Véleménynyilvánítás szabadsága – Alkotmánybíróság

Absztrakt

The Constitutional Court confirmed its case law concerning the freedom of speech: the freedom of expression allows wider criticism of public figures than non-public figures. The condition of “appreciable public interest” in the new Civil Code may narrow the scope of the freedom of expression without any reason; therefore, it is contrary to the Fundamental Law. The distinction between facts and value-judgments is of outstanding constitutional importance, which shall be taken into account when a judge interprets the provisions of criminal law, ’facts’ may not be interpreted too widely. It is in conformity with the freedom of press to set certain requirements at the time of elections for the press owned by local governments in order to ensure a fair, balanced and impartial campaign, without discriminating against or supporting a specific political party or candidate.

The Constitutional Court did not find unconstitutional the interpretation of the law on electoral procedure by the Curia, which allows the placing of campaign posters on electric pylons during the elections. The Court ruled that the system of “winner compensation” is not discriminative and does not violate the right to vote.

The Court declared that the amendment of the Act on National Security was contrary to the Fundamental Law, which permitted continuous national security control and – during this process – secret information gathering for thirty days twice a year against a person who was under national security control.