On 31 July 2026, Media Defence filed a third-party intervention at the European Court of Human Rights in Evertsson and Andersson v Sweden (Application no. 38680/23).
The MS Estonia sank in the Baltic Sea on 28 September 1994 with the loss of 852 lives. While researching a documentary, the applicants used a remote-controlled diving robot to film the exterior of the wreck. The footage revealed previously undocumented damage to the hull and prompted renewed official investigations by the Swedish, Finnish and Estonian authorities. The applicants were subsequently subject to criminal sanctions under the Estonia Act, which imposes a blanket ban on underwater activity near the wreck.
The case raises the question of how far Article 10 permits states to criminalise access to sites that are important for investigating matters of public interest. Media Defence argues that a criminal sanction for newsgathering requires the closest scrutiny. That is especially so where the activity is non-invasive, the public benefit is documented, and the law allows no exception for journalistic activity and no assessment of proportionality at the stage of determining liability. Treating journalistic purpose only as mitigation at sentencing does not satisfy Article 10.
We also argue that a treaty obligation does not displace the Article 10 analysis. A state must implement such an obligation compatibly with the Convention. Where all parties to the agreement are themselves bound by the Convention, they cannot create obligations between them that override it.
Media Defence Legal Director Pádraig Hughes said: “This reporting uncovered facts that the authorities themselves did not know, and it led three states to reopen their investigations. The applicants disturbed nothing at the site. When the criminal law punishes that kind of newsgathering and allows no room for a proportionality assessment, it shields from scrutiny exactly the places where public interest reporting matters most.”
The written submissions can be found here.
The Statement of Facts is here.
For further information about the case, please contact Pádraig Hughes at Padraig.hughes@mediadefence.org
(Note: Media Defence was granted permission by the Court to intervene on condition that the written submissions do not comment on the facts or merits of the case and address only the general principles applicable to its determination.)
