The initial verdict delivered against P. Graževičius, finding him guilty of inciting hatred against any nation, race, ethnic, religious, or other group of people, has been annulled. Previously, the two courts of appeal had issued conflicting verdicts in this matter.
However, a three-judge panel subsequently declared that while the expressions in question may constitute a violation of law, this does not equate to the vilification of a group of people, and therefore, criminal liability cannot be applied. This revised verdict is considered final and is not subject to further appeal. The annulment effectively reverses the initial ruling, which had imposed a fine of 3,000 euros.
This fine had originally been awarded to compensate the victims for both material and non-material damages, as well as litigation costs. Separately, V. Čmilytė-Nielsen addressed the broader context, outlining measures deemed necessary to ensure that Russian speakers do not feel unfairly blamed for the actions of V.
Putin. The panel’s decision focused narrowly on the legal threshold for criminal liability, establishing that mere expression, even if deemed unlawful, does not automatically imply the systematic defilement of an entire group. This legal clarification significantly alters the precedent set by the initial finding, providing a more nuanced interpretation of free speech within the bounds of national law.
Topics: #verdict #which #group
