PARTLY DISSENTING OPINION OF MR S. TRECHSEL

     While I am in full agreement with the majority as regards the

violation of Article 6, I have come to the conclusion that there has

been no violation of Article 10 in the present case. The text of the

Report shows quite clearly that we are faced with a border-line case.

I regard the passages quoted in para. 63 of the Report as decisive - I

see no reason to repeat them here. In my view these passages can in

good faith be understood as encouraging violence. Having regard to the

margin of appreciation which must be accorded to the national

authorities I have come to the conclusion that the interference

complained of cannot be regarded as a disproportionate response and

does not constitute an unjustified interference with the applicant's

right to freedom of expression - the interference could still be

regarded as necessary in a democratic society.

                                                 (Or. English)