On the 7th January 2025, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR/Court) delivered the judgment of Minasyan and Others v. Armenia (2025). It addressed critical issues of hate speech, discrimination and the state’s positive obligations under Article 8 (the right to respect for private and family life) in conjunction with Article 14 (the prohibition of discrimination) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). This case originated from a series of online articles published by the newspaper Iravunk, which targeted the applicants. The attacks followed their criticism of Armenian Eurovision jury members, who had made homophobic remarks regarding the 2014 Eurovision Song Contest. The controversy stemmed from the victory of Conchita Wurst; a performer described in the articles as a ‘gay cross-dressing performer.’1
Facts
The case involved 14 applicants, including human rights activists, members of NGOs, journalists, and researchers working in the fields of LGBT2 and women’s rights. In May 2014, the newspaper published an article titled ‘They Serve the Interests of the International Homosexual Lobby: the Blacklist of Enemies of the Nation and the State.’ The article accused the applicants of promoting homosexuality, labelled them as ‘internal enem[ies] of the Nation and the State,’ and explicitly incited discrimination against them. It included hyperlinks to their Facebook profiles and urged the public to take actions, such as avoiding contact with them, refusing them employment and preventing them from holding educational positions. The article referred to LGBT activists as ‘gay-campaign-supporting zombies’ and advocated for ‘zero tolerance’ toward them. In response, the majority of the applicants requested a retraction of the article, but the newspaper published another article in June 2014, mocking their request and escalating the attacks on their activism. The applicants subsequently filed a civil lawsuit, arguing that several of the statements made in the May 2014 article damaged their honour and dignity and contained statements inciting hatred and discrimination. During the litigation, Iravunk’s editor-in-chief organized a Facebook event, calling on supporters of ‘traditional values’ to rally behind the newspaper. On the day of the hearing, a group of protesters gathered outside the court, displaying anti-LGBT signs and framing the case as a defence of national and moral values. The newspaper continued its campaign, publishing additional articles targeting the applicants. The domestic courts dismissed the applicants’ claims, ruling that the articles fell within the bounds of the freedom of expression.
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.