Ingabire v. Rwanda (Afr. Ct. H.P.R.)

2018 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 373-404
Author(s):  
Yakaré-Oulé (Nani) Jansen Reventlow
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Political Speech ◽  
The Right

On November 24, 2017, the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights (Court) handed down its decision on the merits in the case of Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza v. Rwanda. The case further elucidates the Court's standards on the right to a fair trial and the right to freedom of expression, in particular the latitude that should be given to political speech.

Sedition in Liberal Democracies

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anushka Singh
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Political Speech ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Indian Experience ◽  
Judicial Discourse ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right

Liberal democracies claim to give constitutional and legal protection of varying degrees to the right to free speech of which political speech and the right to dissent are extensions. Within the right to freedom of expression, however, some category of speeches do not enjoy protection as they are believed to be ‘injurious’ to society. One such unprotected form of political speech is sedition which is criminalized for the repercussions it may have on the authority of the government and the state. The cases registered in India in recent months under the law against sedition show that the law in its wide and diverse deployment was used against agitators in a community-based pro-reservation movement, a group of university students for their alleged ‘anti-national’ statements, anti-liquor activists, to name a few. Set against its contemporary use, this book has used sedition as a lens to probe the fate of political speech in liberal democracies. The work is done in a comparative framework keeping the Indian experience as its focus, bringing in inferences from England, USA, and Australia to intervene and contribute to the debates on the concept of sedition within liberal democracies at large. On the basis of an analytical enquiry into the judicial discourse around sedition, the text of the sedition laws, their political uses, their quotidian existence, and their entanglement with the counter-terror legislations, the book theorizes upon the life of the law within liberal democracies.

scholarly journals GUARANTEE OF THE RIGHT TO SILENCE AND OF THE RIGHT NOT TO CONTRIBUTE TO ONE’S OWN INCRIMINATION IN ROMANIAN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (83) ◽  
pp. 25
Author(s):  
Carmen Adriana Domocos
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Right To Silence ◽  
The Right

The Romanian legislation establishes in the new penal procedure law the right to silence and the right of non-incrimination of the defendant in the criminal trial.The right to silence (to remain silent) is the implicit procedural guarantee of the right to a fair trial, which results from the case law of the European Court of Justice within the meaning of Article 6 paragraph 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, according to which judicial authorities cannot oblige a perpetrator (suspected of having committed a criminal offence), a suspect or a defendant to make statements, while having, however, a limited power to draw conclusions against them, from their refusal to make statements.Therefore, the right to silence involves not only the right not to testify against oneself, but also the right of the suspect or defendant not to incriminate oneself. The suspect or defendant cannot be compelled to assist in the production of evidence and cannot be sanctioned for failing to provide certain documents or other evidence. Obligation to testify against personal will, under the constraint of a fine or any other form of coercion constitutes an interference with the negative aspect of the right to freedom of expression which must be necessary in a democratic Romanian society.The right not to contribute to one’s own incrimination (the privilege against self-incrimination) is the implicit procedural guarantee of the right to a fair trial, which results from the case law of the European Court of Justice within the meaning of Article 6 paragraph 1 of the European Convention, according to which judicial bodies or any other state authority cannot oblige a perpetrator (suspected of having committed a criminal offence), a suspect, a defendant or a witness to cooperate by providing evidence which might incriminate him or which could constitute the basis for a new criminal charge. It is essential to clarify certain issues as far as this right is concerned.

scholarly journals Guilty of using Google: Reconciling the right to a fair trial with the right to freedom of expression and addressing juror misconduct in the age of social media

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Emma Jane Smith
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Communications Technology ◽  
Independent Research ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

<p>It is widely accepted that the right to a fair trial is one of the most important guarantees contained within our legal system. That right is undermined when a jury member conducts his or her own research into a case. This type of juror misconduct constitutes contempt of court. In the light of the fact that the law of contempt is currently the subject of review in a number of jurisdictions, this paper considers how the law of contempt could be adapted to better manage the risk of jurors undertaking independent research. After a discussion of the current law and some problems with it, particularly those created by modern communications technology, this paper considers a number of possible reform options. It makes two broad recommendations. First, that the law should focus relatively more on preventing jurors undertaking their own research than on limiting publication. Second, that independent research by jurors should be the subject of statutory criminalisation, and a range of measures should be adopted to increase jurors’ understanding of the importance of not going outside the evidence before them and to minimize any incentives for jurors to conduct their own research.</p>

4. Overriding Objective and Human Rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 32-47
Author(s):  
Stuart Sime
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Civil Litigation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Right

This chapter discusses the sources of procedural law, the general principles relevant to civil procedure established by the overriding objective, the European Convention on Human Rights, and some rules on how the courts approach construing the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR). The CPR and practice directions (PDs) are the procedural rules governing civil proceedings. The most important rule is the ‘overriding objective’ of dealing with claims justly and at proportionate cost. The most important Convention rights in civil litigation are the right to a fair trial, the right to respect for private and family life, and the right to freedom of expression.

4. Overriding Objective and Human Rights

2019 ◽  
pp. 32-47
Author(s):  
Stuart Sime
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Civil Litigation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Right

This chapter discusses the sources of procedural law, the general principles relevant to civil procedure established by the overriding objective, the European Convention on Human Rights, and some rules on how the courts approach construing the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR). The CPR and practice directions (PDs) are the procedural rules governing civil proceedings. The most important rule is the ‘overriding objective’ of dealing with claims justly and at proportionate cost. The most important Convention rights in civil litigation are the right to a fair trial, the right to respect for private and family life, and the right to freedom of expression.

4. Overriding Objective and Human Rights

2020 ◽  
pp. 32-47
Author(s):  
Stuart Sime
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Civil Litigation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Right

This chapter discusses the sources of procedural law, the general principles relevant to civil procedure established by the overriding objective, the European Convention on Human Rights, and some rules on how the courts approach construing the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR). The CPR and practice directions (PDs) are the procedural rules governing civil proceedings. The most important rule is the ‘overriding objective’ of dealing with claims justly and at proportionate cost. The most important Convention rights in civil litigation are the right to a fair trial, the right to respect for private and family life, and the right to freedom of expression.

4. Overriding Objective and Human Rights

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart Sime
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Civil Litigation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Right

This chapter discusses the sources of procedural law, the general principles relevant to civil procedure established by the overriding objective, the European Convention on Human Rights, and some rules on how the courts approach construing the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR). The CPR and practice directions (PDs) are the procedural rules governing civil proceedings. The most important rule is the ‘overriding objective’ of dealing with claims justly and at proportionate cost. The most important Convention rights in civil litigation are the right to a fair trial, the right to respect for private and family life, and the right to freedom of expression.

5. Deprivations of life and liberty

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Clapham
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Legal Restrictions ◽  
The Right ◽  
Association Property

‘Deprivations of life and liberty’ considers the rights to life and liberty, which may be limited through legal restrictions designed to protect a defined legitimate objective. The human rights approach starts from a presumption that we all have rights to liberty, freedom of expression, belief, assembly, association, property, and fair trial. Any restriction on these rights has to be justified as proportionate to the aims pursued by the restriction according to a four-stage schema developed in human rights law. Is the right to life absolute? When is the detention of an individual lawful?

4. Overriding objective and human rights

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart Sime
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Civil Litigation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Right

This chapter discusses the sources of procedural law, the general principles relevant to civil procedure established by the overriding objective, the European Convention on Human Rights, and some rules on how the courts approach construing the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR). The CPR and practice directions (PDs) are the procedural rules governing civil proceedings. The most important rule is the ‘overriding objective’ of dealing with claims justly and at proportionate cost. The most important Convention rights in civil litigation are the right to a fair trial, the right to respect for private and family life, and the right to freedom of expression.

scholarly journals Challenges to the sub judice rule in South Africa

2014 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kobus Van Rooyen
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Students ◽  
South African ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
South Africans ◽  
The Bible ◽  
The Media ◽  
Entire Career ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Right

As a lawyer, it is a privilege to contribute to this Festschrift in honour of Professor Doctor Johan Buitendag. His entire career has been a quest for the truth. In the process, he has fearlessly rejected political agendas based on the Bible, and has inspired countless students in their quest to serve God in a practical and humane manner. His published research as well as the output of his doctoral students, both present and past, bear witness to a life dedicated to the search for knowledge in the service of God. He has also assisted substantially in placing South African theological research on the international map. In a sense, this article which deals with the protection of the right to a fair trial of an accused, also acknowledges Johan Buitendag’s quest for justice for all South Africans, whatever their creed, gender, race or standing. The subject of my article demonstrates my own quest to promote the constitutional right of an accused to a fair trial, a right that should not be subject to inordinate pressure by the media, and which gives priority to the right of an accused to be presumed innocent: an accused who may frequently suffer loneliness and a sense of rejection. Related to that it is, of course, always important to bear in mind that freedom of expression is at the heart of our democracy. A balance has, accordingly, to be struck between the competing rights.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document