Citaat | Parket bij de Hoge Raad 17 oktober 2006

Alinea 30 Parket bij de Hoge Raad 17 oktober 2006

Een alinea uit Parket bij de Hoge Raad 17 oktober 2006, ECLI:NL:PHR:2006:AX5765.

2. One factor of particular importance for the Court's determination in the present case is the essential function the press fulfils in a democratic society. Although the press must not overstep certain bounds, in particular in respect of the reputation and rights of others and the need to prevent the disclosure of confidential information, its duty is nevertheless to impart - in a manner consistent with its obligations and responsibilities - information and ideas on all matters of public interest (see the Jersild v. Denmark judgment of 23 September 1994, Series A no. 298, p. 23, § 31; and the De Haes and Gijsels v. Belgium judgment of 24 February 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-I, pp. 233-34, § 37). In addition, the Court is mindful of the fact that journalistic freedom also covers possible recourse to a degree of exaggeration, or even provocation (see the Prager and Oberschlick v. Austria judgment of 26 April 1995, Series A no. 313, p. 19, § 38). In cases such as the present one the national margin of appreciation is circumscribed by the interest of democratic society in enabling the press to exercise its vital role of "public watchdog" in imparting information of serious public concern (see the Goodwin v. the United Kingdom judgment of 27 March 1996, Reports 1996-II, p. 500, § 39)."

Zelf controleren

Voor dit citaat hoeft niemand Bron op zijn woord te geloven. Het document dat rechtspraak.nl publiceerde, staat op https://bron.page/api/v1/blobs/bc664aa717183f7c217bf9ac99d63b27101f12991aea3cac7611e3eec3f42048. Wie het ophaalt en de SHA-256 ervan berekent, krijgt bc664aa717183f7c217bf9ac99d63b27101f12991aea3cac7611e3eec3f42048, en de alinea staat in dat document op bytes 19557 tot 20894.