ECHR Rules Against Armenia in LGBTQ Rights Case: A Blow to Free Expression or a Win for Human Rights?

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has issued a major judgment against Armenia, citing violations of the right to respect for private and family life and the prohibition of discrimination. The case, centered on hate speech and harassment against LGBTQ individuals and their supporters – the challenges of balancing freedom of expression with the protection of fundamental human rights.

The events leading to the ruling began on May 16, 2014, during a Facebook press conference hosted by Radio Liberty. Inga and Anush Arshakyan, members of Armenia’s jury for the Eurovision Song Contest 2014, revealed they had given the lowest scores to Conchita Wurst, a gay performer who won that year’s contest. The sisters made derogatory comments about Wurst, sparking criticism from activists and others who participated in the online discussion.

The following day, the Iravunk newspaper published an article titled “They Serve the Interests of the International Homosexual Lobby: The Blacklist of Enemies of the Nation and the State.” Written by the editor of the paper, the article included a blacklist of individuals who had criticized the Arshakyans during the press conference. It further stated:

“There is only one way to stop the onslaught of these lobbyists: ZERO TOLERANCE. Regardless of whether they were paid, forced or brainwashed to become gay-campaign-supporting zombies. All that is irrelevant; every lobbyist is an internal enemy of the Nation and the State. That’s it.”

Sixteen individuals named in the blacklist filed a class action lawsuit in the Yerevan Court of General Jurisdiction against the Iravunk newspaper. They sought compensation for harm to their honor and dignity, demanding five million drams in damages. The court rejected their claims, stating that the plaintiffs had failed to prove intent to defame. Subsequent appeals to higher Armenian courts were also unsuccessful, with the Court of Appeals and the Court of Cassation upholding the initial verdict.

Fourteen of the plaintiffs turned to the ECHR, arguing that the articles published by Iravunk amounted to harassment and hate speech. They claimed these actions violated their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights and that the Armenian state had failed to protect them.

In response, the Armenian government defended its judiciary’s decisions, asserting that the courts had acted in accordance with case law protecting freedom of expression, even when the speech in question was insulting or offensive. The government also contended that the plaintiffs had not provided sufficient evidence of discrimination.

The ECHR’s judgment emphasized the broad scope of the term “private life,” which includes an individual’s physical and psychological integrity as well as their social identity. The court noted that sexual orientation is a core aspect of a person’s private sphere.

The ruling noted that the article published by Iravunk contained hostile language towards LGBTQ individuals and their supporters, amounting to hate speech. The court described this as “irresponsible journalism” and found that the Armenian judiciary had disproportionately prioritized the newspaper editor’s right to freedom of expression over the applicants’ right to private life. The Armenian courts had failed to adequately consider the harmful impact of the editor’s statements on the plaintiffs.

The ECHR concluded that Armenia had violated the applicants’ rights under the European Convention. It ordered the Armenian government to compensate the 14 plaintiffs with a total of 28,000 euros (2,000 euros each) for non-pecuniary damage. Additionally, the government was instructed to pay 1,067 euros to cover legal costs.