Privatansattes ytringsfrihed

Hvor offentligt ansattes ytringsfrihed har optaget såvel politikere som jurister i adskillige år, har privatansattes ytringsfrihed ikke haft samme interesse. Afhandlingen undersøger retstilstanden for privatansattes ytringsfrihed i dansk ret, og vurderer hvilke retspolitiske overvejelser, retstilstanden kan give anledning til i lyset af Danmarks menneskeretlige forpligtelser.

Afhandlingen består af fire dele. Del I introducerer forskningsspørgsmålet og forskningsspørgsmålets relevans. Der redegøres i den forbindelse for retskilderne og afhandlingens metode, som hovedsageligt er retsdogmatisk. Dernæst redegøres der for hensynene bag ytringsfriheden og en række ansættelsesretlige typekonflikter.

Afhandlingens del II har til formål at besvare afhandlingens underspørgsmål 1) om, hvordan grundrettighederne beskytter privatansattes ytringsfrihed. Spørgsmålet vurderes efter grundloven, EMRK artikel 10 og EU-retten. Det konkluderes, at grundlovens § 77 hverken direkte eller indirekte finder anvendelse i private ansættelsesrelationer. På tilsvarende vis finder EMRK artikel 10 ikke direkte anvendelse i private relationer. Der gælder dog en positiv forpligtelse for medlemsstaten til i et omfang at beskytte privatansatte mod indgreb i ytringsfriheden fra arbejdsgiveren. I EU-retten er der vedtaget en række direktiver, der sporadisk beskytter privatansattes ytringsfrihed. Chartrets artikel 11 gælder endvidere kun, når der er tale om en gennemførelse af EU-retten, ligesom bestemmelsen ikke kan påberåbes i private relationer efter dansk ret.

Afhandlingens del III har til formål at besvare afhandlingens underspørgsmål 2) om, hvordan den materielle beskyttelse af privatansattes ytringsfrihed er i dansk ret. Det konkluderes, at der gælder en sporadisk lovbeskyttelse af privatansattes ytringsfrihed, men ingen generel lovgivning. I praksis indgår det imidlertid som et hensyn i sager om opsigelse og bortvisning. Karakteren og vægten af hensynet til ytringsfriheden afhænger i vidt omfang af, hvilken lønmodtagerforpligtelse, ytringsfriheden afvejes over for. I afhandlingen undersøges retstilstanden for ytringsfriheden ved afvejning over for loyalitetspligten, tavshedspligten og decorumpligten. Derefter undersøges det i hvilket omfang, arbejdsgiveren har adgang til at fastsætte reglementer og dermed indskrænke ytringsfriheden for privatansatte.

Afhandlingens del IV har til formål at besvare underspørgsmål 3) om, hvordan den danske retstilstand for privatansattes ytringsfrihed stemmer overens med forpligtelserne efter EMRK. Det undersøges indledningsvis hvilken karakter, beskyttelsen i dansk ret har, og det konkluderes, at der er tale om en retsgrundsætning. Det konkluderes videre, at den materielle beskyttelse for 361 privatansattes ytringsfrihed ved opsigelse og bortvisning i udgangspunktet er forenelig med forpligtelserne efter EMRK artikel 10. Det er mere tvivlsomt, når det angår andre ledelsesretlige reaktioner. Derudover konkluderes det, at den danske retstilstand er uforenelig med forpligtelserne med EMRK artikel 10 – navnlig når der er tale om en opsigelse i strid med ytringsfriheden, men uden at den ansatte er omfattet af en opsigelsesbeskyttelse. Afslutningsvis konkluderes det, at der bør lovgives om privatansattes ytringsfrihed, hvis den nationale retstilstand skal stemme overens med forpligtelserne efter EMRK artikel 10, og der fremsættes i den forbindelse en række retspolitiske bemærkninger til en sådan regulering.

While the freedom of expression of public employees has captured the interest of both politicians and legal scholars for many years, the freedom of expression of private employees has not received the same attention. This thesis examines the legal status of private employees' freedom of expression in Danish law and assesses the legal and political considerations that this status may provoke in light of Denmark's human rights obligations.

The thesis is divided into four parts. Part I introduces the research question and its relevance. It outlines the legal sources and the methodology of the thesis, which is primarily doctrinal. It then discusses the considerations underlying freedom of expression and various types of employment-related conflicts.

Part II of the thesis seeks to answer subquestion 1) on how fundamental rights protect the freedom of expression of private employees. This question is examined in relation to the Danish Constitution, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and EU law. It is concluded that § 77 of the Constitution is neither directly nor indirectly applicable to private employment relationships. Similarly, Article 10 of the ECHR is not directly applicable to private relations. However, there is a positive obligation for the Member State to a certain extent to protect private employees against restrictions on their freedom of expression by their employers. In EU law, several directives sporadically protect private employees' freedom of expression. Furthermore, Article 11 of the Charter only applies in cases of implementation of EU law and cannot be invoked in private relations under Danish law.

Part III of the thesis aims to address subquestion 2) on how the substantive protection of private employees’ freedom of expression is in Danish law. It is concluded that there is sporadic legislative protection but no general legislation on the freedom of expression of private employees. However, in practice, it is considered a factor in cases of termination and dismissal. The nature and weight of the consideration for freedom of expression depend largely on the specific employee obligation being balanced against it. The thesis examines the legal status of freedom of expression in relation to the duty of loyalty, the duty of confidentiality, and the duty of decorum. It also examines the extent to which employers have the authority to establish regulations that restrict the freedom of expression of private employees.

Part IV of the thesis aims to answer subquestion 3) on how the legal status of private employees' freedom of expression in Denmark aligns with the obligations under the ECHR. Initially, it explores the character of the protection in Danish law and concludes that it constitutes a legal 363 principle. It further concludes that the material protection for private employees' freedom of expression in cases of termination and dismissal is generally consistent with the obligations under Article 10 of the ECHR. It is, however, less certain when it comes to other reactions from the employer. Additionally, it is concluded that the legal status in Denmark is inconsistent with the obligations under Article 10 of the ECHR, especially in cases where a dismissal violates the employees’ freedom of expression, but the employee is not covered by protection against unfair dismissal. Finally, it is concluded that legislation on private employees' freedom of expression is necessary to align Danish law with the obligations under Article 10 of the ECHR, and several legal and political recommendations are presented for such regulation.