CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 25 mai 1993

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s85F2E5C5 { width:30.44pt; display:inline-block } .s6863D229 { width:26pt; display:inline-block } .s90A93616 { width:27.66pt; display:inline-block } .sBDAE81C4 { width:27.67pt; display:inline-block } .sC7C396CD { width:24.89pt; display:inline-block } .sE4E38D5F { width:23.77pt; display:inline-block } .s49A78FE0 { width:26.55pt; display:inline-block } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. May 1993 Kokkinakis v. Greece - 14307/88 Judgment 25.5.1993 Article 9 Article 9-1 Freedom of religion Manifest religion or belief Conviction of a Jehovah's Witness for proselytism: violation [This summary is extracted from the Court’s official reports (Series A or Reports of Judgments and Decisions). Its formatting and structure may therefore differ from the Case-Law Information Note summaries.] I.   ARTICLE 9 OF THE CONVENTION A.   General principles Freedom of thought, conscience and religion: one of the foundations of a "democratic society" within the meaning of the Convention; one of the most vital elements making up the identity of believers and their conception of life, but also a precious asset for atheists, agnostics, sceptics and the unconcerned. Religious freedom implied freedom to "manifest one's religion" not only in community with others, "in public" and within the circle of those whose faith one shared, but also "alone" and "in private"; it included in principle the right to try to convince one's neighbour. The fundamental nature of the rights guaranteed in Article 9 was also reflected in the wording of the paragraph providing for limitations on them: unlike second paragraphs of Articles 8, 10 and 11, which covered all the rights mentioned in first paragraphs of those Articles, that of Article 9 referred only to "freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs". It might be necessary to place restrictions on this freedom in order to reconcile the interests of the various religious groups and ensure that everyone's beliefs were respected.   B.   Application of the principles Interference with exercise of Mr Kokkinakis's right to "freedom to manifest [his] religion or beliefs",resulting from sentence passed by Lasithi Criminal Court and reduced by Crete Court of Appeal. 1.   "Prescribed by law" Section 4 of Law no. 1363/1938 was supplemented by a body of settled national case-law that had been published and was accessible. 2.   Legitimate aim Protection of the rights and freedoms of others.   3.   "Necessary in a democratic society" A distinction had to be made between bearing Christian witness and improper proselytism: the former corresponded to true evangelism, the latter represented a corruption or deformation of it incompatible with respect for the freedom of thought, conscience and religion of others. The criteria adopted in section 4 were acceptable in so far as they were designed only to punish improper proselytism - the latter did not have to be defined in the abstract in the present case. Applicant's liability established in reasoning that merely reproduced the wording of section 4 without sufficiently specifying in what way he had attempted to convince his neighbour by improper means; none of the facts set out by the Greek courts warranted that finding.   Conviction not justified by a pressing social need. Conclusion : violation (six votes to three). II.   ARTICLE 7 OF THE CONVENTION Prohibition on retrospective application of criminal law to an accused's disadvantage - principle that only the law can define a crime and prescribe a penalty - principle that the criminal law must not be extensively construed to an accused's detriment, for instance by analogy. In instant case applicant could know from wording of relevant provision and, if need be, with assistance of courts' interpretation of it, what acts would make him liable. Conclusion : no violation (eight votes to one). III.   ARTICLE 10 OF THE CONVENTION No need to examine the complaint. Conclusion : unnecessary to consider the complaint (unanimously). IV.   ARTICLE 14 TAKEN TOGETHER WITH ARTICLE 9 OF THE CONVENTION No need to deal with the complaint. Conclusion : no examination called for (unanimously). V.   ARTICLE 50 OF THE CONVENTION A.   Non-pecuniary damage: compensation awarded. B.   Costs and expenses (in national courts and before Convention institutions: reimbursement. Conclusion : respondent State to pay specified sums to the applicant (unanimously).   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes