scholarly journals Freedom of thought in Europe: do advances in ‘brain-reading’ technology call for revision?

Author(s):  
Sjors Ligthart

Abstract Since advances in brain-reading technology are changing traditional epistemic boundaries of the mind, yielding information from the brain that enables to draw inferences about particular mental states of individuals, the sustainability of the present framework of European human rights has been called into question. More specifically, it has been argued that in order to provide adequate human rights protection from non-consensual brain-reading, the right to freedom of thought should be revised, making it ‘fit for the future’ again. From the perspective of criminal justice, the present paper examines whether such a revision is necessary within the European legal context. It argues that under its current understanding, the right to freedom of thought would probably not cover the employment of most brain-reading applications in criminal justice. By contrast, the right to freedom of (non-)expression will provide legal protection in this regard and, at the same time, will also allow for certain exceptions. Hence, instead of revising the absolute right to freedom of thought, a legal approach tailored to non-consensual brain-reading could be developed under the already existing right not to convey information, ideas, and opinions as guaranteed under the freedom of (non-)expression. This might need to re-interpret the right to freedom of expression, rather than the right to freedom of thought.

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 290
Author(s):  
Anbar Jayadi

This article reviews the interpretation of the Constitutional Court (the Court) on the Article 28J paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution by looking into the rulings related to the Information and Electronic Transaction Law. These rulings are chosen because, in those rulings, tensions between individual and public interest are apparent. For example, the tension between the right to privacy and freedom of expression, and the tensions between freedom of expression and public order. The rulings that will be studied in this writing are Ruling No. 50/PUU-VI/2008, Ruling No. 2/PUU-VII/2009, Ruling No. 5/PUU-VIII/2010, Ruling No. 52/PUU-XI/2013, and Ruling No. 20/PUU-XIV/2016. In studying those rulings, this article use a legal method namely the interpretation of arguments, e.g. what are the arguments provided by the claimants in the case in relation to the Article 28J paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution and how does the Court responds to such arguments. Additionally, this writing will also compare the rulings to each other to portray the “variety” of interpretation by the Court over the time. Furthermore, this article will compare the Article 28J paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution and the Court’s interpretation of it to other standards of limitation in other human rights instruments such as European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in order to depict what are the distinctive features of limitation of rights in Indonesian regime in comparison to other regimes. Last but not least, this article analyze what are the lesson learned from studying the Court’s interpretation and the possible consequence of such interpretation to the human rights protection in Indonesia.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 245-270
Author(s):  
Cláudio de Oliveira Santos Colnago ◽  
Bethany Shiner

Abstract The right to freedom of thought is guaranteed by Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights, yet current jurisprudence interprets the right as a mere dimension of freedom of expression, also protected by Article 13. Contemporary neurotechnology research presents the possibility for human thoughts to be tracked, recorded, analysed and predicted. This applies pressure upon the Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ current understanding of the right to freedom of thought. Firstly, this paper will examine how Article 13 has been interpreted by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights at different stages of its jurisprudence. Secondly, by considering both technological advances and the other rights guaranteed by the Convention, this paper argues for an evolution in the interpretation of Article 13 whereby the right to freedom of thought is understood as a distinct right, separate from freedom of expression. Finally, this paper proposes that the positive duty to secure Convention rights requires States to enact preventative legislation and regulations. Existing bioethics principles should be drawn upon to inform human rights-compliant laws and regulations that require the architectural design of technologies to limit the potential to infringe upon freedom of thought.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 27-30
Author(s):  
Olga Yu. Sitkova ◽  

The article analyzes the norms of international acts in the field of human rights protection concerning the right to access information. The author of the article hypothesizes that the legal mechanism, which includes measures of coordinated interaction between the family and the state, best contributes to the implementation of measures to protect children from harmful information, combined with the preservation of the child’s right to access information. Within the framework of this direction, the article reveals the legal nature of the child’s right to access information. The article analyzes the provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and a number of other international acts in this area. The practice of the ECHR in cases related to the right to freedom of expression has been generalized, which made it possible to determine the legal essence of this right in the context of the provisions of the main international acts on the protection of human rights


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 186
Author(s):  
Agus Suntoro ◽  
Nurrahman Aji Utomo ◽  
Sapto Hermawan

Tapping in a human rights perspective is a form of limitation of the right to privacy. As an effort to guarantee human rights protection, tapping as a part of The Interception of Communication Bill arrangements must be following the principles of human rights restrictions. Some of the anomalies in The Interception of Communication Bill appear in vague forms and open up the broad ways of potential violations of individual rights. For this reason, the principles of legality and prudence as a form of control over government actions need to offset the urgency of tapping. Data collection methods use discussions and interviews to enrich and test secondary data findings. This research stipulates that The Interception of Communication Bill use tapping as an induced instrument in criminal law enforcement. At the same time, tapping is regulated regardless of the readiness of the legal apparatus; this naturally raises technical problems in the matter of implementation and opens the door to abuse of authority. Furthermore, based on the need for comprehensive regulation, it is necessary to look at a comprehensive regulatory scheme in the legal system. The functional control that is in line with the tapping mechanism needs to look at the character of the Indonesian criminal justice system.


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. 69
Author(s):  
Kamila Danilovna Shaibakova

The article shed light on a problem of freedom of expression through Online Education. Nowadays, the intermediaries such as Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc. play crucial role in educating people. Their policies in addition to the governmental regulations could seriously affect the human rights. The extraterritoriality and non-state actor status of transnational companies are also problems when considering violation of human rights as legally transnational corporations cannot violate rights as non-state actors and have no obligation towards people. In addition, fake news and trolley factories became a true problem that claimed to be able to affect even elections. Moreover, they could affect the right to know and receive information which constitutes a part of the general right to freedom of expression. However, as recent examples show, social media platforms knowingly keep fake information despite the public announcement of human rights commitments. In addition, while claiming the dedication to the human rights protection, business still more interested in profit. 


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mkhululi Nyathi ◽  
Matshobana Ncube

November 2017 saw the Zimbabwean Defence Forces executing a military coup against Mr Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe's long-serving President. The military sought to justify the coup on the basis that there were divisions in the party in government - ZANU-PF - and that it was stepping in to protect what it called the gains of the liberation struggle. The military demanded, among other things, the reinstatement of those ZANU-PF party members who had been removed from their government and party positions. By brazenly involving itself in politics, let alone aligning itself with a political party, the military violated a number of constitutional provisions that prohibit the involvement of the security services in politics. Several individual freedoms and liberties, including the right to liberty, freedom of expression, freedom of movement and the right to security and freedom from torture, were violated during the coup. There are also allegations that there was loss of life directly linked to the coup. In effecting the coup, the military immobilised the police service and arrogated to itself the role of civilian policing, including the setting up of roadblocks on major roads and arresting and detaining those it identified as 'criminal elements'. The Zimbabwean Defence Forces have a long history of serious human rights violations, including politically-related torture and murder. They also stand accused of chronic involvement in politics, including the unleashing of violence during elections on behalf of ZANU-PF. Therefore, there is no hope that human rights protection and promotion will be on the agenda of the post-coup government - itself consisting of the main coup leaders and most of the ministers that served in the repressive Mugabe government. There is a need to establish mechanisms to ensure that those responsible for the coup and its attendant human rights violations and crimes are brought to account.


2021 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 7-26
Author(s):  
Alicja Jaskiernia

Information pollution in a digitally connected and increasingly polarized world, the spread of disinformation campaigns aimed at shaping public opinion, trends of foreign electoral interference and manipulation, as well as abusive behaviour and the intensification of hate speech on the internet and social media are the phenomenon which concern international public opinion. These all represent a challenge for democracy, and in particular for the electoral processes affecting the right to freedom of expression, including the right to receive information, and the right to free elections. It is a growing international effort to deal with these problems. Among international organizations engaged to seek solutions is the Council of Europe (CoE). The author analyses CoE’s instruments, legally binding (as European Convention on Human Rights), as well of the character of “soft law”, especially resolution of the CoE’s Parliamentary Assembly 2326 (2020) Democracy hacked? How to respond? She exposes the need for better cooperation of international organizations and states’ authorities in this matter.


Author(s):  
Guido Raimondi

This article comments on four important judgments given by the European Court of Human Rights in 2016. Al-Dulimi v. Switzerland addresses the issue of how, in the context of sanctions regimes created by the UN Security Council, European states should reconcile their obligations under the UN Charter with their obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights to respect the fundamentals of European public order. Baka v. Hungary concerns the separation of powers and judicial independence, in particular the need for procedural safeguards to protect judges against unjustified removal from office and to protect their legitimate exercise of freedom of expression. Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary is a judgment on the interpretation of the Convention, featuring a review of the “living instrument” approach. Avotiņš v. Latvia addresses the principle of mutual trust within the EU legal order and the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the Convention.


Author(s):  
Allan Hepburn

In the 1940s and 1950s, Britain was relatively uniform in terms of race and religion. The majority of Britons adhered to the Church of England, although Anglo-Catholic leanings—the last gasp of the Oxford Movement—prompted some people to convert to Roman Catholicism. Although the secularization thesis has had a tenacious grip on twentieth-century literary studies, it does not account for the flare-up of interest in religion in mid-century Britain. The ecumenical movement, which began in the 1930s in Europe, went into suspension during the war, and returned with vigour after 1945, advocated international collaboration among Christian denominations and consequently overlapped with the promotion of human rights, especially the defence of freedom of worship, the right to privacy, freedom of conscience, and freedom of expression.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document