Balancing the Doctor’s Right to Respect to Business Reputation with the Public’s Right to Freedom of Expression (Based on the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights)

Abstract

The article covers the issue of dissemination of negative information about the doctor on the example of the European Court of Human Rights case law. It has been emphasized on the circumstances in which it seems possible to strike a fair balance between a doctors’ right to protect their business reputation and the freedom of expression of others. It has been established that the business reputation of the doctors is closely related to the ethical norms of their behavior. Dissemination of negative information, in particular, about the doctor is one of the manifestations of freedom of expression. However, it is important to remember that such negative information shall be true; otherwise, this activ- ity would not comply with the law. In the case of a restriction of a person’s right to freedom of expression, the European Court of Human Rights proposes to take into account the following factors: whether such a restriction was based on law, whether it pursued one or more legitimate aims and whether it was necessary in a democratic society to achieve those aims. Of course, the dissemination of negative information about a doctor affects his or her business reputation, but in order to achieve a fair balance between competing interests in this area (provided that such information was true) the public interest will prevail, because the dissemination of health information is of particular interest for the public. A fair balance in these relations will also provide such circumstances as: good faith and ethical behavior of those who publish negative information, the way the material is presented, the validity of the information disseminated, the real ability of the doctor to respond to these allegations. Key words: business reputation of a doctor, dissemination of information, European Court of Human Rights.