I wondered, at first, about the reference in the final bullet to relevant international law. If Ireland ruled that the comments were protected free speech, what would that do to the situation? Possibly nothing, because that's national law rather than international law; but then, there's the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which ought to qualify.

What this actually means is going to depend critically on what the various institutions do with it, going forward.

Pi zero (talk)01:55, 7 October 2019

The UDHR has provisions on "freedom of thought, opinion, religion and conscience, word, and peaceful association of the individual", but there's never been much 'muscle' behind it. I don't even think it qualifies as 'law'. I am certain ECJ is saying Ireland's laws are irrelevant. Back in the day, defamation was separated into slander and libel. One was spoken, the other in print. Nowadays, people 'speak' on the internet, but courts seem to be interpreting it as 'print' which used to mean it was in a newspaper. Yes, it would probably be 'wrong' of a newspaper to say those things about EGP and her party, but I damn sure believe in the right of anyone to insult her (and I don't know a damn thing about her politics).

SVTCobra02:30, 7 October 2019

It probably doesn't help that the insults included 'fascist'. My experience suggests folks in western Europe get quite upset by that term, and likely in Austria the effect is especially pronounced.

Pi zero (talk)02:45, 7 October 2019

Well, not nearly as upset as in Eastern Europe. The entire separatist movement in Ukraine is rooted in Russian media propaganda saying the government in Kiev was taken over by 'the same fascists we defeated in the Great Patriotic War. I shit you not, it is on TV there every day.

SVTCobra03:04, 7 October 2019