McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[G-Unit]

A totally screwed Justice System wherein Innocent People can be Libelled wholesale.

Are you posting opinion as fact?

[Venturi Swirl]

Are you posting opinion as fact?

Clearly it's a system which puts people's freedom to libel over people's right not to be libelled so it's a fact is it not? 

[jassi]

You should try it.  But I don't suppose that you are interested enough.  Bashing The McCanns is so much more fun.

Absolutely right on both counts.

[G-Unit]

Clearly it's a system which puts people's freedom to libel over people's right not to be libelled so it's a fact is it not?

It's not clear to me. In fact as I understand it Portugal had a tradition of prioritising people's right to honour over freedom of speech and had been penalised for it in the past. I offer my evidence and look forward to seeing yours upholding your statement. You couldn't be basing your opinion on just one case, could you?

"it is important to know how the Superior Courts fall and solve the conflict between the contemplated rights, starting with the ECHR, of which the jurisprudence is particularly industrious and interesting in this matter.
From this same jurisprudence one retains that in contrast to the traditional current of the Portuguese higher courts, this court does not accept, in principle, the priority of the right to honour and good over the freedom of expression/freedom of the press..."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.msg383228#msg383228

Teixeira da Mota: Portuguese courts traditionally placed a high value on the rights to honour and reputation and considered freedom of expression a second-class freedom compared to those rights. Even today there remains in many cases a tendency to place too much value on the words, image, and reputation of powerful figures when weighed against critical opinions about those figures. Courts continue, at times, to not distinguish between assertions of fact and value judgments, which obviously ends up harming freedom of expression.
https://ipi.media/portuguese-defamation-laws-still-reflect-authoritarian-concept-of-power-expert-says/

[Eleanor]

Are you posting opinion as fact?

I think it is a fact.  Amaral did Libel The McCanns many times, but The Court ruled in favour of his right to do so.

[Eleanor]

It's not clear to me. In fact as I understand it Portugal had a tradition of prioritising people's right to honour over freedom of speech and had been penalised for it in the past. I offer my evidence and look forward to seeing yours upholding your statement. You couldn't be basing your opinion on just one case, could you?

"it is important to know how the Superior Courts fall and solve the conflict between the contemplated rights, starting with the ECHR, of which the jurisprudence is particularly industrious and interesting in this matter.
From this same jurisprudence one retains that in contrast to the traditional current of the Portuguese higher courts, this court does not accept, in principle, the priority of the right to honour and good over the freedom of expression/freedom of the press..."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.msg383228#msg383228

Teixeira da Mota: Portuguese courts traditionally placed a high value on the rights to honour and reputation and considered freedom of expression a second-class freedom compared to those rights. Even today there remains in many cases a tendency to place too much value on the words, image, and reputation of powerful figures when weighed against critical opinions about those figures. Courts continue, at times, to not distinguish between assertions of fact and value judgments, which obviously ends up harming freedom of expression.
https://ipi.media/portuguese-defamation-laws-still-reflect-authoritarian-concept-of-power-expert-says/

I wonder what happen to that when it came to The McCanns.

Although that Cite sounds mostly like gobbled gook to me.

[Venturi Swirl]

It's not clear to me. In fact as I understand it Portugal had a tradition of prioritising people's right to honour over freedom of speech and had been penalised for it in the past. I offer my evidence and look forward to seeing yours upholding your statement. You couldn't be basing your opinion on just one case, could you?

"it is important to know how the Superior Courts fall and solve the conflict between the contemplated rights, starting with the ECHR, of which the jurisprudence is particularly industrious and interesting in this matter.
From this same jurisprudence one retains that in contrast to the traditional current of the Portuguese higher courts, this court does not accept, in principle, the priority of the right to honour and good over the freedom of expression/freedom of the press..."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.msg383228#msg383228

Teixeira da Mota: Portuguese courts traditionally placed a high value on the rights to honour and reputation and considered freedom of expression a second-class freedom compared to those rights. Even today there remains in many cases a tendency to place too much value on the words, image, and reputation of powerful figures when weighed against critical opinions about those figures. Courts continue, at times, to not distinguish between assertions of fact and value judgments, which obviously ends up harming freedom of expression.
https://ipi.media/portuguese-defamation-laws-still-reflect-authoritarian-concept-of-power-expert-says/

One case is all it takes to prove the point.

[Mr Gray]

It's not clear to me. In fact as I understand it Portugal had a tradition of prioritising people's right to honour over freedom of speech and had been penalised for it in the past. I offer my evidence and look forward to seeing yours upholding your statement. You couldn't be basing your opinion on just one case, could you?

"it is important to know how the Superior Courts fall and solve the conflict between the contemplated rights, starting with the ECHR, of which the jurisprudence is particularly industrious and interesting in this matter.
From this same jurisprudence one retains that in contrast to the traditional current of the Portuguese higher courts, this court does not accept, in principle, the priority of the right to honour and good over the freedom of expression/freedom of the press..."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.msg383228#msg383228

Teixeira da Mota: Portuguese courts traditionally placed a high value on the rights to honour and reputation and considered freedom of expression a second-class freedom compared to those rights. Even today there remains in many cases a tendency to place too much value on the words, image, and reputation of powerful figures when weighed against critical opinions about those figures. Courts continue, at times, to not distinguish between assertions of fact and value judgments, which obviously ends up harming freedom of expression.
https://ipi.media/portuguese-defamation-laws-still-reflect-authoritarian-concept-of-power-expert-says/

From my reading and interpretation of Portugals attitude towards the balance of article 10 and 8 they have in the past put greater importance to right to reputation than frre spoech... But..

From what I have seen this has applied to where journalists have criticised judges and the establishment. In these cases the Portuguese courts seem to have put the judges and establishment first.. This is what the ECHR has criticised them for.

[G-Unit]

I think it is a fact.  Amaral did Libel The McCanns many times, but The Court ruled in favour of his right to do so.

A fact is something which has been proved to be correct. How do you propose to prove that Amaral libelled the McCanns many times?

[Eleanor]

From my reading and interpretation of Portugals attitude towards the balance of article 10 and 8 they have in the past put greater importance to right to reputation than frre spoech... But..

From what I have seen this has applied to where journalists have criticised judges and the establishment. In these cases the Portuguese courts seem to have put the judges and establishment first.. This is what the ECHR has criticised them for.

Thank you for explaining that.  You did this so much better than I could have done.

[G-Unit]

From my reading and interpretation of Portugals attitude towards the balance of article 10 and 8 they have in the past put greater importance to right to reputation than frre spoech... But..

From what I have seen this has applied to where journalists have criticised judges and the establishment. In these cases the Portuguese courts seem to have put the judges and establishment first.. This is what the ECHR has criticised them for.

Do you have examples showing that Portugal has been criticised only for putting judges and the establishment first?

[Eleanor]

A fact is something which has been proved to be correct. How do you propose to prove that Amaral libelled the McCanns many times?

I don't have to.  It's obvious.  Even if correct Amaral couldn't prove it at the time and still can't.

[Mr Gray]

Do you have examples showing that Portugal has been criticised only for putting judges and the establishment first?

First read your own post.. It seems to confirm what I have said. I can recall one particular case where a journalist criticised  a judge.. SC ruled in the judges favour.. ECHR in the journalists favour. I'm not going to find it at the moment and that's why I worded my post so that a cite wasn't necessary

[G-Unit]

I don't have to.  It's obvious.  Even if correct Amaral couldn't prove it at the time and still can't.

What you have to prove is that what he said was libellous. Something which the McCanns and their lawyers failed to prove. You believe it's true and that the Portuguese courts couldn't see that it was true, but that doesn't mean it is true, it's still just your opinion.

[Mr Gray]

Do you have examples showing that Portugal has been criticised only for putting judges and the establishment first?

This is from your own post... Do you read your own posts


Teixeira da Mota: Portuguese courts traditionally placed a high value on the rights to honour and reputation and considered freedom of expression a second-class freedom compared to those rights. Even today there remains in many cases a tendency to place too much value on the words, image, and reputation of powerful figures when weighed against critical opinions about those figures. Courts continue, at times, to not distinguish between assertions of fact and value judgments, which obviously ends up harming freedom of expression.
https://ipi.media/portuguese-defamation-laws-still-reflect-authoritarian-concept-of-power-expert-says