By Natalie Alkiviadou
Abstract
This article explores the evolution of Article 17 of the European Convention on Human Rights from its inception as a safeguard against totalitarian regimes to its contemporary application in the suppression of hate speech. The formulation of key issues around the paper’s discussion is prompted by the 2023 case of Lenis v Greece where the European Court of Human Rights extended the use of Article 17 to homophobic speech. Despite originating from the historical context of post-World War II atrocities, the application of Article 17 has extended beyond its original intent, raising concerns about its compatibility with democratic principles and its potential to undermine freedom of expression. Through a comprehensive analysis of relevant case law and scholarly discourse, this paper examines the tension between Article 17 and Article 10 of the ECHR, which guarantees the right to freedom of expression. It argues that the broad interpretation and extensive utilization of Article 17 pose significant threats to democracy and exacerbate challenges faced by marginalized communities. Drawing parallels with the United Nations Human Rights Committee’s approach to abuse clauses, the paper advocates for a more cautious and judicious application of Article 17 to strike a balance between protecting vulnerable groups and upholding fundamental freedoms in a liberal democracy.
Read More
Natalie Alkiviadou is a Senior Research Fellow at The Future of Free Speech. Her research interests lie in the freedom of expression, the far-right, hate speech, hate crime, and non-discrimination.