Valeri Simeonov finally lost a lawsuit against the newspaper “Sega”



[ad_1]

Photo: BGNES

The leader of the NSFB and deputy speaker of parliament, Valeri Simeonov, eventually lost a claim for compensation, which he had filed against the newspaper “Sega”. The politician claimed that he was paid 35,000 for various articles in the newspaper in May 2017. They were dedicated to the scandal with former Deputy Minister of Regional Development Pavel Tenev and the subsequent reaction of the party leader.

Three years ago, a photo of Tenev appeared on Facebook, showing him waving a Nazi salute to a Wehrmacht wax officer at a Paris museum. Simeonov then told Sega that “who knows what “Buchenwald” prank photos I haveThe newspaper published several critical articles, which prompted Simeonov to file the lawsuit.

In the first instance, his claim was partially confirmed and he was awarded BGN 5,000 compensation. After that, however, the appeals court accepted that the published materials did not contain offensive or defamatory allegations and overturned the decision. The Supreme Court of Cassation confirmed it, according to its ruling.

The jurisprudence unanimously accepts that it is not illegal to behave in a journalistic opinion with a negative evaluation, which affects a certain person when their actions are discussed in relation to a public issue related to their position, activity or occupation. Freedom of expression and its oral, written or oral, sound, image or other type of dissemination, guaranteed as a constitutionally protected value, is excluded only in cases where it is used to violate the rights and reputation of another and to request a forced change of the constitutional order, for the commission of crimes, for inciting enmity or for violence against the person. In the absence of any of the exceptions listed above, journalists can legitimately express their judgments. Negative appraisals of a particular public figure do not give rise to liability unless they affect the dignity of the individual.“, reads the judgment of the Supreme Court of Cassation. It is final.

The court also claims that politicians “Due to the public importance of the activity they carry out, they should suffer much more criticism for their activity and words in the public space than other citizens.“.



[ad_2]