The European Convention, Article 10, allows members to restrict freedom of expression to protect a higher interest. There are cases when speech does not enjoy protection under Article 10 of the Convention. Expression falling within the scope of Article 17 does not enjoy the protection of Article 10.
The European Court of Human Rights applied Article 17 in the context of racist speech that undermines the fundamental values of the Convention. A typical example of this is Pavel Ivanov v. Russia, who was criminally convicted for publishing articles in which Jews were presented as the source of evil in Russia. Through his publications, he tried to incite hatred towards Jews because of a fierce attack on an ethnic group, which is contrary to the fundamental values of the Convention. The Court considers that based on Article 17 of the Convention, protection from Article 10 cannot be achieved.
The Court has applied this rule to other types of racist speech, such as Norwood v. United Kingdom. It was a poster showing the “Twin Towers” demolished in the attack on September 11, 2001, with the title, “Expel Islam from Britain – let’s protect the British people.” Such a general and fierce attack on a religious group and associating that group with terrorism is contrary to the values promoted by the Convention.
Also, the Court applied Article 17 in denying the Holocaust, and such an action is incompatible with democracy and human rights because it violates the rights of others. Also, Article 17 was used to deny the protection of Article 10 to these individuals who wanted to revive the Nazi Party in Germany.
B.P.