Yttrandefrihet i Turkiet utifrån två rättsfall - En argumentationsanalys av två rättsfall om yttrandefrihet i Turkiet och hur de förhåller sig till de samhällsfunktionella teorierna sannings-, demokrati- och toleransargumenten

Sammanfattning: The purpose of this bachelor thesis is to gain a deeper understanding of how Turkey has dealt with freedom of expression. This study analyzes two court cases in which the European Court of Human Rights determined that Turkey failed in its obligation to protect the freedom of expression of two of its citizens, Hrant Dink and Selahattin Demirtaş. The study begins by analyzing the merits of the cases, specifically evaluating the arguments that promote and criticize Turkey's infringement of Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights. The study then further analyzes the cases from a societal functional theory, with a focus on issues of truth, democracy and tolerance, to determine whether Turkey violated the applicants' freedom of expression. The theoretical application establishes that Turkey has violated all three aspects of truth, democracy and tolerance in the two cases discussed in this study, thereby also infringing on Article 10. Although there were divided opinions in the cases on whether Turkey violated Article 10, application of the societal functional theory indicates that the applicants' rights to freedom of expression were infringed. A challenge that is demonstrated in the results is Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code and the challenges faced due to the vague and wordy language. The poor language used makes the scope of the provision unclear, resulting in arbitrary interpretations that violate a claimant's rights. Key words: Freedom of expression, Turkey, European Court of Human Rights, European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, Article 10, Article 301