Communicated on 19 September 2016

THIRD SECTION

Application no. 7972/09 Oleg Dmitriyevich FEDCHENKO against Russia lodged on 12 November 2008

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Oleg Dmitriyevich Fedchenko , is a Russian national who was born in 1968 and lives in Suponevo , the Bryansk Region.

A. The circumstances of the case

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

The applicant has been editor of a weekly newspaper, Bryanskiye Budni ( Брянские будни ), since he founded it in 1999.

On 21 February 2008 the applicant published an article in Bryanskiye Budni no. 429/7 headlined “ Fedorov always takes the lead” ( “ Федоров всегда впереди ” ) about Viktor Fedorovich Fedorov , a member of the Bryansk Region Duma and the head of the regional Committee on Legislation, Law and Order and State Service . The article reads as follows, in so far as relevant:

“He got into the regional Duma on the party lists of the Social Democrats. I remember that in a big beautiful poster Fedorov was seen showing off in the company of Anatoliy Bugayev and Nikolay Rudenok . Now Viktor Fedorovich is a member of the Duma faction of United Russia, as is Mr Bugayev . A very convenient and interesting position which, most importantly, is based on principle. In fact, they both ‘ dumped ’ the Social Democrat Nikolay Rudenok . Some say that is pure betrayal. Others contend that that is just politics ...

Now the ‘ sweet couple ’ [1] of former Social Democrats are united in their dislike of the speaker of the regional Duma Vladimir Gaydukov . Considering that the deputy speaker Bugayev is eager to get the post of speaker, it is very likely that he could have promised his current post to the head of the Committee on Legislation ... And why not ?

At present Mr Fedorov is at a political crossroads . If they include him on the United Russia list for the elections to the regional Duma, he will only be at the very end of the list. To be a candidate in a single-member constituency entails expenses, and that would go against his principles.

However, according to rumour, the head of the Committee on Legislation, Law and Order and State Service is a well-to-do man and has a ‘ small wholesale business ’ in neighbouring Orel. Sources note that he all too often takes a ‘ promenade ’ there in his official cars.

At first they thought Mr Fedorov was going there for the rich legislative experience of Orel ’ s parliamentarians. However, it became clear later that the ‘ experience ’ he wanted was of a somewhat different nature ...

During the three years of his ‘ parliamentary career ’ the head of the Committee on Legislation, Law and Order and State Service bought three cars for himself. And each one was a foreign car that was cooler than the one before ...”

The following is the original Russian text :

“В областную же Думу он попал по партийным спискам социал-демократов. Помню, что на большом красивом плакате Федоров красовался рядом с Анатолием Бугаевым и Николаем Руденком. Сейчас Виктор Федорович уже является членом думской фракции «Единая Россия», как и господин Бугаев. Очень удобная и интересная, а главное принципиальная позиция. Фактически и один, и другой «кинули» лидера социал-демократов Николая Руденка. Одни говорят, что это чистейшей воды предательство. Другие утверждают, что это – просто политика ...

Теперь «сладкая парочка» бывших социал-демократов «дружат» против спикера областной Думы Владимира Гайдукова . Если учесть, что вице-спикер Бугаев рвется на место председателя, то вполне возможно, он мог пообещать свой нынешний портфель главе комитета по законодательству ... А почему бы и нет?

В настоящее время господин Федоров на политическом распутье. Если на выборах в областную Думу его включат в списки «Единой России», то только в самом конце. Баллотироваться по одномандатному избирательному округу – надо раскошеливаться, а это не в его правилах.

Хотя по слухам, председатель комитета по законодательству, вопросам правопорядка и государственной службы состоятельный человек, и имеет свой «маленький оптовый бизнес» в соседнем Орле. Источники отмечают, что слишком часто он совершает туда «променаж» на служебных автомобилях.

Сначала думали, что господин Федоров ездит за богатым законодательным опытом орловских парламентариев. Но потом стало ясно, что это «опыт» несколько другого рода ...

За три года своего «депутатства» председатель комитета по законодательству, вопросам правопорядка и государственной службы сменил три личных автомобиля. И с каждым разом приобретал иномарку одну круче другой ...”

Mr Fedorov brought an action for defamation against the applicant and sought damages in the amount of 40,000 Russian roubles (RUB). He claimed, in particular, that the following passages were untrue and damaging to his honour and reputation:

“ 1. “ both ‘ dumped ’ the Social Democrat Nikolay Rudenok ”;

2. “ the ‘ sweet couple ’ of former Social Democrats are united in their dislike of the speaker of the regional Duma”;

3. “However, according to rumour, the head of the Committee ... has a ‘ small wholesale business ’ in neighbouring Orel”;

4. “ he all too often takes a ‘ promenade ’ there in his official cars”;

5. “During the three years of his ‘ parliamentary career ’ the head of the Committee ... bought three cars for himself. And each one was a foreign car that was cooler than the one before”. ”

On 25 March 2008 the Bryanskiy District Court of the Bryansk Region ordered an examination of the impugned passages by a psychological and linguistic expert.

On 17 November 2008 the court allowed the claim in part. In its decision the court relied on the expert ’ s report of 16 September 2008. The court found that the second quote did not contain any information damaging to the claimant ’ s honour and reputation. At the same time it found that the expression “dumped” from the first quote contained a negative assessment of the claimant as an immoral person and that, therefore, the passage contained information damaging to his honour and reputation. The court stated that the third and fourth quotes contained information which showed the claimant in a negative light. In particular, they portrayed him as a person who had committed the immoral and antisocial deed of using his official car for private purposes, and who had possibly even exercised unlawful activities because members of the regional Duma were prohibited from other paid duties. The court noted that the claimant had provided it with a certificate from the tax authorities showing that he had not been an individual entrepreneur since 2005. It also took into account certificates from his employer about four business trips in official cars to Orel between 2005 and 2007 and concluded that the passages in question contained information damaging to the claimant ’ s honour and reputation. Lastly, with regard to the fifth quote, the court took into account a registration certificate for a Mitsubishi Pajero Sport presented by the claimant and found that the impugned passage contained information damaging to his honour and reputation as it implied antisocial conduct on his part by suggesting that he had pursued his own enrichment instead of defending the interests of the public.

The court held the editorial board of Bryanskiye Budni and the applicant jointly liable for RUR 40,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage sustained by the claimant. It also ordered the newspaper to publish a retraction within ten days of the judgment ’ s entry into force.

The applicant appealed.

On 25 December 2008 the Bryansk Regional Court upheld the judgment.

B. Relevant domestic law and practice

For a summary of the relevant domestic law and practice see Fedchenko v. Russia , no. 33333/04 , §§ 17-20, 11 February 2010.

COMPLAINT

The applicant complains under Article 10 of the Convention that the domestic courts ’ judgments violated his right to express his opinion and to impart information and ideas on matters of public interest .

QUESTION TO THE PARTIES

Having regard to the publication of the article “ Fedorov always takes the lead” in the newspaper Bryanskiye Budni , was the interference with the applicant ’ s freedom of expression, in particular his right to impart information and ideas, justified under Article 10 § 2 of the Convention?

[1] . ‘ sweet couple’ was the advertising slogan in Russia for a well-known confectionary which is packaged as a pair of chocolate bars.