Communicated on 4 September 2020
Published on 21 September 2020
THIRD SECTION
Application no. 81292/17
Roman CHOCHOLÁČ
against Slovakia
lodged on 21 November 2017
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns a confiscation, by the prison authorities, of pornographic material possessed by the applicant who is serving a life prison sentence, and a disciplinary sanction imposed on him for the allegedly unlawful possession of such material. The applicant complains that the State interfered with his rights under Articles 8 and 10 of the Convention and that such interference was not necessary in a democratic society.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Has there been an interference with the applicant’s right to respect for his private life, within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention, and/or with his freedom of expression, in particular his right to receive information and ideas, within the meaning of Article 10 § 1 of the Convention?
2. If so, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article 8 § 2 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Biržietis v. Lithuania, no. 49304/09, 14 June 2016) and/or Article 10 § 2 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Pryanishnikov v. Russia, no. 25047/05, 10 September 2019)? In particular, did the domestic authorities carry out a proportionality test as required by the Court’s case-law (see, mutatis mutandis, Perinçek v. Switzerland [GC], no. 27510/08, § 275 in fine, 15 October 2015)?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy