It is constitutional to condemn ‘Tour de La Manada’ to protect freedom of expression | Society
The Constitution has been abolished A year and a half imprisonment Imposed The Creator of the website Tour TourWith the freedom of his expression, he did not intend to insult the victim of a group violation in the 2016 San Fermn festivals. The court unanimously predicted that the author’s behavior, recognized as an anonymous Garcia, considered that right, that he was once the cause of the inability, and that he was stopping.
This page is the creator He was first confirmed as convicted of Pomplona Criminal Court 1 A Crime Against as a writer for moral integrity, a sentence is as well Then passed by Pomplona audience And then by the supreme, by using the appeal.
Now, the Magistrate Laura Diez’s speech of the Constitutional Progressive Group, appealing, explained that he created a web portal (Tourlamanada.com) in December 2018, offering a false and non -travel trip of the places where they traveled Five members of the La Manada Group on July 7, 2016 During the San Fermin celebrations, the Supreme Court was found guilty of sexual harassment in 2019.
This web portal is only available for three days, adding the Navarra government logo against gender violence and Suggested rather than sexual harassment of sexual aggressive.
In connection with the story of action and this fictional trip, “Between alcohol and unclean, five men who have a hairstyle for the latest fashion are found in Central Plaza Del Castillo. After 20 minutes they entered the portal 300 meters away with her and what happened in those 20 minutes?
Within three days of the page available, many media criticized the presence of a trip (which never existed) and very hardness. On the third day, the web content was deleted and replaced The day the media portray themselves. The rejection is scheduled to be scheduled as a “media bomb” and allowed to see how the blood is still hot for any corpse.
Prior to its next approval of the Provincial Court and the Supreme Court imposed by the court in Pompa, the appellant went constitutionally at the request of Ampo. He claimed that his right to freedom of expression (Article 20.1 of the Constitution) and the freedom of his artistic creation (art 20.1b).
These constitutional arguments based on his theory “How to develop a proportionate judgment In the limit cases of freedom of expression In the application of criminal types. “Before applying the criminal type and attending the conditions of the specific case,” the criminal judge must assume that this behavior is a legal exercise of freedom of expression, which has a major value. “
The constitutional theory on the freedom of artistic creation must also be considered, “Since the message is broadcast a Performance And the appellant himself represents this freedom in his demand for this freedom. He explained that in this case, in these cases, “When assessing the limits (inquiries) of the message, the constitutional identity of this right should be taken into account,” he said.
These principles stated in this particular case “The appellant’s appealer’s expression of the appellant’s appellate was violated by the appellant’s freedom and artistic creation, because the law organizations condemned him as a author of a crime against moral integrity, without giving a pre -verdict on the freedom of expression”.
Constitutionalist had to take into account the failures of the general jurisdiction “criticizing the media behavior for the purpose of declaring in the rejection published on the website The spread of sensational news, contrasting or not wrongThey were in public discussion at the time. ”
The court argued that “the path of the previous demand should be worth it,” he had previously performed parodic or sarcastic actions with the same intention. In addition, these measures have been developed “At the hand of the ensemble The man is covering It belongs to and in the frame of cultural flow Culture is jamming . “
Another important observation of the sentence is that “repeated behavior in the Ampoo has an undeniable and painful effect on the victim’s feelings and that it has caused great suffering” which leads to the body of guarantees. But he is applied to his own theory and the application of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), in the sense that “good taste or literary quality does not have constitutional limitations”, it does not have constitutional limitations to freedom of expression, as it should “grant a wide margin to this freedom”, but it is a “exercise”.
