The European court of human rights ruled against a case from three former MPs aiming to mandate a UK inquiry into Russian disinformation's impact on the Brexit vote. The court acknowledged shortcomings in the UK's initial response to allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 referendum, but determined that subsequent inquiries and legislation effectively addressed these issues. The judges noted challenges in accurately assessing the impact of disinformation on individual voters and election outcomes, and concluded that while the threat of disinformation is significant, its precise effects remain complex.
The Strasbourg court ruled that countries had a wide margin in determining how to tackle attempts at electoral interference, rejecting the case for an inquiry into Russian disinformation.
The judges noted that there were shortcomings in the UK's initial response to allegations of Russian interference, but felt subsequent measures compensated for this deficit.
The court acknowledged various inquiries and legislation, including the National Security Act 2023, as responses to allegations of electoral interference.
The court concluded that the precise impact of Russian or other interference efforts is difficult to assess, particularly regarding individual voter influence.
#russian-disinformation #brexit #electoral-interference #european-court-of-human-rights #uk-legislation
Collection
[
|
...
]