RULES OF LAWYER’S BEHAVIOUR ECHR case law Support to the implementation of the judicial reforms in Armenia RULES OF LAWYER’S BEHAVIOUR ECHR case law

Art. 10 Freedom of Expression General principles/factors, that are considered by the ECHR Analogy with a journalists Moris v France, 29369/10, 23/04/15, §§ 124-178

General Principles Importance of the freedom of expression Open public debate Special protection Authority of court Special social role of court As a guarantor of justice As a fundamental social value It is necessary to protect confidence of the society from such harmful attacks against courts, which are ill-founded, especcialy taking into consideration, that judges, due to their status, are restricted in terms of opportunity to critically respond to the critisim against them. Special status/ role of the attorney Intermidiary between society and courts

Արտահայտվելու ազատությունը Broad protection of the freedom of speech ,,Freedom of speech includes not only information or ideas, that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population. Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no "democratic society" Lingens against Austria

In case of attorney- means of client’s protection Freedom of Expression Freedom of speech, as a means and not a complete notion. Revelation of truth Person’s self-perfection/self-realization Democratic self-regulation/control In case of attorney- means of client’s protection

Freedom of Speech as a means ,,The issue of the freedom of expression relates to the principle of freedom of legal profession, which has decicive impact upon maintenance of efficient administration of justice. Only in exceptional cases the restriction of an attorney’s freedom of expression (even if the criminal liability is mild) may be regarded as necessary in the democratic society. Maurice against France § 135,

CCBE From the moment, when a case attracts attention of media, and especially, when crucial state-related issues are at stake, in some cases the rights to defense may be effectively protected only via public statement, even is the statement is made in a loud manner. Maurice against France § 117,

CCBE As the facts of the case concern the freedom of expression outside of the courtroom, in the context of restrictions of this right it should be taken into consideration, that in sensitive and prominent cases, where important state-related issued are being decided, sometimes attorneys have no other choice, but to make public statements to voice their concerns about obstacles of proper administration of the proceeding. In such cases attorneys shall enjoy the same scope of freedom of expression and speech, as journalists do. Maurice against France §116,

The Chamber of Advocates of Paris Attorneys are watchdogs of democracy, like journalists The scope of freedom of expression and speech of attorneys shall be as large, as that of journalists.

Attorney’s Special Status Intermediary between court and society

Attorney’s Special Role Important role in maintenance of court’s authority

Attorney’s Special Role The society should also ascertain, that the attorney can carry out protection effectively.

Attorney’s Special Role Attorney’s special status and independence of the legal profession set forth several obligations for an attorney, including ones of behaveoural nature.

Attorney’s Special Role The freedom of expression serves as a means to protect himself/herself, however, at the same time, the attorney is committed to maintain the authority of court in public.

Important Factors Attorney’s status Addition to the open public debate / an issue of public interest The nature of contentious statement Special circumstances

Attorney’s Special Role The freedom of expression protects not only the content of expression, but also its means and method.

Attorney’s Special Role Consequently attorneys have a right to express their opinions in public about administration of justice, unless their critisism exceeds certain threshold.

Attorney’s Special Role Limits on freedom of expression are located within the norms of attorney’s conduct in accordance with CCBE 10 rules.

The rules protect judicial power from unfounded and irrelevant attacks, which can be used exclusively for the purpose of shifting judicial controversy to the field of media or to settle the score with the judge.

Only in exceptional cases the restriction of an attorney’s freedom of expression( even if the criminal liability is mild) may be regarded as necessary in the democratic society.

Difference shall be struck between attorney’s actions in court and those outside court.

Attorneys shall not make expressions, which are lack of factual bases, as well as are obliged to refrain from voicing insults. Courts assesses an expression within its general context to clarify, whether the expression made can be qualified as misleading or irrelevant personal attack.

The contentious expressions were not a result of applicants personal deeds, impelled by desire to take revenge, but, rather, were a part of two attorneys’ personal initiative, within which they wanted to reveal serious deficiences in the judicial system.