CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 6 mars 2019

.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 } .s9296A950 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s39A7D870 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 6 March 2019   SECOND SECTION Application no. 4358/19 THE ASSOCIATION OF INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND EDITORIAL SECURITY OF MOLDOVA and Iurie SANDUTA against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 9 January 2019 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE Following a journalistic investigation, the applicants published an article entitled “The Bahamas money pipeline of Dodon’s socialists” in which it was reported that numerous members of a political party led at the time by the current President of Moldova received large amounts of money which originated from a Bahamas offshore company with Russian ties. The article also reported on the fact that those same party members donated large amounts of money to their political party which sometimes exceeded their yearly incomes. The political party in question initiated civil defamation proceedings against the applicants arguing that the article was defamatory because it stated that the party had been financed from abroad. The applicants argued that the factual information reported was accurate. The domestic courts found against the applicants and accepted that the article was defamatory. They based their findings on the fact that the title of the article suggested that the plaintiff political party and the President’s election campaign had been financed from abroad and that no such unlawful conduct had been found by the competent State organs. The courts ordered the applicants to pay court fees and to publish a retraction. The applicants complain that their right to freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 10 of the Convention was breached in this case.   QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to freedom of expression, in particular their right to impart information and ideas, contrary to Article   10 of the Convention ( Couderc and Hachette Filipacchi Associés v.   France [GC], no. 40454/07, ECHR 2015 (extracts))?