NGOs under European Convention on Human Rights / Tymofeyeva

in the newspaper, 840 confiscation of publications or of any other means through which an opinion is being expressed or information transmitted, 841 criminal convictions, 842 refusal to grant a broadcasting license, 843 obligations to pay civil damages, 844 etc. Freedom of expression includes the negative freedom not to speak. 845 This type of right was invoked in the case of K. v. Austria , 846 in which the Court protected the applicant against self-incrimination in connection with criminal proceedings. The case-law of the Court concerning the criminal liability of Article 34 NGOs is not so considerable, in particular, because not all the CoE members possess legislation on the liability of legal persons under criminal law. 847 Nevertheless, in theory, the guarantee of the possibility to remain silent deriving from Article 10 of the Convention may be also applicable to them. 2.6.1.2 Requirements for legitimate interference In its case-law, the Court established three requirements for legitimate interference with the exercise of freedom of expression: 1. the interference (meaning ‘formality’, ‘condition’, ‘restriction’ or ‘penalty’) must be ‘prescribed by law’; 2. the interferencemust be aimed at protecting one ormore of the following interests or values: national security; territorial integrity; public safety; prevention of disorder or crime; protection of health; protection of morals; protection of reputation or rights of others; preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, and maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary; and 3. the interference must be necessary in a democratic society. 848 In many cases, it is not contested that the interference was prescribed by law and pursued a legitimate aim; however, it is unclear whether the interference was ‘necessary in ademocratic society’. The test ofnecessity requires theCourt todetermine: 1)whether the interference corresponded to a ‘pressing social need’; 2) whether it was proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued; and 3) whether the reasons given by the national authorities to justify it were relevant and sufficient. 849 840 News Verlags GmbH & Co.KG v. Austria , no. 31457/96, ECHR 2000-I. 841 Handyside, cited above. 842 Dalban v. Romania [GC], no. 28114/95, ECHR 1999-VI. 843 Autronic AG, cited above. 844 Müller and Others v. Switzerland , 24 May 1988, Series a no. 133. 845 MACOVEI, 2004, cited above, p. 15. 846 K. v. Austria, No. 16002/90, Series a no. 255-B. 847 TYMOFEYEVA, A. Some guarantees… , cited above, p. 160-161. 848 HARRIS, 2009, cited above, p. 444. 849 Lindon, Otchakovsky-Laurens and July v. France [GC], nos. 21279/02 and 36448/02, § 45, ECHR 2007-IV

154