This article places a particular emphasis on the collision between the right to personal dignity and the right to freedom o f expression, particularly in cases where the subjects o f criticism are holders o f public authority. The European Court o f Human Rights has established precedents for the so-called “right to extended criticism, ” particularly in favour o f the public, as most commonly represented through the media. In landmark cases on this matter, a clear distinction has been made between the right to express value judgements regarding a public figure, and the assertion o f verifiable facts.In adjudicating the 2021 decision analysed in this paper, the judicial panel took a step back by shifting the right to severe criticism, which typically exceeds the usual boundaries, from the media’s domain to the realm o f public office holders. Furthermore, the judicial panel materially altered the prior case law by misconstruing the right to make value judgements as the right to disseminate untrue factual claims.
Pajtić et al. (Wed,) studied this question.