Islamic Political Identity in Turkey by M. Hakan Yavuz, and: Questioning Secularism: Islam, Sovereignty, and the Rule of Law in Modern Egypt by Hussein Ali Agrama, and: Formations of the Secular: Christianity, Islam, Modernity by Talal Asad, and: Is Critique Secular?: Blasphemy, Injury, and Free Speech by Talal Asad et al.

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 691-698
Author(s):  
Zouhair Ghazzal
2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 477-504
Author(s):  
Sunny Kumar

This article critically evaluates the characterisation of sedition law as colonial by analysing the arguments made by J. F. Stephen in opposing such a claim. While Stephen obfuscated the close links between the sedition law and the requirements of colonial governance, he made a persuasive case for how the sedition law was completely consistent with British ideas of liberty, utility, and the rule of law. Stephen’s arguments about legitimate limits to political liberties, particularly his critique of J. S. Mill in this regard, offer us an opportunity to question the presumed antithesis between colonial and metropolitan jurisprudence and trace their shared origins in British political thought. To that end, with Stephen as an interlocutor, this article critically analyses themes such as the defence of empire, colonialism, and the idea of improvement within a wider set of writings by British political philosophers, to arrive at an alternative understanding of British political liberalism. My article concludes that rather than ‘colonial difference’, the constitutive relation between sedition law and liberal jurisprudence better explains the prevalence of similar authoritarian laws within democratic regimes across the globe.


1970 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 592-593
Author(s):  
Norman Anderson

Author(s):  
Martha C. Nussbaum

The distinction between protected freedom of speech and civil disobedience on campus is often misunderstood. Drawing on the work of John Rawls and Martin Luther King, Jr., this chapter gives an account of civil disobedience that focuses on the protester’s willingness to accept a legal punishment, thereby showing respect for the rule of law. It is wrong for this conduct to be confused with protected speech, which, by definition, should not be penalized. A close discussion is provided of a variety of examples.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  

The world is becoming more authoritarian as autocratic regimes become even more brazen in their repression and many democratic governments suffer from backsliding by adopting their tactics of restricting free speech and weakening the rule of law, exacerbated by what threatens to become a "new normal" of Covid-19 restrictions. Over a quarter of the world's population now live under democratically backsliding governments, including some of the world's largest democracies, such as Brazil, India and three EU members - Hungary, Poland, and Slovenia. Together with those living in non-democratic regimes, they make up more than two-thirds of the world's population.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document