under the headline “The cartoons war: opinions” ( «Карикатурная война: мнения» ) on a page with the heading “Scandal”. It was a reprint of materials previously published on Russian internet sites. The article cited several opinions about the events which followed the publication of the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad by the Danish newspaper Jyllands ‑ Posten on 30   September 2005. 5.     The cartoons were reprinted in the form of a collage on both sides of the article. According to the applicant, the most controversial parts of the cartoons were not visible, being covered by the neighbouring images. 6.     The article was announced on the first page of the newspaper under the headline “‘Explosive’ cartoons”. 7.     The issue of the newspaper with the article had a print run of 2,500   copies and was distributed in the Vologda region. 8.     On 17 February 2006 the Vologda regional prosecutor’s office brought criminal proceedings against the applicant under Article 282   §   2   (b) of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. An undertaking not to leave Vologda, her place of residence, pending investigation was imposed on her. 9.     The applicant stood trial before the Vologda Town Court. According to the charges, being responsible in her capacity as the editor of the newspaper Nash region plus for compliance with legal requirements for mass media, the applicant had committed acts aimed at inciting hatred and enmity, and disparaging a group of persons on the basis of attitude to religion, through her official position and with the use of mass media. 10.     On 14 April 2006 the Town Court convicted the applicant as charged and sentenced her to a fine in the amount of 100,000 roubles. 11.     On 25 May 2006 the Vologda Regional Court altered the judgment and ordered that the applicant be relieved of the punishment in view of the change in the circumstances since the applicant no longer posed a public menace. The Regional Court upheld the judgment in the remaining part. 12.     On 7 September 2006 the Regional Court dismissed the applicant’s request for supervisory review of her case. COMPLAINT The applicant complains under Article 10 of the Convention that the criminal proceedings against her violated her right to impart information.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression, in particular her right to impart information, contrary to Article   10 of the Convention?   The parties are invited to submit the original newspaper in which the impugned article was published.