Case Summary and Outcome

The European Court of Human Rights dismissed a complaint brought by a Portuguese journalist regarding her conviction for publishing an article based on a taped telephone conversation between two politicians without their consent. The article detailed a private exchange between the two politicians obtained during high-profile criminal proceedings but about matters unrelated to the criminal case. The Portuguese courts found that the journalist violated the politicians’ right to privacy, as the conversation was personal and lacked significant public interest, and that the right to freedom of expression did not outweigh the politicians’ right to privacy. The European Court found that the domestic courts had struck a fair balance between the conflicting rights, and emphasized that the publication served primarily to satisfy readers’ curiosity.

Facts

On November 13, 2010, the Portuguese tabloid newspaper, Correio da Manhã (“CM”), published an article written by journalist Tânia Alexandra Ferreira e Castro Da Costa Laranjo which was based on a taped telephone conversation between two politicians. In the private conversation, from June 2009, A.V., a former Minister, and E.E., a Member of the European Parliament at the time, criticized colleagues in the European Parliament. The recording formed part of a high-profile criminal investigation into A.V. and others, and Ferreira e Castro Da Costa Laranjo obtained access to it through her role as an assistente (auxiliary of the prosecutor).

E.E. filed a criminal complaint against Ferreira e Castro Da Costa Laranjo for publishing the article without obtaining prior consent of E.E. and A.V. On July 28, 2017, the Criminal Court of Lisbon convicted the journalist and imposed a fine of €1,000, equivalent to ten daily fines, under Article 348 § 1(a) of the Criminal Code, Article 88 § 4 of the Code of Criminal Proceedings, and the Press Law. The Court found that the content of the article was derived from a personal and private conversation and that the journalist’s right to freedom of expression did not outweigh the politicians’ right to privacy.

The Lisbon Court of Appeal upheld this decision on April 19, 2018, emphasizing the private nature of the conversation and the absence of significant public interest to justify its publication. It further noted that the journalist had failed to seek authorization before publication, as required by law. The Court concluded that Ferreira e Castro Da Costa Laranjo’s right to freedom of expression was outweighed by A.V.’s and E.E.’s right to privacy.

Ferreira e Castro Da Costa Laranjo brought an application before the European Court of Human Rights, arguing that her rights under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights had been infringed.

Article 10 states: “1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises. 2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.”

Decision Overview