Advanced search
1 file | 70.54 KB Add to list

European Court of Human Rights : Vladimir Kharitonov v. Russia, OOO Flavus and others v. Russia, Bulgakov v. Russia and Engels v. Russia

Dirk Voorhoof (UGent)
Author
Organization
Abstract
In four judgments of 23 June 2020 the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) found that the blocking of websites and media platforms in Russia has violated the right to freedom of expression and information as guaranteed by Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). The cases concern different types of blocking measures, including collateral blocking (where the IP address that was blocked was shared with other sites), excessive blocking (where the whole website was blocked because of a single page or file) and wholesale blocking of media outlets for their news coverage. One case concerns a court order to remove a web page with a description of tools and software for bypassing restrictions on private communications and content filters on the Internet, if not the website would be blocked. The ECtHR once again highlighted the importance of the Internet as a vital tool in exercising the right to freedom of expression. It found that the provisions of Russia’s Information Act used to block the websites and online media outlets had produced excessive and arbitrary effects and had not provided proper safeguards against abusive interferences by the Russian authorities. In each of the four cases the ECtHR also found a violation of the right to an effective remedy under Article 13 ECHR: it found that the Russian courts had not carried out examinations of the substance of what had been arguable complaints of violations of the applicant’s rights and that none of the remedies available to the applicants had been effective.
Keywords
Freedom of expression, Internet, blocking, transparency, effective remedies

Downloads

  • IRIS2020.9.RussianInternetblockingcases.Voorhoof.pdf
    • full text (Published version)
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 70.54 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Voorhoof, Dirk. “European Court of Human Rights : Vladimir Kharitonov v. Russia, OOO Flavus and Others v. Russia, Bulgakov v. Russia and Engels v. Russia.” IRIS (ENGLISH ED.), no. 8, 2020, pp. 12–15.
APA
Voorhoof, D. (2020). European Court of Human Rights : Vladimir Kharitonov v. Russia, OOO Flavus and others v. Russia, Bulgakov v. Russia and Engels v. Russia. IRIS (ENGLISH ED.).
Chicago author-date
Voorhoof, Dirk. 2020. “European Court of Human Rights : Vladimir Kharitonov v. Russia, OOO Flavus and Others v. Russia, Bulgakov v. Russia and Engels v. Russia.” IRIS (ENGLISH ED.).
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Voorhoof, Dirk. 2020. “European Court of Human Rights : Vladimir Kharitonov v. Russia, OOO Flavus and Others v. Russia, Bulgakov v. Russia and Engels v. Russia.” IRIS (ENGLISH ED.).
Vancouver
1.
Voorhoof D. European Court of Human Rights : Vladimir Kharitonov v. Russia, OOO Flavus and others v. Russia, Bulgakov v. Russia and Engels v. Russia. IRIS (ENGLISH ED.). 2020. p. 12–5.
IEEE
[1]
D. Voorhoof, “European Court of Human Rights : Vladimir Kharitonov v. Russia, OOO Flavus and others v. Russia, Bulgakov v. Russia and Engels v. Russia,” IRIS (ENGLISH ED.), no. 8. pp. 12–15, 2020.
@misc{8675686,
  abstract     = {{In four judgments of 23 June 2020 the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) found that the blocking of websites and media platforms in Russia has violated the right to freedom of expression and information as guaranteed by Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). The cases concern different types of blocking measures, including collateral blocking (where the IP address that was blocked was shared with other sites), excessive blocking (where the whole website was blocked because of a single page or file) and wholesale blocking of media outlets for their news coverage. One case concerns a court order to remove a web page with a description of tools and software for bypassing restrictions on private communications and content filters on the Internet, if not the website would be blocked. The ECtHR once again highlighted the importance of the Internet as a vital tool in exercising the right to freedom of expression. It found that the provisions of Russia’s Information Act used to block the websites and online media outlets had produced excessive and arbitrary effects and had not provided proper safeguards against abusive interferences by the Russian authorities. In each of the four cases the ECtHR also found a violation of the right to an effective remedy under Article 13 ECHR: it found that the Russian courts had not carried out examinations of the substance of what had been arguable complaints of violations of the applicant’s rights and that none of the remedies available to the applicants had been effective.}},
  articleno    = {{2020-8:1/11}},
  author       = {{Voorhoof, Dirk}},
  issn         = {{2078-6158}},
  keywords     = {{Freedom of expression,Internet,blocking,transparency,effective remedies}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{8}},
  pages        = {{2020-8:1/11:12--2020-8:1/11:15}},
  series       = {{IRIS (ENGLISH ED.)}},
  title        = {{European Court of Human Rights : Vladimir Kharitonov v. Russia, OOO Flavus and others v. Russia, Bulgakov v. Russia and Engels v. Russia}},
  url          = {{https://merlin.obs.coe.int/article/8956}},
  year         = {{2020}},
}