The Constitutional Court has handed down a sentence that delimits anonymous insults on the internet and discharges the responsibility, ultimately, on the web page where they are published. The plenary session has confirmed a penalty of 1,200 euros to Menéame for not deleting the anonymous comment that called a Marbella councilor a “son of a bitch”. The Constitutional Court explains that freedom of expression does not cover these comments: “Not even in a context of political criticism, when they are totally unnecessary, they are protected by anonymity and are made in a medium with an extraordinary capacity for dissemination, such as the Internet.” says the sentence.
The Supreme Court protects the insults on a phone search website against two “deceived” companies
Further
The plenary session has studied a case from the Andalusian courts. A councilor from the Marbella City Council had been accused of spending more than 14,000 euros on telephone calls in his first month in office, a bill that he charged to the public treasury of the consistory that Ángeles Muñoz, of the Popular Party, was already directing at that time. Information arrived at the Menéame portalwhere users share, vote and comment on the news.
One of those comments was anonymous and referred to the councilor as a “son of a bitch” and a legal process began to delete the comment. The website refused twice and ended up ordered to pay compensation of 1,200 euros to the councilor in question. A sentence that, says the Constitutional, does not violate Menéame’s rights either by making him ultimately responsible for the comment.
This Constitutional sentence has not been unanimous. The progressive magistrate María Luisa Balaguer has signed a private vote in which she explains that freedom of expression should have prevailed over the honor of public office. A vote in which she regrets that this case could have served to go further and “address the issue of ownership of the communicative freedoms of Internet platforms.”
“He did nothing to remove them”
The case had been sentenced by the Andalusian courts, where Menéame was sentenced. The Supreme Court, for example, reproached the web for not deleting the comment, not for allowing its publication. “She is held responsible for her because she, after learning of her illegality -evident of her, because it was mere insults-, she did nothing either to remove them or to prevent access to them,” explained the courtroom. civil.
Previously, the Provincial Court of Malaga had ruled in the same sense. “He did not act with the required diligence, which makes him responsible for the insults directed against the appellant, violations of his right to honor.” In the first instance, a court in Marbella had rejected the councilor’s claim.
