ECHR confirms conviction of French politician for unlawful comments posted on his Facebook wall by third parties

A recent decision by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) could have far-reaching consequences for the online debate culture and digital engagement of politicians and other celebrities. The Grand Chamber of the ECtHR ruled on 15 May that a local politician's conviction for offensive comments made by third parties on his Facebook page, which he failed to delete, did not violate the right to freedom of expression.

This decision potentially has a major impact: the ruling allows celebrities to be required to moderate content on social media. This could lead to some prominent social media users refraining from setting up comment sections on their accounts, which could limit important discussions and democratic discourse.

The case that led to the decision involved French local councillor Julien Sanchez. Sanchez was running for parliamentary elections and was convicted of inciting hatred or violence against a religious group. He had published a post on his public Facebook account to which 15 people made comments, two of which accused the MP of letting Muslims rule the city and allowing drug trafficking and prostitution. Sanchez did not remove the offending comments from his Facebook page. The court ruled that Sanchez acted carelessly by not responding to others' comments, respectively deleting them.

The Grand Chamber of the ECtHR ruled in favour of France, finding that Sanchez's rights had not been violated. The court argued that by making his Facebook page public, Sanchez allowed others to post comments and should have been aware of the potential consequences of his decision. Therefore, the court saw no violation of the right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

It will have to be observed whether and to what extent this decision will prevent public figures from activating the comment function on social media posts in the future, thus enabling debate among social media posts. The role of the operators of social media platforms, in this case Facebook, who could increasingly transfer liability issues related to hate speech to their users on the basis of this ruling, also remains questionable.