ÿWPCž' Ùe§é­[r[°Sg:žUSY+uëÑCùœsîqÍè鯭sØçpS&†°7T&é9j¾¤œT•eÓ’¸gÚôB2YkõŸ„ëjG²"Iô¸çþ¯B‚©üÀ3˜&Ž'Aû¤œy³GÃw=Èã­HñÁí‚–»Åô†y-EÇãßNõ~ܾÿå¨]˜¯(Gâøýâ¢N0H*í™p¾„a-»WÈ< B‚IDfò¬6=÷”¶ª4^lwäÇfÀĬïíb Ï6î½³È'Š~â f°a·ðNk wS wÜ í}i«_(ÌÁ£ºÇÏ/l^aÎ+uIþÌ ùÙä¸mã˜b»™|8öTZprùC ë åÁýC•.ËÝA ¹ÚÏ&Îâ¡ÿ–ììnJBŸ}㥦´•GôGXþæ gŒ àß;ߪ™?Í$aÉèAÁ¡´¼…M² ´òôÀL“ˆ‰†´î‚½Q̨ùZ†Â›T°Ë£§P>SƦq¤—G#ÁâUN£ %ñ 0:÷ 0î1 0ë 0è 0åò 0â× 0ß¹ 0ܘ 0Ùt 0ÖM 0Ü# 0Ùÿ 0ÖØ 0Ó® 0Ð 0ÍQ 0Ê 0Çè 0į 0Ûs 0ØN 0Õ& 0Òû 0ÏÍ 0Ìœ 0Éh 0Æ1 0Ã÷ 0̺ 0¶† 0¶< 0<ò 0¾.! 0œì! 0 ˆ" 0U¨#U>ý#ý#Æ;$ 0U% 0(V% D+~% AM©%©%©%©%©%Vö% 0Cø%ø%ø% 0ƒ;& B¾& BÛ& B+ø& B-#'#'#'#'#'NP'^ R'w^'4b'v'…' m‡'˜HP LaserJet 4P,ü,,,,,ü0(ÈhH  Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(ûœ$¡¡ÔUKUS.,Ô2G+J ÿÿ0_level1Ó ¨ý ÓÓ X ÓÓ/%á á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ/ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2D+J ÿÿ0_level2Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ,"9 9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2A+J ÿÿ0_level3Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ)‘ ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ)ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2>+J ÿÿ0_level4Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ&ééA™ñI¡ùQ&ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2;+J ÿÿ0_level5Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ#AA™ñI¡ùQ#ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó28+J ÿÿ0_level6Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ™™ñI¡ùQ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó25+J ÿÿ0_level7Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓññI¡ùQÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó22+J ÿÿ0_level8Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓII¡ùQÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2/+J ÿÿ0_level9Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ¡¡ùQÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2GJ ÿÿ0_levsl1Ó ¨ý ÓÓ X ÓÓ/%á á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ/ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2DJ ÿÿ0_levsl2Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ,"9 9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2AJ ÿÿ0_levsl3Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ)‘ ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ)ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2>J ÿÿ0_levsl4Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ&ééA™ñI¡ùQ&ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2;J ÿÿ0_levsl5Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ#AA™ñI¡ùQ#ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó28J ÿÿ0_levsl6Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ™™ñI¡ùQ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó25J ÿÿ0_levsl7Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓññI¡ùQÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó22J ÿÿ0_levsl8Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓII¡ùQÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2/J ÿÿ0_levsl9Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ¡¡ùQÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2GJ ÿÿ0_levnl1Ó ¨ý ÓÓ X ÓÓ/%á á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ/ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2DJ ÿÿ0_levnl2Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ,"9 9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2AJ ÿÿ0_levnl3Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ)‘ ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ)ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2>J ÿÿ0_levnl4Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ&ééA™ñI¡ùQ&ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2;J ÿÿ0_levnl5Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ#AA™ñI¡ùQ#ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó28J ÿÿ0_levnl6Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ™™ñI¡ùQ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó25J ÿÿ0_levnl7Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓññI¡ùQÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó22J ÿÿ0_levnl8Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓII¡ùQÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2/J ÿÿ0_levnl9Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ¡¡ùQÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(‰ ‰á9 ‘ éA™ñI¡ùQ2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó6K >ÿÿ4heading 2Ñ  ÑÓ  Óò òÔ UK ÔÔ‡XXXÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  Óó óÔ US ÔÑ  ÑÔ‡XXXÔ6@ 3ÿÿ4heading 3Ñ  Ñò òÔ UK ÔÔ‡XXXÔÔ  ÔÔ  Ôó óÔ US ÔÑ  ÑÔ‡XXXÔ6@ 3ÿÿ4heading 4Ñ  ÑòòÔ UK ÔÔ‡XXXÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔóóÔ US ÔÑ  ÑÔ‡XXXÔ<ÿÿ:Default Para0GGÿÿ.headerÑ  ÑÓ ‰‰™©!ÓÔ UK ÔÔ‡XXXÔÔ US ÔÑ  ÑÓ ‰‰™©!ÓÔ‡XXXÔ<00ÿÿ:footnote texÑ  ÑÔ UK ÔÔ‡XXXÔÔ US ÔÑ  ÑÔ‡XXXÔ<rrÿÿ:endnote refeò òòòÔ‡XXXÔÔS‡(ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔó óóóÔS‡(ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÔ‡XXXÔ(-2FÞ$§§Ý ƒûœ!ÝÔUKUS.,ÔÝ  Ýô\  `‹&Times New Roman Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(-2FÞ$££Ý ƒûœ!ÝÔUKUS.,ÔÝ  Ý(ÿÿ$’’'dxd*+,-A<< cÿÿ(ÿÿ$‘‘òòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóó(B2ŽÎ$¥¥Ý ƒûœ!ÝÔUKUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÓÓòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóûÿK Kd  d'Single1 d)Hairline dˆ7/ é[/ParPÿŸ3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀÝ ƒûœ!ÝÔUKUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôò òCOMMITTEE€ON€THE€ELIMINATION€OF€RACIAL€DISCRIMINATIONÐ ° ÐÌÔ_ÔP.O.E.M.Ô_Ô€and€Ô_ÔF.A.S.M.Ô_Ô€v.€DenmarkÐ ˆØ ÐÌCommunication€No.€22/2002Ð `° ÐÌ19€March€2003Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌÔ_ÔCERDÔ_Ô/C/62/D/22/2002*Ð  ` ÐÌADMISSIBILITYó óÐ è 8  ÐÌÌÌSubmitted€by:€Ô_ÔP.O.E.M.Ô_Ô€and€Ô_ÔF.A.S.M.Ô_Ô€€(represented€by€counsel)Ð ˜è  ÐÌòòAlleged€victimóó:€The€petitionerÐ pÀ ÐÌòòState€partyóó:€DenmarkÐ H˜ ÐÌòòDate€of€communicationóó:€8€August€2001€(initial€submission)Ð  p ÐÌÓ  ÓòòThe€Committee€on€the€Elimination€of€Racial€Discriminationóó,€established€under€article€8€of€theÐ øH ÐInternational€Convention€on€the€Elimination€of€All€Forms€of€Racial€Discrimination,€€Ð ä4 ÐÌòòMeeting€onóó€19€March€2003,Ð ¼  ÐÌòòHaving€concludedóó€its€consideration€of€communication€No.€22/2001,€submitted€to€the€CommitteeÐ ”ä Ðunder€article€14€of€the€International€Convention€on€the€Elimination€of€All€Forms€of€RacialÐ €Ð ÐDiscrimination,Ð l¼ ÐÌòòHaving€taken€into€considerationóó€all€written€information€made€available€to€it€by€the€author€and€theÐ D!” ÐState€party,Ð 0"€  ÐÌòòBearing€in€mindóó€rule€95€of€its€rules€of€procedure€requiring€it€to€formulate€its€opinion€on€theÐ $X" Ðcommunication€before€it,Ð ô$D # ÐÌòòAdopts€the€followingóó:€Ð Ì&"% ÐÓÓÌÓ  Óò òòòDecision€on€admissibilityóóó óÐ ¤(ô#' ÐÓÍÓÓ  ÓÌ1.€€The€authors€of€the€communication€(hereafter,€the€petitioners),€dated€8€August€2001,€are€POEMÐ |*Ì%) Ð(Umbrella€Organization€for€the€Ethnic€Minorities),€and€FASM€(Association€of€Muslim€Students).€Ð h+¸&* ÐThey€claim€a€violation€by€Denmark€of€article€2,€paragraph€1€(d),€article€4€and€article€6€of€theÐ T,¤'+ ÐConvention.€€They€are€represented€by€counsel.Ð @-(, ÐòòÌThe€facts€as€presented€by€the€petitionersóóÐ œì ÐÌ2.1€€The€first€petitioner,€the€Umbrella€Organization€for€the€Ethnic€Minorities€(hereafter,€POEM),€isÐ tÄ Ða€Danish€organization€that€promotes€ethnic€equality€in€all€spheres€of€society€including€through€fullÐ `° Ðcivil€and€political€rights€for€ethnic€minorities.€€The€organization€currently€comprises€30€membersÐ L œ Ðrepresenting€most€of€ethnic€and€national€minorities€in€the€State€party.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌ2.2€€The€second€petitioner,€the€Association€of€Muslim€Students€(hereafter,€FASM),€is€also€a€DanishÐ  ` Ðorganization€that€raises€awareness€on€Muslim€issues€and€deals€with€the€negative€effects€caused€by€„Ð ü L  Ðso€called€„€Islamophobic€politicians€and€the€media€on€the€image€of€Islam.€€The€organization€currentlyÐ è 8  Ðcomprises€more€than€100€members,€all€students€and€practising€Muslims€students€who,€for€the€mostÐ Ô$  Ðpart,€were€born€and€raised€in€Denmark.€Ð À  ÐÌ2.3€€POEM€represents€a€number€of€Muslim€organizations€and€other€organizations€which,€althoughÐ ˜è  Ðnot€Muslim,€comprise€members€of€ethnic€and€national€groups€with€a€Muslim€background.€€FASMÐ „Ô  Ðis€an€all„Muslim€organization.€€Therefore,€when€Islamophobic€and€other€prejudicial€statementsÐ pÀ Ðagainst€Muslims€are€made€public,€both€the€petitioners€and€their€members,€including€the€non„Ð \¬ ÐMuslims,€are€affected.Ð H˜ ÐÌ2.4€€The€incident€of€racial€discrimination€raised€by€the€petitioners€relates€to€a€statement€made€by€theÐ  p Ðleader€of€the€Danish€Peopleððs€Party€(Dansk€Folkeparti,€hereafter€DPP)€and€Member€of€Parliament,Ð  \ ÐPia€Kjrsgaard,€on€19€June€2000€in€her€weekly€newsletter€which€was€disseminated€on€the€partyððsÐ øH Ðweb€site€and€through€a€press€release:Ð ä4 ÐÌ€à0  àBehind€this€lurks€the€phenomenon€which€becomes€ever€more€obvious€in€all€its€horror:€Ð¼ (#(# Ѐà0  àthat€the€multiculturalization€of€Denmark€brings€trouble€in€its€train€like€gang€and€groupÐ ¨ø Ðformation,€mass€rape€and€complete€indifference€to€the€principles€on€which€the€Danish€legalÐ ”ä Ðsystem€is€built.ЀÐ(#(# Ðà0  àð8ðÐl¼(#(# ÐÌThe€phenomenon€of€mass€rape€is€also€new€in€a€Danish€context€and€is€linked€with€a€culturalÐ D!” Ðperception€of€Danish€girls€as€prostitutes€who€can€be€defiled€without€shame,€while€the€same€boys€andÐ 0"€  Ðguys€are€brought€up€to€murder€a€sister€if€she€breaches€the€family€and€cultural€codes.Ð #l! ÐÌ2.5€€On€20€June€2000,€the€Documentation€and€Advisory€Centre€on€Racial€Discrimination€(DRC)Ð ô$D # Ðreported€the€statement€to€the€Copenhagen€Police,€alleging€a€violation€of€section€266€(b)€of€theÐ à%0!$ ÐCriminal€Code€(hereafter,€section€266€(b)).òò1óó€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌ2.6€€By€letter€of€21€July€2000,€the€Copenhagen€Police€informed€the€DRC€that€the€case€wasÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdiscontinued.€€This€decision€indicated€that,€according€to€the€òòtravaux€prparatoiresóó€of€the€provisionòò,óóÐ )à$( Ðthe€purpose€of€section€266€(b)€is€neither€to€limit€the€topics€that€can€make€the€object€of€a€politicalÐ |*Ì%) Ðdebate€nor€to€decide€the€way€these€topics€are€addressed.€€Political€statements,€although€they€may€beÐ h+¸&* Ðperceived€by€some€as€offending,€are€part€of€dialectic€where,€traditionally,€there€are€wide€limits€to€theÐ T,¤'+ Ðuse€of€generalization€and€simplified€allegations.€€The€above-mentioned€weekly€newsletter€consistsÐ @-(, Ðin€an€observation€on€the€scale€of€penalties€for€crimes€of€violence,€which€is€legitimate€in€a€politicalÐ ° Ðdebate.€€Finally,€although€the€statement€could€be€considered€as€offensive,€an€important€weight€shouldÐ œì Ðbe€given€in€the€present€case€to€considerations€related€to€the€freedom€of€expression€and€of€politicalÐ ˆØ Ðdebate.€Ð tÄ ÐÌ2.7€€By€letter€of€21€August€2000,€the€DRC€requested€that€the€case€be€brought€before€the€RegionalÐ L œ ÐPublic€Prosecutor.€€The€DRC€argued€that€statements€similar€to€that€made€by€Pia€Kjrsgaard€had€ledÐ 8 ˆ Ðto€convictions€and€that€neither€the€òòtravaux€prparatoiresóó€of€section€266€(b)€nor€article€4€of€theÐ $ t ÐConvention€provided€for€an€extended€freedom€of€expression€for€Members€of€Parliament€or€forÐ  ` Ðobservations€made€in€a€political€debate.€€The€petitioners€are€therefore€of€the€opinion€that€statementsÐ ü L  Ðforming€part€of€a€serious€debate€should€be€assessed€regardless€of€whom€has€made€them.Ð è 8  ÐÌ2.8€€By€letter€of€31€August€2000,€the€Regional€Public€Prosecutor€upheld€the€decision€of€theÐ À  ÐCopenhagen€Police.€€He€stressed€that€he€had€carefully€considered€the€balance€between€the€insultingÐ ¬ü  Ðcharacter€of€the€statement€and€the€right€to€freedom€of€expression€and€that€it€must€be€accepted,€to€aÐ ˜è  Ðcertain€degree,€that,€in€order€to€secure€a€free€and€critical€debate,€statements€may€be€offending€toÐ „Ô  Ðindividuals€or€groups.€€Regardless€of€the€degrading€and€insulting€character€of€the€statement€forÐ pÀ Ðindividuals€of€a€different€cultural€background,€the€allegations€made€in€the€statement€are€not€seriousÐ \¬ Ðenough€to€justify€a€derogation€from€the€freedom€of€expression.Ð H˜ ÐÌ2.9€€By€letter€of€4€October€2000,€the€DRC€wrote€to€the€Director€of€Public€Prosecutions€and€requestedÐ  p Ða€review€of€the€Regional€Public€Prosecutorððs€decision€of€31€August€2000.€€The€DRC€also€requestedÐ  \ Ðan€opinion€on€the€question€of€the€existence€of€an€extended€freedom€of€expression€for€Members€ofÐ øH ÐParliament€and€for€observations€being€made€in€a€political€debate.€€The€DRC€further€asked€whetherÐ ä4 Ðthe€Regional€Public€Prosecutorððs€decision€was€consistent€with€the€Danish€judicial€practice€andÐ Ð  Ðobligations€under€the€Convention.Ð ¼  ÐÌ2.10€€By€letter€of€8€February€2001,€the€Director€of€Public€Prosecutions€decided€that€there€were€noÐ ”ä Ðgrounds€for€reviewing€the€decision€of€the€Regional€Public€Prosecutor.Ð €Ð ÐÌòòThe€complaintÐ X ¨ ÐÌExhaustion€of€domestic€remediesÐ 0"€  ÐóóÌ3.1€€The€petitioners€argue€that,€according€to€section€749,€paragraph€1€of€the€State€partyððsÐ $X" ÐAdministration€of€Justice€Act,€the€police€decides€whether€it€will€investigate€the€reported€incidents.€Ð ô$D # ÐThe€decision€may€be€referred€to€the€Regional€Public€Prosecutor€and€his/her€decision€is€final.€Ð à%0!$ ÐNevertheless,€the€State€party€itself€stated€in€its€fourteenth€periodic€report€to€the€Committee€that€allÐ Ì&"% Ðcases€related€to€section€266€(b)€should€be€notified€to€the€Director€of€Public€Prosecutions.€€TheÐ ¸'#& Ðpetitioners€have€thus€made€such€a€notification€in€order€to€exhaust€all€domestic€remedies.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌ3.2€€The€petitioners€also€contend€that€a€direct€legal€action€against€Pia€Kjrsgaard€would€not€beÐ |*Ì%) Ðeffective€in€the€absence€of€further€investigation€by€the€police€or€Regional€Public€Prosecutor.€Ð h+¸&* ÐMoreover,€the€State€partyððs€Eastern€High€Court€decided€on€5€February€1999€that€an€incident€of€racialÐ T,¤'+ Ðdiscrimination€does€not€in€itself€imply€a€violation€of€the€honour€and€reputation€of€a€person€underÐ @-(, Ðsection€26€of€the€Act€of€Civil€Liability.€Ð ° ÐÌòòAlleged€violation€of€article€2,€paragraph€1€(d)€together€with€article€6óóÐ ˆØ ÐÌ3.3€€The€petitioners€allege€that€the€State€party€has€violated€its€obligations€under€article€2,€paragraphÐ `° Ð1€(d)€taken€together€with€article€6€of€the€Convention€because,€the€Director€of€Public€ProsecutionsÐ L œ Ðhaving€the€exclusive€competence€to€initiate€legal€action€in€this€type€of€incident,€the€alleged€victimsÐ 8 ˆ Ðof€such€an€incident€are€not€entitled€to€bring€the€case€before€a€court,€and€have€therefore€no€means€ofÐ $ t Ðredress,€if€the€Director€of€Public€Prosecutions€discontinues€a€case.Ð  ` ÐÌ3.4€€The€petitioners€refer€to€the€decision€in€case€No.€4/1991€(òòL.K.€v.€the€Netherlandsóó)€where€theÐ è 8  ÐCommittee€emphasized€that€the€State€parties€have€a€positive€obligation€to€take€effective€actionÐ Ô$  Ðagainst€reported€incidents€of€racial€discrimination.Ð À  ÐÌ3.5€€Referring€also€to€the€fourteenth€periodic€report€of€the€State€party€to€the€Committee,€theÐ ˜è  Ðpetitioners€complain€that€while€all€cases€in€which€a€provisional€charge€has€been€brought€underÐ „Ô  Ðsection€266€(b)€must€be€submitted€for€decision€to€the€Director€of€Public€Prosecutions,€those€that€areÐ pÀ Ðrejected€without€a€provisional€charge€are€only€notified€to€the€same€authority.€€Moreover,€theÐ \¬ Ðpetitioners€contend€that€there€is,€in€the€State€partyððs€procedure€related€to€acts€of€racial€discrimination,Ð H˜ Ðan€inequality€of€arms,€because€in€cases€where€charges€have€been€brought,€both€the€Regional€PublicÐ 4„ ÐProsecutor€and€the€Director€of€Public€Prosecutions€have€a€right€to€review€the€decision,€while€in€casesÐ  p Ðwhere€no€charge€is€brought,€the€case€is€only€brought€to€the€Regional€Public€Prosecutor.Ð  \ ÐòòÌAlleged€violation€of€article€2,€paragraph€1€(d)€together€with€articles€4€and€6óóÐ ä4 ÐÌ3.6€€The€petitioners€allege€that€the€State€party€has€violated€its€obligations€under€article€2,€paragraphÐ ¼  Ð1€(d)€taken€together€with€articles€4€and€6€of€the€Convention€because,€the€decision€of€the€Director€ofÐ ¨ø ÐPublic€Prosecutions€implying€that€the€initial€decision€of€the€Copenhagen€Police€is€in€compliance€withÐ ”ä Ðarticle€266€(b),€the€State€party€allows€an€extended€right€to€freedom€of€expression€for€Members€ofÐ €Ð ÐParliament€and€for€observations€being€made€during€a€political€argumentation,€regardless€whetherÐ l¼ Ðstatements€are€racist€or€prejudicial.€€Ð X ¨ ÐÌ3.7€€In€this€regard,€the€petitioners€point€out€to€the€State€partyððs€thirteenth€periodic€report€where€it€wasÐ 0"€  Ðstated:Ð #l! ÐÌà0  à24.€€Section€266€(b)€of€the€Penal€Code,€which€is€described€in€detail€in€Denmarkððs€lastÐ ô$D # Ðperiodic€report€(paras.€34„41),€was€amended€by€Act€No.€309€of€17€May€1995€with€theÐ à%0!$ Ðaddition€of€a€new€subsection€2,€according€to€which€it€must€be€considered€an€aggravatingÐ Ì&"% Ðcircumstance€when€meting€out€the€punishment€ð ðthat€the€count€is€in€the€nature€ofÐ ¸'#& Ðpropagandaðð.€€The€amendment€entered€into€force€on€1€June€1995.€Ð¤(ô#'(#(# ÐÌà0  à25.€€During€the€readings€of€the€bill€in€the€Danish€parliament€(Folketinget)€it€was€declared€thatÐ |*Ì%) Ðin€these€especially€aggravated€cases€the€prosecutors€should€not€in€future€exhibit€the€sameÐ h+¸&* Ðrestraint€with€regard€to€prosecuting€as€previously.€ÐT,¤'+(#(# ÐÐ @-(, Ðà0  à26.€€Whether€ð ðpropagandaðð€is€present€in€a€specific€case€will€depend€on€an€overall€assessmentÐ ° Ðstressing€in€particular€whether€there€has€been€a€systematic€dissemination€of€discriminatingÐ œì Ðstatements,€etc.,€including€dissemination€to€foreign€countries,€with€a€view€to€influencingÐ ˆØ Ðpublic€opinion.€€It€could€speak€in€favour€of€referring€a€count€to€section€266€(b)€(2)€if€theÐ tÄ Ðviolation€was€committed€by€several€persons€jointly,€especially€if€the€persons€in€questionÐ `° Ðbelong€to€the€same€party,€association€or€other€organization,€and€manifestations€of€the€relevantÐ L œ Ðnature€form€part€of€the€activities€of€the€organization€in€question.€€Also,€a€more€extensiveÐ 8 ˆ Ðdissemination€of€statements€may€speak€in€favour€of€applying€section€266€(b)€(2).€€In€thisÐ $ t Ðrespect€it€is€relevant€whether€the€statements€were€put€forward€in€a€medium€involving€greaterÐ  ` Ðdissemination,€for€example€a€printed€publication,€radio,€television€or€another€electronicÐ ü L  Ðmedium.€Ðè 8 (#(# ÐÌ3.8€€In€order€to€illustrate€the€State€partyððs€practice€in€this€regard,€the€petitioners€explain€that€theÐ À  Ðfounder€of€the€extreme€right€wing€ð ðProgress€Partyðð€(Fremskridtsparteit)€Mogens€Glistrup,€althoughÐ ¬ü  Ðhe€made€continuous€allegations€that€could€have€fallen€under€section€266€(b),€was€never€chargedÐ ˜è  Ðunder€the€said€provision€before€he€left€the€Parliament.€€On€23€August€2000,€no€longer€a€Member€ofÐ „Ô  ÐParliament,€Mogens€Giltrup€was€convicted€by€the€Supreme€Court€under€section€266€(b)€(1)€to€sevenÐ pÀ Ðdays€conditional€imprisonment€for€racist€allegations€made€on€television€but€was€not€convicted€underÐ \¬ Ðsection€266€(b)€(2).€€The€petitioners€underline€that€the€Court€then€held€that€the€consideration€of€anÐ H˜ Ðextended€right€to€freedom€of€expression€for€politicians€concerning€controversial€public€matters€couldÐ 4„ Ðnot€constitute€a€basis€for€acquitting€the€defendant.Ð  p ÐÌ3.9€€With€regard€to€Pia€Kjrsgaard,€the€petitioners€argue€that,€on€27€August€1998,€she€wrote€theÐ øH Ðfollowing€statement€in€a€weekly€newspaper:Ð ä4 ÐÌà0  àThe€majority€of€our€foreign€citizens€come€from€Africa€and€Asia,€and€this€group€is€by€andÐ ¼  Ðlarge€Mohammedan.€€[ð8ð]€and€in€addition€to€this€comes€a€long€series€of€expenses€for€aliens,Ð ¨ø Ðsuch€as€expenses€to€maintain€public€law€and€order€and€security.€€[ð8ð]€I€maintain€the€point€thatÐ ”ä Ðthe€expenses€incurred€by€aliens€„€and€not€the€private€consumption€of€Danish€citizens€„€is€theÐ €Ð Ðultimate€and€decisive€cause€of€the€destruction€of€the€Danish€Welfare€State.€€[ð8ð]€ImmigrantsÐ l¼ Ðare€to€a€large€extent€not€capable€of€supporting€themselves,€just€as€aliens€are€far€more€criminalÐ X ¨ Ðthan€the€average€population.€ÐD!”(#(# ÐÌ3.10€€In€another€weekly€newsletter€of€25€April€2000,€where€she€compared€Muslim€parliamentaryÐ #l! Ðcandidates€with€Lenin€who€used€the€support€of€minor€socialist€parties€and€brutally€crushed€them€onceÐ $X" Ðin€power,€Pia€Kjrsgaard€held:Ð ô$D # ÐÌà0  àThus€a€fundamentalist€Muslim€does€in€fact€not€know€how€to€act€[in€dignity€and€in€aÐ Ì&"% Ðcultivated€way]€in€accordance€with€Danish€democratic€traditions.€€He€simply€does€not€haveÐ ¸'#& Ða€clue€about€what€it€means.€€Commonly€acknowledged€principles€such€as€speaking€the€truthÐ ¤(ô#' Ðand€behaving€with€dignity€and€culture€„€also€towards€those€whom€you€do€not€sympathize€withÐ )à$( Є€are€unfamiliar€ground€to€people€like€of€Ô_ÔM.Z.Ô_ÔÐ|*Ì%)(#(# ÐÌ3.11€€By€contrast,€a€few€members€of€the€youth€branch€of€the€DPP€were€charged€with€violation€ofÐ T,¤'+ Ðsection€266€(b)€for€having€published€the€following€ad:€€òòMass€rapes€„€gross€violence€„€insecurity€„Ð @-(, Ðforced€marriages€„€suppression€of€women€„€gang€crime.€€That€is€what€a€multi„ethnic€society€has€toÐ ° Ðoffer€us.€€Is€that€what€you€want?Ð œì ÐóóÌ3.12€€The€work€of€the€Progress€Party€and€of€the€DPP€being€to€promote€a€restrictive€immigrationÐ tÄ Ðpolicy€„€particularly€concerning€Muslims€„€mainly€based€on€Islamophobia€since€three€decades,€theÐ `° Ðpetitioners€consider€that€it€constitutes€propaganda€to€racial€hatred€against€Muslims€in€Denmark.€€ItÐ L œ Ðis€thus€the€opinion€of€the€petitioners€that€when€the€State€party€grants€an€extended€freedom€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ðexpression€to€parliamentarians,€who€are€protected€from€prosecutions,€it€allows€racist€propaganda€andÐ $ t Ðdoes€not€provide€Muslims€with€sufficient€protection.Ð  ` ÐÌòòAlleged€violation€of€articles€4€and€6€of€the€ConventionóóÐ è 8  ÐÌ3.13€€The€petitioners€allege€that€the€State€party€has€violated€its€obligations€under€articles€4€and€6€ofÐ À  Ðthe€Convention€because,€the€Copenhagen€Police€having€failed€to€carry€out€a€proper€investigation,€theÐ ¬ü  Ðpetitioners€have€been€deprived€of€the€opportunity€to€establish€whether€their€rights€under€theÐ ˜è  ÐConvention€had€been€violated.€€The€State€party€has€therefore€failed€to€provide€the€petitioners€withÐ „Ô  Ðeffective€protection€against€racial€discrimination.Ð pÀ ÐÌ3.14€€Referring€to€case€No.€16/1999€(òòKashif€Ahmad€v.€Denmarkóó),€the€petitioners€stress€that€while€theÐ H˜ Ðincidents€have€been€reported€on€20€June€2000,€the€decision€of€the€police€was€transmitted€a€monthÐ 4„ Ðlater,€on€21€July€2000.€€Similarly,€the€Attorney-General€decided€to€uphold€the€policeððs€decision€10Ð  p Ðdays€after€the€case€was€brought€to€his€attention€by€the€DRC.€€The€petitioners€argue€that€it€is€highlyÐ  \ Ðunlikely€that€the€Regional€Public€Prosecutor€could€investigate€the€matter€and€carry€out€investigationÐ øH Ðin€10€days,€in€particular,€in€order€to€assess€the€existence€of€ð ðpropagandaðð,€to€investigate€allÐ ä4 Ðpreviously€reported€incidents€concerning€Pia€Kjrsgaard.€€They€further€mention€that€they€have€neverÐ Ð  Ðbeen€questioned€by€the€authorities€in€relation€to€their€complaint.Ð ¼  ÐÌ3.15€€To€further€support€this€allegation,€the€petitioners€emphasize€that€the€Regional€Public€ProsecutorÐ ”ä Ðhas€not€responded€properly€to€the€different€arguments€developed€in€the€complaint,€the€decisionÐ €Ð Ðmerely€referring€to€the€Copenhagen€Policeððs€decision€and€reproducing€almost€standard€paragraphs.€Ð l¼ ÐThis€demonstrates€that€the€Regional€Public€Prosecutor€did€not€investigate€the€matter.Ð X ¨ ÐÌòòAlleged€general€violation€of€the€Convention€óóÐ 0"€  ÐÌ3.16€€The€petitioners€argue€that€the€State€party€has€failed€to€comply€with€the€principles€of€theÐ $X" ÐConvention€as€a€whole€because€it€provides€for€more€extensive€protection€for€victims€of€defamationÐ ô$D # Ðthan€for€victims€of€racial€discrimination.€Ð à%0!$ ÐÌ3.17€€While€according€to€the€Public€Prosecution,€political€statements€of€a€similar€nature€to€that€ofÐ ¸'#& Ðthe€present€case€should€be€seen€as€legitimate€contributions€to€the€general€political€debate,€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðpetitioners€stress€that,€by€contrast,€a€journalist,€Lars€Bonnevie,€who€wrote€that€Pia€Kjrsgaard€wasÐ )à$( Ðpromoting€ð ðapparent€racist€viewsðð€was€convicted€of€defamation€and€sentenced€to€a€fine€andÐ |*Ì%) Ðcompensation.Ð h+¸&* ÐÌ3.18€€In€conclusion,€the€petitioners€request€the€Committee€to€recommend€to€the€State€party€to€carryÐ @-(, Ðout€a€full€investigation€of€this€case€and€pay€appropriate€compensation€to€the€victims.Ð ° ÐÌòòObservations€by€the€State€partyÐ ˆØ ÐóóÌ4.1€€By€submission€of€28€January€2002,€the€State€party€made€its€observations€on€the€admissibilityÐ `° Ðand€merits€of€the€case.Ð L œ ÐÌòòOn€the€admissibilityóóÐ $ t ÐÌ4.2€€The€State€party€considers€that€the€communication€should€be€declared€inadmissible€òòrationeÐ ü L  Ðpersonaeóó€under€article€14,€paragraph€1,€of€the€Convention€because€the€petitioners€are€legal€personsÐ è 8  Ðand€not€individuals€or€groups€of€individuals.€€It€refers€in€this€respect€to€the€jurisprudence€of€theÐ Ô$  ÐHuman€Rights€Committee€in€cases€Nos.€502/1992€and€737/1999.€€Moreover,€the€fact€that€theÐ À  Ðpetitioners€comprise€a€certain€number€of€members€and€work€for€the€interests€of€Muslims€and€otherÐ ¬ü  Ðethnic€minorities€does€not€entitle€them€to€submit€a€communication€under€article€14€of€theÐ ˜è  ÐConvention.Ð „Ô  ÐÌ4.3€€Moreover,€the€petitioners€have€not€submitted€powers€of€attorney€from€one€or€more€individualsÐ \¬ Ðclaiming€to€be€victims€of€a€violation€and€authorizing€them€to€submit€such€a€communication.Ð H˜ ÐÌ4.4€€Finally,€the€State€party€argues€that€the€petitioners€have€not€participated€in€the€domesticÐ  p Ðproceedings.€€The€report€of€20€June€2000€was€only€made€by€the€DRC€who€later€on€appealed€to€theÐ  \ ÐRegional€Public€Prosecutor€on€behalf€of€seven€named€individuals.Ð øH ÐÌòòOn€the€meritsÐ Ð  ÐÌAlleged€violation€of€article€2,€paragraph€1€(d)€together€with€article€6óóÐ ¨ø ÐÌ4.5€€With€regard€to€the€alleged€violation€of€article€2,€paragraph€1€(d)€together€with€article€6,€the€StateÐ €Ð Ðparty€is€of€the€opinion€that€it€cannot€be€inferred€from€the€Convention€that€investigations€should€beÐ l¼ Ðcarried€out€in€situations€which€do€not€require€it€and€consider€that€the€Danish€authorities€haveÐ X ¨ Ðtherefore€fulfilled€their€obligations.Ð D!” ÐÌ4.6€€Furthermore,€the€State€party€considers€that€although€proceedings€in€cases€of€alleged€racialÐ #l! Ðdiscrimination€have€to€be€carried€out€in€compliance€with€the€provisions€of€the€Convention,€theÐ $X" ÐConvention€does€not€specify€which€authority€should€decide€to€initiate€prosecution€or€at€what€levelÐ ô$D # Ðof€the€hierarchy€the€decision€should€be€taken.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌ4.7€€For€the€same€reasons,€the€State€party€argues€that€the€notification€of€the€case€to€the€Director€ofÐ ¸'#& ÐPublic€Prosecutions€cannot€raise€an€issue€under€the€Convention€and€has€the€only€aim€of€ensuring€aÐ ¤(ô#' Ðuniform€prosecution€practice€and€to€collect€case€law€in€the€field.Ð )à$( ÐÌòòAlleged€violation€of€article€2,€paragraph€1€(d)€together€with€articles€4€and€6óóÐ h+¸&* ÐÌ4.8€€With€regard€to€the€alleged€violation€of€article€2,€paragraph€1€(d)€together€with€articles€4€and€6,Ð @-(, Ðthe€State€party€contends€that€article€4€of€the€Convention€provides€that€State€parties€undertake€toÐ ° Ðdeclare€any€dissemination€of€ideas€based€on€racial€superiority€or€hatred€an€offence€punishable€by€lawÐ œì Ðbut€that€State€parties€shall,€at€the€same€time,€act€according€to€article€19€of€the€Universal€DeclarationÐ ˆØ Ðof€Human€Rights€as€well€as€article€5€(d)€(viii)€of€the€Convention.Ð tÄ ÐÌ4.9€€The€State€party€considers€that€the€allegations€made€by€the€petitioners€according€to€which€theÐ L œ Ðabsence€of€conviction€of€Mogens€Glistrup€under€section€266€(b)€(2)€implies€that€racist€propagandaÐ 8 ˆ Ðis€accepted€in€Denmark€was€not€substantiated,€as€the€petitioners€do€not€refer€to€particular€incidentsÐ $ t Ðthat€have€been€reported€to€the€police€without€any€result.€€Moreover,€in€relation€with€the€SupremeÐ  ` ÐCourtððs€judgement€referred€to€by€the€petitioners,€the€State€party€indicates€that€since€the€charge€underÐ ü L  Ðsection€266€(b)€(2)€have€been€dismissed€on€procedural€grounds,€the€judgement€cannot€be€consideredÐ è 8  Ðas€reflecting€an€acceptance€in€Denmark€of€racist€propaganda€made€by€politicians.Ð Ô$  ÐÌ4.10€€The€State€party€further€explains€that€section€266€(b)€has€been€amended€in€order€to€comply€withÐ ¬ü  Ðits€obligations€under€article€4€of€the€Convention.€€Concerning€the€relationship€to€the€freedom€ofÐ ˜è  Ðexpression,€it€is€mentioned€in€the€òòtravaux€prparatoiresóó€that:Ð „Ô  ÐÌà0  àOn€the€other€hand€it€is€necessary€to€give€due€regard€to€the€freedom€of€expression€whichÐ \¬ Ðshould€apply,€also€in€comments€on€racial€groups,€etc.,€and€which€article€4€of€the€ConventionÐ H˜ Ðhad€in€view,€among€other€things€by€its€reference€to€the€Universal€Declaration€of€HumanÐ 4„ ÐRights.€€In€this€regard,€it€should€first€be€mentioned€that,€according€to€the€draft,€the€criminalÐ  p Ðoffences€are€limited€to€statements€and€other€messages€made€ð ðin€public€or€with€intent€toÐ  \ Ðdissemination€to€a€wider€circleðð.€€Furthermore,€the€statements€referred€to€above€„€particularlyÐ øH Ðthe€words€ð ðinsulted€or€exposed€to€indignitiesðð€„€must€be€interpreted€to€mean€that€offences€ofÐ ä4 Ðminor€gravity€are€kept€outside€the€criminal€field.€€Outside€the€provision€fall€scientific€theoriesÐ Ð  Ðput€forward€on€differences€of€race,€nationality€or€ethnicity,€which€presumably€the€ConventionÐ ¼  Ðcannot€have€been€intended€to€encompass.€€As€mentioned€above€(ð8ð)€there€will€probably€also,Ð ¨ø Ðconcerning€statements€that€were€not€made€in€a€scientific€context€proper,€but€otherwise€as€partÐ ”ä Ðof€an€objective€debate,€be€occasion€to€reckon€with€an€area€of€impunity€(emphasis€added€byÐ €Ð Ðthe€State€party).Ðl¼(#(# ÐÌ4.11€€Therefore,€the€State€party€has€to€apply€section€266€(b)€taking€into€account€the€offenderððs€rightÐ D!” Ðto€freedom€of€expression€as€set€forth€in€article€19€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€PoliticalÐ 0"€  ÐRights€and€article€10€of€the€European€Convention€on€Human€Rights.Ð #l! ÐÌ4.12€€The€State€party€refers€thereafter€to€a€number€of€cases€decided€by€the€European€Court€of€HumanÐ ô$D # ÐRights,€stating€that€the€latter€attaches€an€important€weight€to€freedom€of€expression,€especially€whenÐ à%0!$ Ðexpressions€are€made€as€part€of€a€political€or€social€debate.€€In€the€case€òòJersild€v.€DenmarkóóÐ Ì&"% Ðconcerning€a€journalist€who€had€been€convicted€under€section€266€(b)€for€having€made€racistÐ ¸'#& Ðstatements,€the€European€Court€of€Human€Rights€held€that€the€protection€against€racist€statementsÐ ¤(ô#' Ðhad€to€be€balanced€against€the€freedom€of€expression.€€Concerning€the€relationship€with€theÐ )à$( ÐConvention,€the€Court€stated€that:Ð |*Ì%) ÐÌà0  àDenmarkððs€obligation€under€article€10€[of€the€European€Convention]€must€be€interpreted,€toÐ T,¤'+ Ðthe€extent€possible,€so€as€to€be€reconcilable€with€its€obligation€under€the€United€NationsÐ @-(, ÐConvention.€€In€this€respect€it€is€not€for€the€Court€to€interpret€the€ð ðdue€regardðð€clause€inÐ ° Ðarticle€4€of€the€United€Nations€Convention,€which€is€open€to€various€constructions.€€TheÐ œì ÐCourt€is€however€of€the€opinion€that€its€interpretation€of€article€10€of€the€EuropeanÐ ˆØ ÐConvention€in€the€present€case€is€compatible€with€Denmarkððs€obligations€under€the€UnitedÐ tÄ ÐNations€Convention.Ð`°(#(# ÐÌ4.13€€This€balance€is€also€made€in€the€State€partyððs€case€law.€€In€the€above-mentioned€SupremeÐ 8 ˆ ÐCourtððs€case€concerning€Mogens€Glitrup,€the€court€found€that€Glistrupððs€statements€could€notÐ $ t Ðobjectively€be€justified€and€the€extensive€freedom€of€expression€for€politicians€could€not€lead€toÐ  ` Ðacquittal€in€this€case.Ð ü L  ÐÌ4.14€€The€State€party€then€explains€that€the€newsletter€of€19€June€2000€was€related€to€the€level€ofÐ Ô$  Ðpunishment€in€case€of€rapes€and€gang€rapes€following€the€case€of€a€14„year„old€girl€who€had€beenÐ À  Ðraped€by€several€men€of€non„Danish€ethnic€background.€€The€debate€took€place€in€the€context€of€aÐ ¬ü  Ðproposed€legislative€amendment€purporting€to€increase€the€punishment€for€rape€committed€by€severalÐ ˜è  Ðperpetrators€jointly€and€attracted€great€public€interest.Ð „Ô  ÐÌ4.15€€The€State€party€finds€that€the€statement€made€by€a€Member€of€Parliament€should€be€consideredÐ \¬ Ðtherefore€as€part€of€the€public€debate€on€this€issue€and€are€not€of€the€same€aggravated€nature€as€theÐ H˜ Ðstatements€for€which€Mogens€Glistrup€was€convicted€by€the€Supreme€Court.€Ð 4„ ÐÌ4.16€€The€State€party€further€considers€that€the€content€of€the€statement€made€in€the€newsletter€is€notÐ  \ Ðdisproportionate€to€the€aim€pursued,€which€is€to€take€part€in€the€debate€on€the€issue€of€punishmentÐ øH Ðfor€certain€offences.€€The€Copenhagen€Police€and€the€Regional€Public€Prosecutor€made€thus€a€correctÐ ä4 Ðbalancing€between€article€4€of€the€Convention€and€the€right€to€freedom€of€expression€by€decidingÐ Ð  Ðin€advantage€of€the€latter.Ð ¼  ÐÌòòAlleged€violation€of€articles€4€and€6€of€the€ConventionóóÐ ”ä ÐÌ4.17€€With€regard€to€the€alleged€violation€of€articles€4€and€6€of€the€Convention,€the€State€partyÐ l¼ Ðconsiders€that€the€question€that€had€to€be€decided€by€the€relevant€authorities€was€whether€PiaÐ X ¨ ÐKjrsgaard€had€violated€section€266€(b)€because€of€the€statement€made€in€the€newsletter€of€19€JuneÐ D!” Ð2000.€€It€did€not€concern€other€statements€from€this€person€nor€did€it€concern€generally€the€principleÐ 0"€  Ðof€the€scope€of€freedom€of€expression€for€Members€of€Parliament.Ð #l! ÐÌ4.18€€Concerning€the€obligation€to€investigate€acts€of€racial€discrimination,€the€State€party,€referringÐ ô$D # Ðto€a€number€of€decisions€taken€by€the€Committee,€considers€that€the€investigation€conducted€by€theÐ à%0!$ Ðpolice€in€the€present€case€fully€satisfied€the€obligations€that€can€be€inferred€from€the€Convention.€Ð Ì&"% ÐOn€the€basis€of€the€report€made€by€the€DRC,€another€report€was€drafted€and€no€further€investigativeÐ ¸'#& Ðsteps€were€taken€because€the€decision€consisted€in€a€legal€assessment€of€the€content€of€the€newsletter,Ð ¤(ô#' Ði.e.€whether€it€constituted€a€violation€of€section€266€(b).Ð )à$( ÐÌ4.19€€The€State€party€also€indicates€that€the€petitioners€were€not€questioned€because€they€were€notÐ h+¸&* Ðpart€of€the€domestic€proceedings€and€that€neither€the€DRC€nor€the€seven€persons€named€by€the€latterÐ T,¤'+ Ðwere€questioned€because€such€interviews€were€not€relevant€for€the€investigation,€as€the€outcome€ofÐ @-(, Ðthe€case€depended€solely€on€a€legal€assessment.Ð ° ÐÌ4.2€€The€same€argumentation€is€valid€for€the€decision€taken€by€the€Regional€Public€Prosecutor.Ð ˆØ ÐÌ4.21€€Moreover,€the€State€party€considers€that,€since€the€statements€were€not€considered€to€be€inÐ `° Ðviolation€of€section€266€(b)€(1),€neither€the€Copenhagen€Police€nor€the€Regional€Public€ProsecutorÐ L œ Ðshould€consider€whether€propaganda€in€the€sense€of€section€266€(b)€(2)€was€involved,€because€thisÐ 8 ˆ Ðsubsection€only€provides€for€an€aggravating€circumstance€of€acts€under€section€266€(b)€(1).€Ð $ t ÐÌòòAlleged€general€violation€of€the€ConventionóóÐ ü L  ÐÌ4.22€€Concerning€the€alleged€general€violation€of€the€Convention€because€individual€victims€ofÐ Ô$  Ðdefamation€would€be€better€protected€than€groups€of€victims€of€defamation,€degradation€and€insults,Ð À  Ðthe€State€party€contends€that€the€object€of€the€legal€provisions€on€defamation€is€to€protect€the€honourÐ ¬ü  Ðof€specific€individuals€against€offensive€words€and€acts€while€the€object€of€section266€(b)€is€toÐ ˜è  Ðprotect€groups€of€persons€who€are€threatened,€insulted€or€exposed€to€indignities€on€the€grounds€ofÐ „Ô  Ðrace,€colour,€national€extraction,€ethnic€origin,€religion€or€sexual€orientation.€€The€two€provisionsÐ pÀ Ðare€applied€differently€in€view€of€their€different€contents€and€purposes.Ð \¬ ÐÌ4.23€€Furthermore,€both€provisions€complement€each€other€as,€for€example,€an€individual€can€beÐ 4„ Ðcharged€for€defamation€even€if€the€conditions€for€a€charge€under€266€are€not€met.€Ð  p ÐÌòòAuthorððs€commentsóóÐ øH ÐÌ5.1€€By€submission€of€14€May€2002,€the€petitioners€made€their€comments€on€the€State€partyððsÐ Ð  Ðobservations.Ð ¼  ÐÌ5.2€€With€regard€to€the€admissibility€of€the€communication,€the€petitioners€are€of€the€opinion€thatÐ ”ä Ðarticle€14€of€the€Convention€does€not€prevent€non„governmental€organizations€to€submitÐ €Ð Ðcommunications€to€the€Committee.€€Contesting€that€POEM€and€FASM€are€legal€persons,€they€argueÐ l¼ Ðthat€these€organizations€are€non„governmental€organizations€which€represent€a€group€of€people€andÐ X ¨ Ðare€thus€entitled€to€submit€a€communication€under€article€14.Ð D!” ÐÌ5.3€€The€petitioners€further€contend€that€the€objective€of€article€14€is€to€exclude€communicationsÐ #l! Ðfrom€individuals€who€are€not€subject€to€the€jurisdiction€of€the€State€party.€€The€petitioners€considerÐ $X" Ðalso€that€article€14€of€the€Convention€should€be€interpreted€along€the€terms€of€article€34€of€theÐ ô$D # ÐEuropean€Convention€of€Human€Rights,òò2óó€which€expressly€provides€for€the€right€for€non„Ð à%0!$ Ðgovernmental€organizations€to€apply€before€the€European€Court€of€Human€Rights.€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌ5.4€€Alternatively,€the€petitioners€note€that€the€powers€of€attorney€from€individual€members€ofÐ ¤(ô#' ÐPOEM€and€Ô_ÔFASMÔ_Ô,€submitted€together€with€their€present€comments,€make€clear€that€thoseÐ )à$( Ðindividuals€as€well€as€the€organizations€that€represent€them€appointed€Ô_ÔDRCÔ_Ô€to€submit€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðcommunication€to€the€Committee.€€Ð h+¸&* ÐÌ5.5€€With€regard€to€the€alleged€violation€of€article€2,€paragraph€1€(d)€together€with€article€6,€theÐ @-(, Ðpetitioners€maintain€that€cases€concerning€section€266€(b)€are€treated€differently€whether€the€policeÐ ° Ðintends€to€dismiss€a€report€or€to€prosecute.Ð œì ÐÌ5.6€€The€petitioners€explain€that€if€the€Regional€Public€Prosecutor€had€decided€to€chargeÐ tÄ ÐPiaÔ_ÔKjrsgaardÔ_Ô,€she€would€have€been€entitled€to€receive€a€third€opinion€on€the€matter€since€theÐ `° ÐDirector€of€Public€Prosecutions€takes€the€final€decision€in€such€cases.€€By€contrast,€the€allegedÐ L œ Ðvictims€do€not€have€the€same€right€if€the€Regional€Public€Prosecutor€decides€to€dismiss€the€case.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐThe€Director€of€Public€Prosecutions€will€only€be€notified€of€the€decision€to€dismiss.€€In€the€opinionÐ $ t Ðof€the€petitioners,€this€constitutes€a€differential€treatment€that€is€incompatible€with€the€ConventionÐ  ` Ðand,€in€particular,€with€article€2,€paragraph€1€(d).Ð ü L  ÐÌ5.7€€With€regard€to€the€alleged€violation€of€article€2,€paragraph€1€(d)€together€with€articles€4€and€6,Ð Ô$  Ðthe€petitioners€agree€with€the€State€party€and€the€European€Court€of€Human€Rightððs€decision€inÐ À  ÐòòÔ_ÔJersildÔ_Ô€v.€Denmarkóó€that€a€fair€balance€has€to€be€assessed€between€freedom€of€expression€andÐ ¬ü  Ðprotection€against€racist€statements.€€However,€in€the€present€case,€it€appears€that€the€Regional€PublicÐ ˜è  ÐProsecutor€found€that€the€statement€was€degrading€and€insulting€individuals€with€another€ethnicÐ „Ô  Ðbackground€but€that€it€was€not€severe€enough€to€limit€the€freedom€of€expression.€€The€petitionersÐ pÀ Ðconsider€that€the€Regional€Public€Prosecutor€should€have€decided€that€the€statement€fell€underÐ \¬ Ðsection€266€(b),€alongside€a€precedent€judgement€of€10€April€1996€in€a€similar€case.€€In€the€presentÐ H˜ Ðcase,€freedom€of€expression€could€not€constitute€a€justification€to€dismiss€the€case.€Ð 4„ ÐÌ5.8€€The€petitioners€therefore€conclude€that€politicians€in€Denmark€are€entitled€to€make€statementsÐ  \ Ðthat€fall€under€section€266€(b)€without€being€charged€while€others,€non„politicians,€would€be€chargedÐ øH Ðfor€similar€statements.€€The€petitioners€asked€the€Director€of€Public€Prosecutions€to€comment€on€thisÐ ä4 Ðpoint€of€view€which€they€consider€as€having€no€justification€and€being€contrary€to€article€2,Ð Ð  Ðparagraph€1€(d),€article€4€and€6€of€the€Convention.Ð ¼  ÐÌ5.9€€The€petitioners€further€indicate€that,€while€they€do€not€dispute€that€the€European€Court€gives€aÐ ”ä Ðwider€margin€to€freedom€of€expression€for€politicians,€the€same€holds€true€for€journalists.€€In€thisÐ €Ð Ðregard,€they€refer€again€to€the€case€of€Ô_ÔLarsÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔBonnevieÔ_Ô€who€was€convicted€of€defamation€on29€AprilÐ l¼ Ð1999€for€having€claimed€that€Pia€Ô_ÔKjrsgaardÔ_Ô€was€promoting€ð ðapparent€racist€viewsðð.€€In€the€sameÐ X ¨ Ðline,€the€petitioners€refer€to€a€decision€of€the€Court€of€Ô_ÔArhusÔ_Ô€which€convicted€a€politician,€KarenÐ D!” ÐÔ_ÔSundÔ_Ô,€for€having€stated€that€ð ð[Ô_Ôo]neÔ_Ô€cannot€cooperate€with€the€Danish€Peopleððs€Party€because€theÐ 0"€  Ðleader€of€the€party€has€a€racial€point€of€viewðð.Ð #l! ÐÌ5.10€€Finally,€the€petitioners€contend€that€it€is€for€the€courts€to€draw€the€line€between€freedom€ofÐ ô$D # Ðexpression€and€protection€from€racist€remarks€and€not€the€police€or€the€Regional€Public€Prosecutor.€Ð à%0!$ ÐThis€is€even€more€justified,€because€of€the€independence€of€the€judiciary,€in€cases€where€the€allegedÐ Ì&"% Ðoffender€is€a€politician.Ð ¸'#& ÐÌ5.11€€With€regard€to€the€alleged€violation€of€articles€4€and€6,€the€petitioners€reiterate€that€the€case€hasÐ )à$( Ðnot€been€investigated€thoroughly€and€individually.€€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÌÌÐ @-(, ЇòòIssues€and€proceedings€before€the€CommitteeóóÐ ° ÐÌ6.1€€Before€considering€any€claims€contained€in€a€communication,€the€Committee€on€the€EliminationÐ ˆØ Ðof€Racial€Discrimination€must€decide,€pursuant€to€article€14€of€the€Convention€and€rules€86€and€91Ð tÄ Ðof€its€rules€of€procedure,€whether€or€not€the€communication€is€admissible.Ð `° ÐÌ6.2€€The€Committee€notes€the€State€partyððs€argument€that€none€of€the€petitioners€were€plaintiffs€inÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€domestic€proceedings€and€that€the€report€to€the€Copenhagen€Police€was€only€submitted€by€theÐ $ t ÐÔ_ÔDRCÔ_Ô.€Ð  ` ÐÌ6.3€€The€Committee€considers€that€it€is€a€basic€requirement€under€article€14,€paragraph€7€(a)€thatÐ è 8  Ðdomestic€remedies€have€to€be€exhausted€by€the€petitioners€themselves€and€not€by€other€organizationsÐ Ô$  Ðor€individuals.€€The€Committee€finds€therefore€that€communication€is€inadmissible€under€article€14,Ð À  Ðparagraph€7€(a)€of€the€Convention.€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌ7.€€Notwithstanding€the€above,€the€Committee€calls€the€State€partyððs€attention€to€the€content€ofÐ „Ô  Ðparagraph€115€of€the€Programme€of€Action€adopted€by€the€World€Conference€against€Racism,€RacialÐ pÀ ÐDiscrimination,€Xenophobia€and€Related€Intolerance€in€Durban€(South€Africa)€on8September2001,Ð \¬ Ðwhich€ð ðunderlines€the€key€role€that€politicians€and€political€parties€can€play€in€Ô_ÔcombatingÔ_Ô€racism,Ð H˜ Ðracial€discrimination,€xenophobia€and€related€intolerance€and€encourages€political€parties€to€takeÐ 4„ Ðconcrete€steps€to€promote€equality,€solidarity€and€non-discrimination€in€society,€inter€alia€byÐ  p Ðdeveloping€voluntary€codes€of€conduct€which€include€internal€disciplinary€measures€for€violationsÐ  \ Ðthereof,€so€their€members€refrain€from€public€statements€and€actions€that€encourage€or€incite€racism,Ð øH Ðracial€discrimination,€xenophobia€and€related€intoleranceðð.Ð ä4 ÐÌ[Done€in€English,€French€and€Spanish,€the€English€text€being€the€original€version.€€Subsequently€toÐ ¼  Ðbe€issued€also€in€Arabic,€Chinese€and€Russian€as€part€of€the€Committeeððs€annual€report€to€theÐ ¨ø ÐGeneral€Assembly.]Ð ”ä ÐÌ*€€Made€public€by€decision€of€the€Committee€on€the€Elimination€of€Racial€Discrimination.Ð l¼ ÐÌòòNotesóóÐ D!” ÐÌòò1€€óóSection€266€(b)€of€the€Danish€Criminal€Code€reads:Ð #l! ÐÌÓ XÓ1.€€Any€person€who€publicly€or€with€the€intention€of€disseminating€it€to€a€wide€circle€ofÐ ô$D # Ðpeople,€makes€a€statement€or€imparts€other€information€threatening,€insulting€or€degradingÐ à%0!$ Ða€group€of€persons€on€account€of€their€race,€colour,€national€or€ethnic€origin,€belief€or€sexualÐ Ì&"% Ðorientation€shall€be€liable€to€a€fine€or€imprisonment€for€any€term€not€exceeding€two€years.Ð ¸'#& ÐÌ2.€€When€the€sentence€is€meted€out,€the€fact€that€the€offence€is€in€the€nature€of€propagandaÐ )à$( Ðactivities€shall€be€considered€an€aggravating€circumstance.€€òòÐ |*Ì%) ÐÌÓ XÓ2€€óóArticle€34€of€the€European€Convention€on€Human€Rights€reads:€Ð ö+F'+ ÐÌà0  àThe€Court€may€receive€applications€from€any€person,€non„governmental€organization€orÐ Î-)- Ðgroup€of€individuals€claiming€to€be€the€victim€of€a€violation€by€one€of€the€High€ContractingÐ ° ÐParties€of€the€rights€set€forth€in€the€Convention€or€the€protocols€thereto.€€The€HighÐ œì ÐContracting€Parties€undertake€not€to€hinder€in€any€way€the€effective€exercise€of€this€right.ЈØ(#(# ÐÓ#ÓÌ