一个著名的奥地利政府审查案凸显了政府倾向于满足大多数人的要求，而使一些有争议的观点得不到保护。作者：Michele Finck。
案例详情
1985年，一家名为奥托 – 普雷明格研究所（OPI）的艺术电影院计划上映一部名为《天堂理事会》的电影。这部悲剧电影讽刺了上帝使用梅毒来惩罚文艺复兴时期的男性，特别是教廷男性的淫乱和罪恶。电影用漫画般的手法讽刺了基督教信条。影院位于奥地利蒂罗尔州，为了依法防止蒂罗尔天主教社区的居民不小心看到这部影片，花了很大功夫来明确警告电影内容可能会触犯他人，并禁止17岁以下的孩子观影。
放映之前，公诉人在因斯布鲁克罗马天主教教区的要求下提出诉讼，指控电影院经理诋毁宗教的教义，这在奥地利属于范围行为。结果，电影胶片被扣押没收。
在欧洲人权法院，OPI的董事辩称奥地利政府侵犯了其言论自由权，即《欧洲人权公约》第10条规定的权利。奥地利政府则认为，措施旨在保护蒂罗尔州的天主教社区，防止出现骚乱。
法院认同奥地利政府的行动是有道理的。它认为个案涉及了“两个《公约》认可的基本自由利益之间的冲突，即社团有权传播给公众一些具有争议的观点，以此推论，一方面是相关人士有权获知这些观点，另一方面是其他人也有权为其思想自由，良心和宗教自由争得适当的尊重。”查扣电影拷贝旨在防止出现那种“蒂罗尔州公众所认为的那种对击天主教宗教的攻击”，而“天主教是蒂罗尔绝大多数居民的宗教信仰”这一事实是不能忽略的。奥地利当局已经采取行动，“以确保该地区的宗教和平，并且避免一些人产生其宗教信仰受到了无端冒犯的想法。”法院的结论是，鉴于国家主管部门在强制影片下映前权衡了艺术表达自由和上述社会考量，因此并没有违反第10条的规定。
reply report Report comment
Although I completely disagree with the decision of the Court and side with the dissenting opinions regarding the broad range of expressions that are covered by the right of freedom of expression (it is the way it has been understood by the Constitutional Court in Colombia, which is one of the most activist courts in the world), I do wonder at the idea of proposing a move from balancing rights to establishing rigid categorisations where some rights in every case have primacy over others. This could lead to more abuses by the state and to arbitrary decisions by courts. I would still defend the balancing of rights, although I would encourage the European Court to follow the lead of other more progressive courts.
reply report Report comment
This sort of expediency is often excused by referring to the commonly-accepted and rarely challenged notion that the judges or politicians have to ‘balance’ opposing rights. It should not be a question of balancing rights – it should be a simple matter of deciding upon which rights have primacy. In this case, whilst we might wish to protect people from having their religious beliefs insulted, this should not be allowed to interfere with freedom of expression. Free speech must have primacy. If we don’t have free speech, then we can’t even properly discuss what other rights we ought to have.