"Pealtnägija" reported that it turns out that Holm is Estonia's "most insulted" person, if the basis for such a title is taken as the number of defamation suits she has brought to the courts.

However, after multiple successes in court, Holm, 66 and now retired, lost a case in summer this year which may have left her in the red financially.

The root of the attacks on Holm was an article she wrote for Tartu Postimees in 2018 on the topic of Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE), as provided to children. Holm gave an overview on the principles of CSE for preschoolers.

This attracted not only criticism online but also even abuse, particularly on conservative platforms. Holm's 30 cases so far had brought results "Pealtnägija" called surprising.

Tuesday, October 9, 2018 was a watershed day for Holm. On that day, her opinion piece appeared in Tartu Postimees. Studying in Finland at the time, Holm outlined how CSE could also start as early as kindergarten age in Estonia.

The main rationale for doing so, as advanced by European child protection groups, who generally recommend CSE, is to protect children from abuse.

An official textbook for teachers on CSE for preschool children has been published while Holm herself founded a nationwide support group network for adults abused in. The group is regularly attended by 85 people, she says.

However, Holm was not always met with as open a mind as that. Facebook group EKRE Sõprade Klubi ("Friends of EKRE club") was one forum where the mud was slung.

Several high profile online defamation cases have been heard in Estonia

Back in 2018, legal precedent on internet "trolling" was only being established in Estonia. This was the same year actress Marika Korolev achieved a landmark victory over internet trolls; Holm hired the same law firm, Emerald Legal, that had represented Korolev.

Other high-profile online defamation cases to have been handled by Emerald include those taken by socialite Brigitte Susanne Hunt against dozens of defendants, with the difference being Hunt was already a public figure, whereas Holm was not, until she took up the CSE torch in Estonia at least.

Since abusers often hid behind a cloak of anonymity, identifying them was a long and arduous process. The first stage was to get court permission for the names behind IP addresses to be obtained from internet service providers; from the end of 2019, cease and desist orders began to be sent out. Neither Holm nor her representatives can remember how many of these were issued, they say, though note that the figure stretches into "dozens and dozens."

An Emerald Legal lawyer denied defamation suits are motivated by financial gain either for themselves or for their clients, though it has to be said the firm has clearly made a living in this area of the law, "Pealtnägija" reported.

This is to the extent that the law firm operates a separate dedicated website which states at the time of writing they had already dealt with 124 cases, winning €134,985 in compensation.

The site also provides instructions on how to file a defamation suit.

Lawyer: Holm's legal representatives will make more from the cases than she does

Lawyer Õnneli Matt-Tohter unsuccessfully defended two individuals being sued by Holm. In the end, Holm's lawyers earned much more from the proceedings than she did, Matt-Tohter noted. Her most recent case, over the summer, resulted in a loss for Holm also.

Holm's win-loss ratio is 28:2 out of the 30 cases brought, with three still being processed.

Analysis of the 28 cases Holm won shows that courts found 10 times that use of the term "pervert" and at least seven times the word "pedophile" (Estonian: "pedofiil") merited punishment.

However, in the most recent case heard, the ruling went the other way on the term "pervert," bringing the streak to an end.

The defendant on that case, one Ege Maas, who resides in Finland, had posted with reference to the 2018 article, that "Perverts rule; negative emoticon; dislike; three exclamation marks."

Pealtnägija reached out to Maas, who declined to comment, meaning the following was drawn from court materials: Initially, Maas claimed that he was not the author of that particular statement; subsequently he argued the matter should be resolved in Finland, where he resides permanently. He also argued that since the group is a semi-private forum, his post's reach would have been modest, until finally stating that the phrase in question had not been intended for Holm.

The entire process lasted five years, with the court rejecting all of Maas' defenses, though finding his comment did not merit a penalty.

Court: Defendant's words 'unacceptable but not punishable'

The second-tier circuit court sent Pealtnägija the following written statement: "While the defendant's impolite choice of words regarding the plaintiff is unacceptable, this nevertheless does not give grounds for compensation. /…/ The plaintiff, as a person with professional training, had to take into account the eventuality that handling topics related to sexuality in a public outlet could provoke disagreements and criticism. /…/ In the opinion of the circuit court, the criticism published did not cause as much damage to the plaintiff's mental health or life arrangements as the suit claims."

Just how emotive and complex the issue can be is evidenced by the fact that the two lawyers, Sarv and Matt-Tohter, have themselves been to court over insults between themselves.

Sarv was ultimately expelled from the bar due to professional ethics concerns.
At the same time, one lawyer familiar with several of the cases identified a noticeable shift in recent years for monetary compensation to be less easily awarded for online insults, though the courts themselves have not confirmed this.

Holm's battles have at least had the effect of cleaning up a number of online comments sections and may even have helped establish the boundaries of freedom of speech which users can voluntarily adhere to.

However, Holm is, as noted, now running in the red, since she has to bear the legal costs from the last loss in summer, which "Pealtnägija" estimated as running into the thousands of euros given how long the case lasted.

The UN's global guidance states that CSE can be started at age five, when formal education typically begins, with a view to the lifelong process evolving as the student matures. Proponents say CSE informs children and young people about their rights, making them less vulnerable to abuse, giving them an awareness of what to do in such cases. CSE also redresses gender imbalances and related issues such as gender violence. The UN estimates that 18 percent, or almost 1 in 5 girls worldwide, have experienced child sexual abuse at some point.

Opponents of CSE at least at an early age argue that it violates parental rights to educate their children on sexual matters, including in line with religious and cultural values. Some critics fear CSE could inappropriately sexualize children and encourage too-early sexual activity.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!