Lev Levinson Admissible Level of "Immorality": European Law and Traditional Values Lev Levinson-Expert, the Human Rights Institute (Moscow, Russia); Member, the Russian Ombudsman's Advisory Board, levlev@yandex.ru This article deals with the cases in ECHR, concerning suits appealing to the article 10 of the European Convention for Human Rights (freedom of expression). The author pays special attention to claims protesting against state intervention powered by the desire to protect morality as well as against sanctions for blasphemy One can find analysis of law enforcement practice of ECHR and fluctuations of Court's strategy (as an example author analyses "the Lautsi case"). Author concludes that the policy of the Court could be characterized as transitional, but the direction of this transition is still unclear. The Court faces two possible alternatives: either the freedom of speech will be defended in all its fullness, or will the margins of appreciation of national powers prevail; in the latter case, the national forces will control ideological, cultural and informational square under pretext of defending religion and morality. Keywords: European Court of Human Rights, freedom of speech, protection of morality, blasphemy, feelings of believers, religion, traditional values. The role of the authorities in such circumstances is not to eliminate the cause of tensions and suppress pluralism, but to monitor how competing groups tolerate each other. From the Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Sheriff v. Greece of 11 December 1999.1. De Salvia M. 1. Precedents of the European Court of Human Rights. St. Petersburg: Legal Center Press, 2004, p. 614. page 213For quite a long time and very firmly in the studies and commentaries devoted to the protection of freedom of expression by the European Court of Justice, the idea has taken root that this freedom, when confronted with religious principles and public morals, does not find protection in Strasb ... Read more