PERINÇEK v. SWITZERLAND - 27510/08 - Chamber Judgment (French Text) [2013] ECHR 1292 (17 December 2013)

PERINÇEK v. SWITZERLAND - 27510/08 - Chamber Judgment (French Text) [2013] ECHR 1292 (17 December 2013)

The Swiss courts' conviction of the applicant for denying the Armenian genocide was based on a legal provision criminalizing the denial of genocide, which the courts interpreted as applying to the Armenian genocide due to a broad consensus in Swiss society and among experts. The courts found that the applicant's...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] ECHR 1292
Parties
Applicant: Doğu Perinçek; Respondent: Confédération suisse
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
17 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Chamber Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed; conviction upheld by Swiss courts.
Legal Topics
Freedom of Expression, Genocide Denial, Discrimination, Hate Speech, Racial Discrimination
Human Rights Law Criminal Law International Law Freedom of Expression Genocide Denial Discrimination Hate Speech Racial Discrimination

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Doğu Perinçek

Applicant

Confédération suisse

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Chamber Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's conviction for denying the Armenian genocide violated his right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights
  2. 2 Whether the Swiss courts' application of criminal law for genocide denial was compatible with the requirements of legality, necessity, and proportionality under the Convention

Ratio Decidendi

The Swiss courts' conviction of the applicant for denying the Armenian genocide was based on a legal provision criminalizing the denial of genocide, which the courts interpreted as applying to the Armenian genocide due to a broad consensus in Swiss society and among experts. The courts found that the applicant's statements were not part of a legitimate historical debate but constituted an attack on the dignity of the Armenian community, motivated by racist and nationalist intent. The restriction on freedom of expression was considered necessary and proportionate to protect the rights and dignity of others and to prevent discrimination.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; conviction upheld by Swiss courts.