HUMAN right judges have condemned Spain for convicting two Catalan men who set fire to a picture of King Juan Carlos I and Queen Sofia during a protest more than a decade ago.
Seven judges at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg unanimously ruled that Spain had violated Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights in the case against Stern Taulats and Roura Capellera.
The pair set fire to pictures of the royal couple in Girona in December 2007, during a protest outside the town hall during visit to the city by the royal couple.
Judges found the act “had been part of a political, rather than personal, critique of the institution of monarchy in general and in particular of the Kingdom of Spain as a nation”.
They ruled it had not constituted incitement to hatred or violence, and that the 15-month prison sentence – later replaced with fines of €2700 (£2396) each – was an interference with their right to freedom of expression It was not a personal attack on the king, but part of a debate on Catalan independence, an issue of general interest, the monarchic structure of the state and a critique of the king as a symbol of the Spanish nation.
The court ordered Spain to pay Taulats and Capellera €2700 each in pecuniary damages and €9,000 (£7988) each for costs and expenses.
Their lawyer, Benet Salellas, said in a statement: “The ruling makes it very clear that political criticism against the institutions of the state will never be a discourse of hatred. It is an amendment to the whole of the Spanish justice system.”
Spain’s use of anti-terrorism legislation has come under fire from human rights group Amnesty International, which described it as “a sustained attack on freedom of expression”.
Amnesty said in a report that scores of ordinary social media users, musicians, journalists and even puppeteers had been prosecuted on the grounds of national security, which had had a “profoundly chilling effect”.
This had created an environment where people were increasingly afraid to express alternative views or make controversial jokes.
“Sending rappers to jail for song lyrics and outlawing political satire demonstrates how narrow the boundaries of acceptable online speech have become in Spain,” said Esteban Beltrán, director of Amnesty International Spain.
“People should not face criminal prosecution simply for saying, tweeting or singing something that might be distasteful or shocking.
“Spain’s broad and vaguely-worded law is resulting in the silencing of free speech and the crushing of artistic expression.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel