This paper addresses legal responses to Holocaust denial by looking into the European Court of Human Rights evolving case-law. As from the 2003 Garaudy decision, such heinous utterances have been stigmatized as an abuse of freedom of expression and hence excluded a priori from the protection of Article 10 ECHR pursuant to Article 17 ECHR. A concise illustration of this categorical pattern, centered on the anti-abuse clause and symbolically pictured as the “guillotine”, is provided to highlight its distinguishing rationale as well as its inherent shortcomings. Attention is then focused on the most recent lines of development, which indicate a move towards a more considered approach, restoring centrality to the conditions of legitimacy set forth in Article 10 ECHR in accordance with the ordinary logic of rights balancing.
Holocaust Denial in The Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights: Has the ‘Guillotine’ Truly Run Its Course?
Federica Falconi
2023-01-01
Abstract
This paper addresses legal responses to Holocaust denial by looking into the European Court of Human Rights evolving case-law. As from the 2003 Garaudy decision, such heinous utterances have been stigmatized as an abuse of freedom of expression and hence excluded a priori from the protection of Article 10 ECHR pursuant to Article 17 ECHR. A concise illustration of this categorical pattern, centered on the anti-abuse clause and symbolically pictured as the “guillotine”, is provided to highlight its distinguishing rationale as well as its inherent shortcomings. Attention is then focused on the most recent lines of development, which indicate a move towards a more considered approach, restoring centrality to the conditions of legitimacy set forth in Article 10 ECHR in accordance with the ordinary logic of rights balancing.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
