The European Court of Human Rights has asked the Government for explanations in the case of journalist Julieta Savitchi, who accuses the lack of an effective investigation into an incident in which she was deprived of her freedom by employees of a private security company, while documenting a journalistic investigation. The Court is set to examine whether the authorities have violated the right to freedom and security, reports IPN.
According to the Promo-LEX Association, which represents the journalist, the incident took place in April 2018, when Julieta Savitchi was documenting the assets of former deputy Constantin Tutu. While filming from a public road several residences to determine which one belonged to the politician, she claims she was stopped by an armed security guard, who asked her to stop filming.
Subsequently, other employees of the private security company also arrived at the scene, who, according to the complainant, prevented her from leaving for about 40 minutes and demanded that she hand over the video recordings. During this time, the journalist alerted the police and the press, and only after the intervention of law enforcement was she able to leave the area. Promo-LEX points out that as a result of the incident, she suffered a panic attack and needed medical attention.
Subsequently, the journalist filed a complaint, and the prosecutors initiated a criminal investigation in May 2018. However, the case was dismissed a few months later, on the grounds that it did not meet the elements of a crime. The decision was subsequently upheld by both the investigating judge and the Chisinau Court of Appeal. In her application to the ECHR, Julieta Savitchi alleges a violation of the right to freedom and security, freedom of expression, and the right to an effective remedy.
The Strasbourg Court has addressed four questions to the Government of the Republic of Moldova, requesting explanations regarding how the authorities investigated the case and whether the state has fulfilled its obligation to protect journalistic activity. The Executive is to present its observations on the admissibility and substance of the case, after which the plaintiff will have the opportunity to respond.
