Freedom of Speech

ECHR Says Ex-Brother and Sister-in-Law Have Right to Marry in Greece

By: Mujtaba Ali Tirmizey

Impunity Watch Staff Writer

ATHENS, Greece — On September 5, 2019, the European Court of Human Rights (“ECHR”) decided that legislation preventing marriage between ex-siblings-in-law is a violation of the right to marry.

Georgios Theodorou and Sophia Tsotsorou were married in 2005, just one year after George was divorced from his previous marriage to Tsotsorou’s sister. After George and Sophia wed, Sophia’s sister complained about the union to a local prosecutor, arguing nullity on the grounds of prohibited kinship between two spouses. In 2010, the marriage was annulled by the Regional Court on the basis of Article 1357 of the Greek Civil Code, which forbids marriage between persons related by collateral descent up to the third degree. The court reasoned that since Theodorou and Tsotsorou were second-degree relatives, their marriage was barred for reasons of decency and respect for the institution of the family. Theodorou and Tsotsorou’s subsequent appeals were dismissed, and their marriage was ultimately annulled in June 2015.

In 2015, Theodorou and Tsotsorou lodged a complaint with the ECHR, citing a violation of Article 12, which proscribes the right to marry. Placing particular importance to this point, the Court noted that a consensus had developed in the marriage of ex-sisters-in-law and brothers-in-law among the member states of the Council of Europe. Only Italy and San Marino had introduced barriers to such a marriage, but these obstacles were not absolute.

The Court also noted that Theodorou and Tsotsorou had not faced any problems prior to getting married and the national authorities had not raised any objections. Tsotsorou’s sister had not complained about the marriage until approximately a year and a half later, and the prosecutor filed a formal complaint two years after the marriage. Relevant authorities only issue a marriage license after certain legal conditions have been met. Here, these authorities did not express any doubts prior to issuing this license, and for more than ten years, the couple enjoyed legal and social recognition of a married relationship and the protection provided exclusively to married couples. Lastly, the Court also observed that the Government’s arguments concerning “biological considerations” and the risk of confusion were unconvincing.

As a result, the Court held that Article 12 had been violated because the annulment of the marriage had disproportionately restricted Theodorou and Tsotsorou’s right to marry.

This decision bodes well for Italy and San Marino, the remaining members of States of the Council of Europe where such a marriage is still forbidden. Other regions of the world may also benefit from this decision, where ex-brothers and sisters-in-law’s right to marry is taboo. Lastly, a broad interpretation of this case can help other parties under Article 12 as well, which states that “no one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation.”

For further information, please see:

European Court of Human Rights – Judgement Theodorou and Tsotsorou v. Greece – legislation preventing the marriage of former brothers- and sisters-in-law – 5 Sept. 2019

Law and Religion UK – Marrying a Non-Deceased Wife’s Sister? Theodorou and Tsotsorou – 5 Sept. 2019

Two Imprisoned Journalists in Myanmar Will Appeal to Supreme Court

By: Natalie Maier
Impunity Watch, Press Freedom                                                                                                                                                               

YANGON, Myanmar — Two Reuters journalists imprisoned under Myanmar’s Official Secrets Act filed an appeal Friday with the Supreme Court to overturn their convictions.

Reuters journalist Wa Lone is escorted by police as he leaves court Wednesday, Jan. 10, 2018, outside Yangon, Myanmar. (2018 AP Photo/Thein Zaw)

Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo have been in prison for over a year now. The pair were arrested on December 12, 2017 and charged with violating the Official Secrets Act, a colonial-era law that punishes the distribution or publication of documents that may be “useful to the enemy.”

Prosecutors claim that the two obtained important and secret state documents relating to a military campaign in Rakhine State by the Myanmar army. Since 2016, over 680,000 Rohingya Muslims have fled the area amidst genocide. The United Nations has opened up an investigation into the crisis, calling it “ethnic cleansing.”

Lone and Soe Oo, reporters for the Reuters news agency, had been investigating a mass grave in the city of Inn Din. They claim that they were framed by police, who handed them documents, and then arrested them for possession.

On January 11, 2019, an appellate judge upheld the original conviction of 7 years in prison for hard labor. This appeal claims that lower court rulings involved errors in judicial procedure. Khin Maung Zaw, counsel for the journalists, said the lower courts did not properly evaluate witness testimony. Observers at the trial described testimony of the prosecution as vague and contradictory. However, one police officer who testified for the prosecution admitted that the two journalists were indeed the target of a sting operation.

The case has caught the attention of human rights and free speech advocacy groups around the world. Concerns about the status of press freedom in Myanmar are growing, with 43 journalists arrested wince 2015.

For more information, please see:

1 February 2019 – AP/The Diplomat –  Landmark Myanmar Press Freedom Case Set for Supreme Court Appeal 

2018 – PEN America – Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo