CASE OF PERİNÇEK v. SWITZERLAND
Hearing: Perinçek v. Switzerland (no. 27510/08) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2015-01-28 00:00:00)
Application no.: 27510/08
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2013-12-17 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:1217JUD002751008
Respondent state: CHE
Articles of the Convention: 10;10-1;10-2;35;41
Judges: András Sajó;Eckart Klein;Guido Raimondi;Helen Keller;Nebojša Vučinić;Paulo Pinto De Albuquerque;Peer Lorenzen
Represented by: CENGIZ M.
Issue: Article 261bis of the Criminal Code
Strasbourg case-law cited: Animal Defenders International v. the United Kingdom [GC], no 48876/08, § 100, 22 April 2013;Castells v. Spain, 23 April 1992, § 43, Series A no 236;Chauvy and Others v. France, no. 64915/01, § 78, ECHR 2004 VI;Cox v. Turkey, no 2933/03, 20 May 2010;De Haes and Gijsels v. Belgium, 24 February 1997, § 46, Reports 1997-I;Dink v. Turkey, nos. 2668/07, 6102/08, 30079/08, 7072/09 and 7124/09, 14 September 2010;Editions Plon v. France, no 58148/00, § 53, ECHR 2004-IV;Erbakan v. Turkey, no 59405/00, 6 July 2006;Erdoğdu and İnce v. Turkey [GC], nos. 25067/94 and 25068/94, ECHR 1999 IV;Féret v. Belgium, no 15615/07, § 73, 16 July 2009;Garaudy v. France (dec.), no 65831/01, ECHR 2003-IX (extracts);Gawęda v. Poland, no 26229/95, § 39, ECHR 2002-II;Giniewski v. France, no 64016/00, ECHR 2006 I;Gündüz v. Turkey, no 35071/97, ECHR 2003 XI;Ivanov v. Russia (dec.), no 35222/04, 20 February 2007;Jersild v. Denmark, 23 September 1994, Series A no 298;Kern v. Germany (dec.), no 26870/04, 29 May 2007;Kokkinakis v. Greece, 25 May 1993, § 40, Series A no 260-A;Kopp v. Switzerland, 25 March 1998, § 59, Reports 1998-II;Kruslin v. France, 24 April 1990, § 29, Series A no 176-A;Lehideux and Isorni v. France, 23 September 1998, Reports 1998 VII;Leroy v. France, no 36109/03, 2 October 2008;Lingens v. Austria, 8 July 1986, § 42, Series A no 103;Lopes Gomes da Silva v. Portugal, no 37698/97, § 36, ECHR 2000 X;Maestri v. Italy [GC], no 39748/98, § 30, ECHR 2004-I;Molnar v. Romania (dec.), no 16637/06, 23 October 2012;Monnat v. Switzerland, no 73604/01, ECHR 2006 X;Mouvement raëlien suisse v. Switzerland [GC], no 16354/06, § 48, ECHR 2012;Norwood v. the United Kingdom, no 23131/03, 16 November 2004;Orban and Others v. France, no 20985/05, § 34, 15 January 2009;Rekvényi v. Hungary [GC], no 25390/94, § 34, ECHR 1999 III;Rotaru v. Romania [GC], no 28341/95, § 52, ECHR 2000-V;Stoll v. Switzerland [GC], no 69698/01, § 101, ECHR 2007 V;Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no 1), 26 April 1979, § 49, Series A no 30;Thorgeir Thorgeirson v. Iceland, 25 June 1992, § 63, Series A no 239;Vgt Verein gegen Tierfabriken v. Switzerland, no 24699/94, § 52, ECHR 2001-VI;Vogt v. Germany, 26 September 1995, § 48, Series A no 323;Wingrove v. the United Kingdom, 25 November 1996, § 58, Reports 1996 V;Winterwerp v. the Netherlands, judgment of 24 October 1979, § 46, Series A no 33
External sources: Declaration of 24 April 2013 (no. 542, Doc. 13192) from twenty members of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe;Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide on 9 December 1948;Article 5 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court adopted on 17 July 1998;Judgment of 2 September 1998 of the Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in the case of The Prosecutor v. Akayesu (no. ICTR-96-4-T);Judgment of 26 February 2007 of the  International Court of Justice in the case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro) (ICJ Reports 2007);Judgment of 7 November 2007 (no. 235/2007) of the Spanish Constitutional Court;Case of Robert Faurisson v. France, determined by the UN Human Rights Committee on 8 November 1996, Communication no. 550/1993, doc. CCPR/C/58/D/550/1993 (1996);Article 6, sub-paragraph (c), of the Charter of the (Nuremberg) International Military Tribunal, annexed to the London Agreement of 8 August 1945;Study dated 19 December 2006 by the Swiss Institute of Comparative Law;Article 607.2 of the Spanish Criminal Code;French law no. 2001-70 of 29 January 2001 on recognition of the 1915 Armenian genocide;General Comment no. 34 on freedom of opinion and expression concerning Article 19 of the Covenant adopted by the UN Human Rights Committee
Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible;Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression -{General} (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression);Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed;Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient
Separate opinion: TRUE