Brigitte Bardot, Animal Activism, and Freedom of Expression in France
Abstract
This article examines the historical evolution of freedom of expression in France, from its revolutionary origins in the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen to its contemporary configuration within the constitutional bloc, the 1881 Press Law, and subsequent anti-racism legislation. Using the historic-evolutionary legal method, the study analyzes how the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and the French Constitutional Council has shaped standards of proportionality, necessity, and responsibility to balance robust public debate with the prohibition of discriminatory speech. The analysis culminates in the Brigitte Bardot case, which illustrates ongoing tensions between animal-rights activism, social criticism, and human dignity. The article concludes that the contemporary French model affirms a strong yet responsibility-oriented freedom of expression grounded in pluralism, equality, and the protection of vulnerable groups.
References
BJØRSTAD, Sigve Soldal. Liberté d’expression et internet. Institut d’Études Politiques de Paris, 2000. Disponível em: https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/. Acesso em: 15 dez. 2021.
CLAYTON, Richard; TOMLINSON, Hugh. The Law of Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY – Global Freedom of Expression. Handyside v. United Kingdom (case analysis), 2021. Disponível em: https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/. Acesso em: 12 dez. 2021.
CONSELHO DA EUROPA. Convenção Europeia dos Direitos do Homem (art. 10). Estrasburgo: ECHR, 1950 (com emendas). Disponível em: https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/Convention_ENG. Acesso em: 19 jan. 2026.
COSTA, J.-P. Le principe de proportionnalité dans la jurisprudence du Conseil d’État. AJDA, 1988, p. 434.
ECHR – European Court of Human Rights. Handyside v. United Kingdom, no. 5493/72, 1976. HUDOC: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-57499.
ECHR – European Court of Human Rights. Steel and Others v. United Kingdom, 1998; Hashman and Harrup v. United Kingdom, 1999; Steel and Morris v. United Kingdom, 2005. HUDOC: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
FENWICK, Helen; PHILLIPSON, Gavin. Media Freedom under the Human Rights Act. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
FRANÇA. Déclaration des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen (1789). Disponível em: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/. Acesso em: 18 dez. 2021.
FRANÇA. Loi du 29 juillet 1881 sur la liberté de la presse. Paris: Légifrance. Disponível em: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/LEGITEXT000006070722. Acesso em: 19 jan. 2026.
FRANÇA. Loi n° 72-546 du 1er juillet 1972 relative à la lutte contre le racisme (Loi Pleven). Disponível em: https://enseignants.lumni.fr/fiche-media/00000001774/la-loi-gayssot-reprimant-le-racisme-et-l-antisemitisme.html. Acesso em: 19 jan. 2026.
FRANÇA. Loi n° 90-615 du 13 juillet 1990 (Loi Gayssot). Paris: Légifrance. Disponível em: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/JORFTEXT000000532990. Acesso em: 19 jan. 2026.
FRANÇA. Conseil constitutionnel. Decisões sobre pluralismo e comunicação: n° 93-333 DC (1994); n° 2004-497 DC (2004); n° 2019-811 QPC (2019). Disponível em: https://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/. Acesso em: 18 dez. 2021.
GÓESEL‑LE BIHAN, V. “Le contrôle de proportionnalité exercé par le Conseil constitutionnel: présentation générale.” Les Petites Affiches, n. 46, 5 mar. 2009, p. 62.
GORDILHO, Heron. Liberdade de expressão nas redes sociais: um estudo de caso nos tribunais constitucionais do Brasil e Alemanha. In: Direito cibernético, liberdade de expressão e proteção de dados II, 2023, Belo Horizonte. CONPEDI, 2023. v. 1.Disponível em : https://site.conpedi.org.br/publicacoes/s5y6p2k5/63309re3/87b37LBP2206JVEB.pdf
HARRIS, David; O’BOYLE, Michael; WARBRICK, Colin. Law of the European Convention on Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.
HOTTELIER, Michel; MCGREGOR, Eleanor. La liberté d’expression: regards croisés sur ses sources, son contenu et ses fonctions. Cahiers de la recherche sur les droits fondamentaux, n. 8, 2010, p. 11‑26. DOI: 10.4000/crdf.6122.
LE FIGARO/AFP. Brigitte Bardot condamnée à 20 000 euros d’amende pour injures publiques envers les Réunionnais. 4 nov. 2021. Disponível em: https://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/brigitte-bardot-condamnee-a-20-000-euros-d-amende-pour-injures-publiques-envers-les-reunionnais-20211104. Acesso em: 19 jan. 2026.
LE POURHIET, Anne‑Marie. L’encadrement juridique de la liberté d’expression en France (conferência). 2015. Disponível em: http://www.regioneurope-apf.eu/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/2015.09.24-Lencadrement-juridique-de-la-libert%C3%A9-dexpression-en-France-Intervention-de-Le-Pourhiet.pdf. Acesso em: 15 dez. 2021.
MARGUÉNAUD, Jean‑Pierre. Le droit à la liberté d’expression des militants écologistes. Dalloz, 2007. Disponível em: https://actu.dalloz-etudiant.fr/fileadmin/actualites/pdfs/D2007-1704.pdf. Acesso em: 15 dez. 2021.
MARGUÉNAUD, Jean‑Pierre. “Une victoire historique pour la liberté d’expression des défenseurs des animaux: VgT c. Suisse (Grande Chambre).” Revue Semestrielle de Droit Animalier, n. 1, 2009, p. 21.
MENDES, Elias Suzano. O Conselho Constitucional Francês e a Liberdade de Expressão. Brasília: IDP, 2024 (Dissertação de Mestrado).
MIDI LIBRE. La ville de Béziers répond à la campagne d’affichage anti‑corrida de la Fondation Brigitte Bardot. 30 jul. 2021. Disponível em: https://www.midilibre.fr/2021/07/29/la-ville-de-beziers-repond-a-la-campagne-daffichage-anti-corrida-de-la-fondation-brigitte-bardot-9701925.php. Acesso em: 19 jan. 2026.
ROBERTSON, Geoffrey; NICOL, Andrew. Media Law. London: Penguin Books, 1992.
XYNOPOULOS, G. “Proportionnalité.” In: ALLAND, D.; RIALS, S. (dir.). Dictionnaire de la culture juridique. Paris: PUF, 2003, p. 1251.
