The European Court of Human Rights has issued another ruling against the Government of Azerbaijan.

The decision concerns an application filed by journalist Ramin Jabrayilzada (Deko), who is currently in prison, regarding freedom of information.

Ramin Jabrayilzada (Deko) was detained on December 6, 2024, in connection with the “Meydan TV case.”

 He was initially charged under Article 206.3.2 of the Criminal Code (smuggling committed by a group of persons acting in collusion), and a court ordered his pretrial detention.

On August 28, 2025, the charges in the “Meydan TV case” were increased. Currently, 12 people arrested in this case are being charged under seven different articles of the Criminal Code.

In 2012, Jabrayilzada sent a request for information to the Presidential Administration, asking for the following data:

• A list of well-known individuals — artists, athletes, and officials — who had been granted apartments by presidential decrees;
• The financial sources for these apartments;
• Whether the state owned any other housing funds and whether the Baku City Executive Authority had any powers over those funds.

The Presidential Administration did not respond to the journalist’s request.
Jabrayilzada therefore filed a lawsuit, but the domestic courts rejected his claim.
After that, he appealed to the European Court of Human Rights.

In its judgment, the European Court stated that the journalist was fulfilling the function of a “public watchdog” and that the requested information was necessary for his professional activities.
The Court further noted that the information sought related to an issue of significant public interest, namely the distribution of state-funded apartments to citizens.

In this case, the Presidential Administration neither determined who held the information, nor forwarded the request to the relevant authority, nor responded to the applicant at all.
The domestic courts failed to address this inaction and merely stated that the journalist had “applied to the wrong authority.”

The Court concluded that the behavior of the Presidential Administration was “not prescribed by law” and constituted an interference with the journalist’s freedom of information.
Accordingly, the European Court found a violation of Articles 10 (freedom of expression) and 13 (right to an effective remedy) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Court also noted that the mere finding of a violation in this case was sufficient compensation for any moral damage the applicant might have suffered, and therefore no monetary compensation was awarded.