Closed Expands Expression. Global Freedom of Expression is an academic initiative and therefore, we encourage you to share and republish excerpts of our content so long as they are not used for commercial purposes and you respect the following policy:. Attribution, copyright, and license information for media used by Global Freedom of Expression is available on our Credits page. In , the private company Mladina d. This article also described the debate of the deputies of the Slovenian National Party, who strongly opposed adoption of this act, and especially statements of one of the deputies, S.
After publishing this article, S. The district court partially upheld S. Applicant stated that, in previous cases, it was established that generally offensive speech is acceptable in certain circumstances, especially in a situation such as the present case where speech is used to contribute to public debate about a topic of public importance. Moreover, Applicant emphasized that S. Finally, as for the very words used in the disputed article, Applicant stated that this was satire with some degree of exaggeration.
The Government, on the other side, stated that the article contained inaccurate and incomplete information, since the disputed statements in fact described the mockery of a child of homosexual parents might be exposed to when picked up after school.
Second, the Government argued that the fact that delegate critiqued the legislation does not allow a journalist to make insulting remarks about S. As for the allegation that this was the satirical expression of a journalist, the Government insisted that this article was written to inform the public about a debate that was held in the Assembly, not as a satirical article.
Finally, the Government stated that the penalty was proportional since it only pressed a civil claim for damages.
