Title:
Constitutionality of part 1 of article 6.21 of the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation in relation to the complaint lodged by citizens Alexeev N. A., Evtuschenko Y.N. and Isakov D.A.
Court:
Constitutional Court of Russian Federation
Date:
23 September 2014
CRC Provisions:
Preamble: necessary protection and assistance for the family so that it can fully assume its responsibilities within the community.
Article 5: Parental guidance and the child’s evolving capacity
Article 6(2): Survival and development
Article 34: Sexual exploitation
Other International Provisions:
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 29: exercising rights and freedoms
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 19: Freedom of expression
European Convention on Human Rights, Article 10: Freedom of expression
Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse, Article 6: Education for Children
Domestic Provisions:
Constitution of Russian Federation, Article 17(3), 55(3): exercising rights and freedoms
Federal law N 124 of 24 July 1998 on the basic guarantees of the rights of the child, Article 14(1): protection of children from harmful information and propaganda
Federal law N436 of 29 December 2010 on the protection of children from information harmful to their health and development, Article 5(2): prohibition of non-traditional sexual relations propaganda among minors
Case Summary:
Background:
The three complainants were imposed an administrative sanction according to the Article 6.21(1) of the Code of Administrative Offences for conducting a picket in a public place near a children’s library. Justices of the peace dealing with the cases came to conclusion that the slogans on the banners used by the alleged offenders (“Gay propaganda doesn’t exist!”, “One doesn’t become a gay but was born a gay!” and “To be a gay and love a gay is normal. To assault gays and to kill gays is a crime!”) during the action should be considered as propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations, harmful to children’s health and development, as children could have access to this information due to public nature of the event.
After unsuccessfully appealing, the three complainants lodged to the Constitutional Court of Russian Federation a challenge to the constitutionality of article 6.21(1) of the Code of Administrative Offences as violating articles 15(4), 17(1), 19(1,2), 21(1), 29(1,2,4) and 55(3) of the Constitution: supremacy of international treaties over national legislation, guarantee of the rights and freedoms according to the international standards, non-discrimination, personal dignity, freedom of expression.
Issue and resolution:
Freedom of expression. The Court concluded that article 6.21 (1) of the Code of Administrative Offences establishing sanctions for the propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations among minors was in line with the Convention on the Rights of the Child, as well as other international human rights instruments and the Constitution.
Court reasoning:
In reaching its decision, the Court referred to the various provisions of the CRC, pointing out that the State must ensure the development of the child and protection from all forms of sexual abuse, as well as respect the rights of parents to provide appropriate direction and guidance in the exercise by the child of their rights in a manner consistent with their evolving capacities. The Court also referred to the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights allowing limits to freedom of expression in order to protect public health or morals. Therefore, as the Court reasoned, the prohibition of propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations among minors was intended for protection of the constitutional values such as family and childhood, preventing harmful effects on child’s health and moral development, and neither affected individual autonomy, including the right to sexual self-determination of a person, nor censured non-traditional sexual relations as such, including the right to freedom of expression on the matters of sexual minorities where it is not intended for dissemination and imposition among minors.
Excerpts citing CRC and other relevant human rights instruments:
In Russian:
“Конституция Российской Федерации не дает оснований для признания безусловной правомерности публичной деятельности, направленной на дискредитацию, склонение к отрицанию конституционно значимых нравственных ценностей, предопределенных историческими, культурными и иными традициями многонационального народа Российской Федерации. Такой подход соотносится с предписаниями Всеобщей декларации прав человека, предусматривающей – на основе признания обязанностей человека перед обществом, в котором только и возможно свободное и полное развитие его личности, – допустимость ограничений в осуществлении прав и свобод человека законом, в том числе с целью удовлетворения справедливых требований морали (пункты 1 и 2 статьи 29), а также Конвенции о защите прав человека и основных свобод (статья 10) и Международного пакта о гражданских и политических правах (статья 19), согласно которым право свободного выражения своего мнения налагает обязанности и ответственность и может быть сопряжено с определенными формальностями, условиями, ограничениями или санкциями, предусмотренными законом и необходимыми в демократическом обществе, в частности, для охраны здоровья и нравственности, защиты репутации и прав других лиц.”
“Изложенные подходы, вытекающие из Конституции Российской Федерации и практики Конституционного Суда Российской Федерации, соотносятся с положениями Конвенции ООН о правах ребенка от 20 ноября 1989 года, которая исходит из того, что семье как основной ячейке общества и естественной среде для роста и благополучия всех ее членов и особенно детей должны быть предоставлены необходимые защита и содействие, с тем чтобы она могла полностью возложить на себя обязанности в рамках общества (преамбула); государства же в целях обеспечения здорового развития ребенка обязаны, в частности, защищать ребенка от всех форм сексуальной эксплуатации и сексуального совращения (статья 6, пункт 2; статья 34).”
“Из необходимости адаптации такой информации к возрастным особенностям детей исходит и Конвенция ООН о правах ребенка, в статье 5 которой нашел отражение принцип учета конкретного уровня развивающихся способностей ребенка при осуществлении в отношении ребенка родителями и, в соответствующих случаях, иными ответственными за ребенка лицами контроля и руководства.”
As translated by CRIN:
“The Constitution of Russian Federation doesn’t provide a basis for recognizing an unconditional lawfulness of public activities aimed at discrediting, inciting to deny constitutionally recognized moral values, determined by the historic, cultural and other traditions of the multinational people of Russian Federation. This approach is consistent with the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, establishing…the legality of limitations in exercising rights and freedoms for meeting the just requirements of morality (article 29 (1, 2), as well as with the European Convention on Human Rights (art. 10) and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (art. 19), according to which the exercise of freedom of expression carries with it special duties and responsibilities and can be subject to certain restrictions provided by law and necessary for the respect of the rights or reputations of the others, or for the protection of public health and morals…”
“Constitutional recognition of such values as the family, motherhood, fatherhood and childhood determines the character and content of legal regulation in the area of state protection of minors…in order to provide safety of each child…from harmful effects on his morality and mental condition, that can significantly affect personal development…These considerations condition the necessity of legal instruments allowing to protect children from the influence of information capable to produce harmful effects on their health and development, in particular, from information related to aggressive imposition of the certain models of sexual behaviour, forming distorted ideas about socially recognized models of family relations…This approach is in line with the provisions of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child of 20 November 1989 recalling that the family, as the fundamental group of society and the natural environment for the growth and well-being of all its members and particularly children, should be afforded the necessary protection and assistance so that it can fully assume its responsibilities within the community (preamble); and states in order to ensure health development of the child shall, in particular, protect the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse (art. 6(2), art. 34)…”
“The need to adapt information to age specifics stems from the art. 5 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child establishing the principle of consideration of evolving capacities of the child in providing direction and guidance by the parents…”
Notes:
Since this case was decided Alexeev N.A. has filed a complaint against the State to the European Court of Human Rights.
For more information on children’s right to freedom of expression and access to information, including a selection of case law, please see CRIN’s campaign ‘Protect children, end censorship’.
CRIN Comments:
CRIN believes this decision is inconsistent with the CRC. The Court omits from its discussion Article 17 of the Convention which guarantees the right of children to access information and material from a diversity of sources. That article also requires States to take steps to protect children from ‘harmful information’, however, the Court in this case fails to objectively assess whether the challenged provisions is a proportionate restriction on the right of children to access to information. CRIN believes that such disproportionate restrictions on children’s access to information should be immediately removed not only because they ignite and fuel discrimination, but because they also deny children information which can help them to make informed choices and play a role in their own protection.
Citation:
Постановление КС РФ от 23 сентября 2014 года № 24-П
Link to Full Judgment:
http://www.rg.ru/2014/10/03/sud-dok.html
This case summary is provided by the Child Rights International Network for educational and informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice.