Strasbourg, 28/06/2002 (Agence Europe) - Passing down its ruling in the Colambini versus France case, the European Court of Human Rights unanimously noted that France misunderstood the right to freedom of expression by upholding that a crime had been committed against a Head of State.. Consequently it awarded 4096.46 euro compensation and 21 852.20 costs to the applicants: Jean-Marie Colombani as director of the publication, the journalist Eric Incyan and the daily "Le Monde". The applicants had been sentenced for offence against the King of Morocco following the publication in November 1995 of a signed article by Me. Incyan who, basing himself on a report drawn up by the Geopolitical Observatory on Drugs commissioned by the European Commission, had stressed the importance and development of cannabis production and pointing the finger at the entourage of King Hassan II. The report had been established in the context of Morocco's candidacy for EU membership. Initially, Colombani and Incyan had been released by the criminal court in Paris, but the King of Morocco and the public ministry appealed against the decision. The Court of Appeal of Paris considered that the desire to draw public attention to the responsibility of the royal entourage and the king's tolerance had all the imprints of malicious intent. It also accused the journalist of not having checked the veracity and topicality of the facts. The applicants were sentenced to a FF 5000 fine and to pay the king FF1 in compensation with interest, as well as FF 10,000 for the proceedings. The Court also ordered the publication of this sentence in the daily. The Court of Appeal rejected the plaintiffs' appeal.
In its ruling, the European Court of Human Rights first states that the public had a legitimate right to be informed of the assessment made by the Commission on a problem linked to the production and trafficking of drugs in a candidate country. It considers, that, when the press contributes to a public debate on issues that arouse legitimate concerns, it has in principle to be able turn to official reports without having to resort to independent investigations. The Court considers that "Le Monde" could reasonably rest its case on this report without having to check whether the facts were correct. The Court notes that implementation of the provision relating to a crime of offence tends to confer on Heads of State an exorbitant right compared to common law that does not square with today's political practice and concepts..