Murphy v. Ireland, No. 44179/98, ECtHR (Third Section), 10 July 2003

Prohibition imposed on a private subject, by a public authority, to broadcast an advertisement with a religious content. Non-violation of articles 9 and 10 of the ECHR.

Art. 9 ECHR
Art. 10 ECHR

1. No restriction on freedom of expression, whether in the context of religious beliefs or in any other, can be compatible with Article 10 unless it satisfies, inter alia, the test of necessity as required by the second paragraph of that Article. In examining whether restrictions to the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention can be considered "necessary in a democratic society" the Court has, however, consistently held that the Contracting States enjoy a certain but not unlimited margin of appreciation.

2. A wide margin of appreciation is generally available to the Contracting States when regulating freedom of expression in relation to matters liable to offend intimate personal convictions within the sphere of morals or, especially, religion. Moreover, as in the field of morals, and perhaps to an even greater degree, there is no uniform European conception of the requirements of "the protection of the rights of others" in relation to attacks on their religious convictions.

3. The potential impact of the medium of expression concerned is an important factor in the consideration of the proportionality of an interference with the right to manifest one’s religion. In particular, account must be taken of the fact that the audio-visual media have a more immediate and powerful effect than the print media.
(The case revolves around the ban imposed on a religious organization from broadcasting an advertisement with a religious content. In the Court's opinion, this prohibition, which had a specific legislative basis, was justified by the particular religious sensitivity of the Irish population)