Pryanishnikov v Russia represents the first occasion on which anyone within the European Court of Human Rights has addressed the matter of gender equality and (extreme) pornography to any degree of significance. This case analysis explores Judge Pinto’s lengthy Concurring Opinion thereon, which aimed to set down principled guidelines for the Court’s approach to pornography proscription on the basis of women’s rights interests. This analysis focuses on two arguments made within the Opinion: namely, that the Court’s current, "permissive" approach to pornography conflicts with international norms, and that Member States have a positive obligation to prohibit "extreme" pornography. It finds that these conclusions are overstated. By breaking down and rebuilding the Opinion’s precepts, this analysis seeks to provide the groundwork upon which a more robust, human-rights based discussion of the impact of (extreme) pornography, and regulatory responses thereto, can take place.
Beattie, T. (2019). Pryanishnikov v Russia (App. No.25047/05), judgment of 10 September 2019—Setting the Foundations for Human Rights Discourse on Pornography. European Human Rights Law Review, 6, 654-662