The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54
(art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),
Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human
Rights in the Jersild case delivered on 23 September 1994 and
transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;
Recalling that the case originated in an application
(No. 15890/89) against Denmark lodged with the European Commission
of Human Rights on 25 July 1989, under Article 25 (art. 25) of the
Convention by Mr Jens Olaf Jersild, a Danish national, and that the
Commission declared admissible his complaint that his conviction
violated his right to freedom of expression under Article 10
(art. 10) of the Convention;
Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the
Commission and, thereafter, by the Government of Denmark
on 9 September and 11 October 1993, respectively;
Whereas in its judgment of 23 September 1994 the Court:
- held, by twelve votes to seven, that there had been a
violation of Article 10 (art. 10) of the Convention;
- held, by seventeen votes to two, that Denmark was to pay the
applicant, within three months, 1 000 Danish kroner in compensation
for pecuniary damage; and for costs and expenses, the sums
resulting from the calculations to be made in accordance with
paragraph 45 of the judgment;
- dismissed, unanimously, the remainder of the claim for just
satisfaction;
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of
Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 (art. 54) of the
Convention;
Having invited the Government of Denmark to inform it of the
measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of
23 September 1994, having regard to Denmark's obligation under
Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention to abide by it;
Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee
of Ministers, the Government of Denmark gave the Committee
information about the measures taken in consequence of the
judgment, which information appears in the appendix to this
resolution;
Having satisfied itself that the Government of Denmark paid
the applicant, within the time limit set, the sum provided for in
the judgment of 23 September 1994,
Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied
by the Government of Denmark, that it has exercised its functions
under Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this case.
Appendix to Resolution DH (95) 212
Information provided by the Government of Denmark
during the examination of the Jersild case
by the Committee of Ministers
Following the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
in the Jersild case, the Danish Supreme Court acquitted, in a
judgment of 28 October 1994, a journalist who had been charged with
invasion of privacy by entering without permission an area which
was not accessible to the public. The journalist had, together
with a cameraman and a soundman, been covering a demonstration
which was heading towards the house of the Danish Minister for
Environmental Questions. When the demonstration entered the
minister's garden and started to dig up the lawn, the journalist
followed them and continued her reporting.
In the City Court of Copenhagen and in the Eastern Division of
the High Court the journalist was found guilty as charged. She was
sentenced to pay day-fines (dagböter) totalling 500 Danish kroner,
or, alternatively, five days' imprisonment. However, the Supreme
Court acquitted the journalist as it found that this result was
most in keeping with the jurisprudence of the European Court of
Human Rights concerning Article 10 (art. 10). In this connection
the Supreme Court made a special reference to the Jersild judgment
as the latest authority.
This example is but one of quite a number of judgments from
the Supreme Court and the High Courts in recent years which
demonstrate that the courts are directly inspired by the European
Convention on Human Rights and the Strasbourg case-law in their
interpretation of Danish law (see, inter alia, the numerous cases
cited in Betaenkning No. 1220 from 1991: "On the Incorporation of
the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in
Danish Law"). There is, accordingly, no reason to doubt that also
the interpretation of the 1991 Media Liability Act
(Medieansvarsloven, 1991: No. 348) will be based on the principles
which emerge from the judgment of the European Court of Human
Rights in the Jersild case.
It should also be pointed out that following the Jersild
judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, the Special Court
of Revision has decided on 24 January 1995 to allow the case
against, inter alia, Mr Jersild to be reopened.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy