[5] In the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, "necessary in a democratic society" is further defined as meeting a "pressing social need" and "relevant and sufficient" to a legitimate aim.
[3] When defining what constitutes a "democratic society" for the purposes of the test, the Court considers that freedom of speech is one of its foundations (hence restrictions on it must be narrow and focused).
The court also considers that "democracy does not simply mean that the views of a majority must always prevail"[3][6] and that "a balance must be achieved which ensures the fair and proper treatment of minorities and avoids any abuse of a dominant position".
It has also been invoked in cases involving state surveillance, which the court acknowledges can constitute an Article 8 violation but may be "strictly necessary for safeguarding the democratic institutions" (Klass and Others v.
[3][6] The court has also held that restrictions on obscenity and blasphemy may satisfy the requirement of being "necessary in a democratic society", something which is not disputed even by the minority of judges who disagree that such bans are compatible with the convention.