Freedom of Speech in International Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 192-212
Author(s):  
Michael Hamilton
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Domestic Law

This chapter traces the broad contours of the right to freedom of speech as it has evolved in international law, principally under Article 19(2) of the 1996 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR or ‘the Covenant’). Any speech protective principles deriving from the international jurisprudence are qualified by the following factors: the contextual contingency of the value of speech, the inherently limited reach of international scrutiny, the changing nature of the marketplace, and emerging forms of censorship. The chapter then outlines the key human rights treaty protections for freedom of speech, before further exploring the scope of the right. It examines the permissible grounds for speech restriction, highlighting two contested categories of speech—namely, incitement to hatred and glorification of terrorism—where international law not only concedes the low value of such speech, but specifically mandates its prohibition in domestic law. States that introduce broadly framed speech restrictions may claim to be acting in satisfaction of this prohibitory requirement. In consequence, the intensity of any ensuing international scrutiny will inevitably be substantially reduced.

scholarly journals Extraterritorial application of the right to life on the high sea . Commentary to the Views adopted by the Human Rights Committee of 27 January 2021, A.S., D.I., O.I. and G.D. against Italy, Communication No. 3042/2017

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bartosz Pacholski
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Rescue Operation ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right

The subject matter of this commentary, which instigates the Views of the Human Rights Committee of 27 January 2021, is the protection of one of the fundamental human rights – the right to life. The Committee, as an authority appointed to oversee compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, had to decide on the issue of Italy’s responsibility for failing to provide assistance to a boat in distress, even if the area in which the vessel was located was not within the territory of this state and other acts of international law attribute the responsibility for executing the rescue operation to a third country. According to the Committee’s views, which applied extraterritorial approach to the protection of the right to life, whenever states have the opportunity to take action for the protection of human rights they should do everything possible in a given situation to help people in need.

The Urgency of Protecting Netizen in Freedom of Speech on Social Media

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Grandis Ayuning Priyanto ◽  
Martinus Sardi
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Speak Up

Freedom of speech is a part of fundamental rights to every people. Nowadays, freedom of speech could not felt widely to all people. Freedom of speech developed until Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights assure and restrict freedom of speech. In Indonesia, since the rise of The Law of Information and Electronic Transaction, the restriction of freedom of speech become biased, many words in social media are presumably attack others. Netizen feels security to speak up is limited, such Ruslan Buton who critics and record about President Jokowi deemed as a hoax and hate speech. Even though some articles in 1945 Constitution have already protect and guarantee all people to bear the right to speak. The limitations of Freedom of speech in The Law of Information and Electronic Transaction emerge multi interpretation which the right to speak have not been correspond with the values in 1945 Constitution. To harmonize freedom of speech in Indonesia, it needs cooperation among government and people to eradicate ambiguity and fear in which already happen.By using juridical-normative method, the research aims to understand the condition of freedom of speech in Indonesia, and to understand the protection of netizen in using social media

Introduction

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clooney Amal ◽  
Webb Philippa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Preparatory Work

This introductory chapter provides an overview of the right to a fair trial. An unfair trial can be devastating to an individual defendant—removing their liberty, destroying their reputation, even taking away their life. Unfair trials are also damaging to entire societies as they are used to undermine democracy and oppress minorities. As such, the right to a fair trial is one of the most fundamental components of human rights. Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is the starting point and organising principle of the right to a fair trial, but the scope and content of the right is not always easy to discern given the multitude of international-law sources that define it. Understanding the right to a fair trial may require reference not only to its interpretation by courts, treaty bodies, rapporteurs, experts, and scholars, but also the preparatory work of the treaty and the circumstances of its conclusion.

The Economic and Political Determinants of Human (Including Health) Rights

1978 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vicente Navarro
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Power Relations ◽  
Political Power ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Individual Property ◽  
Socioeconomic Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
Fair Wages ◽  
The Right ◽  
The U.S

This paper presents an analysis and critique of the U.S. government's current emphasis on human rights; and (a) its limited focus on only some civil and political components of the original U.N. Declaration of Human Rights, and (b) its disregard for economic and social rights such as the rights to work, fair wages, health, education, and social security. The paper discusses the reasons for that limited focus and argues that, contrary to what is widely presented in the media and academe: (1) civil and political rights are highly restricted in the U.S.; (2) those rights are further restricted in the U.S. when analyzed in their social and economic dimensions; (3) civil and political rights are not independent of but rather intrinsically related to and dependent on the existence of socioeconomic rights; (4) the definition of the nature and extension of human rights in their civil, political, social, and economic dimensions is not universal, but rather depends on the pattern of economic and political power relations particular to each society; and (5) the pattern of power relations in the U.S. society and the western system of power, based on the right to individual property and its concomitant class structure and relations, is incompatible with the full realization of human rights in their economic, social, political, and civil dimensions. This paper further indicates that U.S. financial and corporate capital, through its overwhelming influence over the organs of political power in the U.S. and over international bodies and agencies, is primarily responsible for the denial of the human rights of the U.S. population and many populations throughout the world as well.

ACCIDENT AND DESIGN: RECOGNISING VICTIMS OF AGGRESSION IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-132
Author(s):  
Shane Darcy
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Future Application ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Civil And Political Rights

AbstractInternational law has not traditionally recognised individuals as victims of the crime of aggression. Recent developments may precipitate a departure from this approach. The activation of the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court over the crime of aggression opens the way for the future application of the Court's regime of victim participation and reparation in the context of prosecutions for this crime. The determination by the United Nations Human Rights Committee in General Comment No. 36 that any deprivation of life resulting from an act of aggression violates Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights serves to recognise a previously overlooked class of victims. This article explores these recent developments, by discussing their background, meaning and implications for international law and the rights of victims.

The Right to Enter One’s Own Country: The Conflict between the Jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee and the Travaux Préparatoires of Article 12(4) of the iccpr

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-123
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right

Abstract Article 12(4) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (iccpr) provides that ‘[n]o one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.’ The jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee shows that Committee members have often disagreed on the question of whether the right under Article 12(4) is reserved for citizens only or it can be claimed by non-citizens who consider the countries in which they were born or they have lived for longer periods as their own. In its earlier case law, the Committee held that Article 12(4) is applicable to nationals only. Since 1999, when General Comment No.27 was adopted, the Committee has moved towards extending the right under Article 12(4) to non-nationals. Its latest case law appears to have supported the Committee’s position that Article 12(4) is applicable to non-nationals. Central to both majority and minority decisions in which the Committee has dealt with Article 12(4), is whether the travaux préparatoires of Article 12(4) support either view. This article relies on the travaux préparatoires of Article 12(4) to argue that it does not support the view that Article 12(4) is applicable to non-nationals.

scholarly journals Roles of the Courts in New Zealand in Giving Effect to International Human Rights - with Some History

1999 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth J Keith
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Common Law ◽  
General Effect ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right ◽  
Domestic Law

The Right Honourable Sir Kenneth Keith was the fourth speaker at the NZ Institute of International Affairs Seminar. In this article he describes and reflects upon the role of courts and judges in relation to the advancement of human rights, an issue covered in K J Keith (ed) Essays on Human Rights (Sweet and Maxwell, Wellington, 1968). The article is divided into two parts. The first part discusses international lawmakers attempting to protect individual groups of people from 1648 to 1948, including religious minorities and foreign traders, slaves, aboriginal natives, victims of armed conflict, and workers. The second part discusses how from 1945 to 1948, there was a shift in international law to universal protection. The author notes that while treaties are not part of domestic law, they may have a constitutional role, be relevant in determining the common law, give content to the words of a statute, help interpret legislation which is in line with a treaty, help interpret legislation which is designed to give general effect to a treaty (but which is silent on the particular matter), and help interpret and affect the operation of legislation to which the international text has no apparent direct relation. 

How to Think about Advocacy

2020 ◽  
pp. 34-56
Author(s):  
Michelle Jurkovich
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Right To Food ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Right ◽  
Spiral Model

This chapter focuses on contemporary international anti-hunger advocacy, which describes the nature of contemporary campaigns across top international anti-hunger organizations. It introduces dominant human rights models, namely Margaret E. Keck and Kathryn Sikkink's “boomerang model” and Thomas Risse, Stephen C. Ropp, and Kathryn Sikkink's “spiral model.” It also provides an alternative model of advocacy, the “buckshot model,” which describes and explains advocacy around hunger and the right to food. The chapter identifies the hidden assumptions behind dominant human rights models and explores their limitations by using the hunger case to set up a contrast with more-often-studied civil and political rights campaigns. It reviews interviews with international anti-hunger activists that were completed by 2015, which reflected contemporary campaigns and efforts until 2014.

Socio-Economic Rights and Their Implementation: The Impact of Domestic and International Instruments

2004 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 243-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerhard Erasmus
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
Personal Liberty ◽  
Legal Remedy ◽  
Basic Quality ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
International Instruments ◽  
The Impact

Socio-economic rights are those human rights that aim to secure for all members of a particular society a basic quality of life in terms of food, water, shelter, education, health care and housing. They differ from traditional civil and political rights such as the right to equality, personal liberty, property, free speech and association. These “traditional human rights” are now found in most democratic constitutions and are, as a rule, enshrined in a Bill of Rights; which is that part of the Constitution that is normally enforced through mechanisms such as judicial review. The victims of the violation of such rights have a legal remedy. Individual freedom is a primary value underpinning civil and political rights.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document