Criminal Division
Case No.: 2015/39470
Decision No.: 2017/9714
“Judgment Text”
COURT: High Criminal Court
OFFENSE: Insult
JURISDICTION: Conviction
DECISION
An appeal was filed against the decision rendered by the Local Court, and the case was reviewed taking into account the appeal period, the nature of the decision, and the date the offense was committed:
Since there were no grounds for dismissing the appeal, the case proceeded.
Based on an examination of the minutes, documents, and the reasoning reflecting the trial process;
The legal value protected by the penalty for the offense of insult is the dignity, honor, and integrity of individuals, and for this offense to be established, the conduct must be of a nature that humiliates the person. Whether an act constitutes defamation is relative in some cases and may vary depending on time, place, and circumstances. Any harsh criticism or defamatory remarks directed at public officials or civilian citizens should not be evaluated within the context of defamation; rather, such remarks must constitute a concrete act, fact, accusation, or insult capable of impairing honor, dignity, and reputation.
On the other hand, the case law of the European Court of Human Rights acknowledges that officials granted specific administrative powers must be more tolerant of criticism directed at their words and actions. In a case involving defamatory statements against public officials, the European Court of Human Rights examines whether the statements in the complaint pose a real risk of undermining public confidence in the official’s performance.
.
In the specific case at issue: When the defendant’s attorney failed to begin the hearing at the previously announced time, the complainant shouted loudly, referring to the judge, “If your tea is finished, I’ll tell you to get another cup,” and, asking who had spoken those words, said, “I told you, are you going to conduct your hearing?” The statements “Stop talking here, go inside and conduct your hearing” and, following the complainant’s warning, “Go inside, conduct your hearing; you spoke to me like this in the previous hearing,” while not constituting an insult to the complainant’s honor, dignity, or reputation, do contain elements of insult, disrespect, and aggression.
The decision to convict rather than acquit on this charge is contrary to the law, despite the fact that the language used was merely coarse and thus did not constitute the elements of the offense of insult,
and since the grounds for objection raised by the defendant’s defense attorney and the prosecutor of the relevant jurisdiction were deemed valid, on September 27, 2017, by unanimous decision, it was ruled to overturn the judgment contrary to the matters stated in the notice and to remit the case to the trial court to proceed from the stage prior to the overturning of the judgment.
The Statement Made After the Hearing Began, “If the Tea Is Finished, Let’s Have Some More Tea,” Does Not Constitute the Crime of Insult