The European Court of Human Rights condemns Serbian Courts for Overstepping Bounds in Their Criticism of Broadcast Company's Reporting on Swine Flu Vaccine Dispute

07-09-2023 

Sofía Medina Sánchez 

International Justice and Human Rights Researcher

Global Human Rights Defence 

On the 5th of September, the European Court of Human Rights issued its judgment in the case of Radio Broadcasting Company B92 AD v. Serbia (application no. 67369/16) holding that there had been a violation of Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights. 

The case concerned civil proceedings initiated against the broadcasting company by a former assistant health minister due to their coverage in 2011. This coverage suggested that the minister was under suspicion for misconduct related to the procurement of swine flu vaccines, amid a wider controversy.

The Court determined that the Serbian courts had acknowledged that the information disseminated by the broadcasting company had contributed to a public discourse and that, given her position, the former assistant health minister should have displayed more tolerance. However, the Serbian courts overstepped their boundaries by excessively critiquing the company’s fact-checking process.

The company had grounded its reporting on a document obtained from law enforcement officers regarding the investigation into the vaccine controversy, and there were no doubts regarding the credibility of this document. The reporting used precise and non-exaggerated language, and all parties involved were contacted to provide their perspectives on the events. Overall, the court considered that the broadcasting company had conducted itself in good faith and with the level of care and responsibility anticipated in ethical journalism.

The Strasbourg Court thus concluded that the Serbian courts had overstepped their narrow margin of appreciation to restrict discussion on matters of public interest and the interference in the applicant’s freedom of expression was disproportionate and not “necessary in a democratic society”. Therefore, the courts violated Article 10 (freedom of expression). 

This judgement shows the delicate balance which exists between opposing rights, such as the right to freedom of expression vs the right to respect for private and family life. 

Sources and further reading: 

Case of Radio Broadcasting Company B92 AD v. Serbia (Application no. 67369/16), Judgment, Fourth Section, 5th September 2023: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-226417%22]}

Press Release issued by the Registrar to the Court, ECHR 245 (2023), 5 September 2023: 

https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng-press#{%22itemid%22:[%22003-7733585-10698166%22]}