scholarly journals “To Follow the Law and Conscience”: Hard Skills and Soft Skills in the Legal Education

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 276-295
Author(s):  
Ekaterina A. Koval ◽  
Andrey A. Sychev ◽  
Natalya V. Zhadunova ◽  
Liliya Yu. Fomina
Keyword(s):  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Soft Skills ◽  
Law Students ◽  
Professional Competencies ◽  
Educational Goals ◽  
Case Method ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Pedagogical Tact ◽  
The Right

Introduction. The study is devoted to investigation of methods to integrate “hard” and “soft” skills of law students. This approach is necessary for teaching students to make decisions in situations of value and norm uncertainty, which require the integration of law and morality, general cultural and professional competencies. The public use of hate speech is chosen as an example of a value-ambiguous problem. This problem involves the search for a certain balance of public and private interests, the right to freedom of expression and protection against discrimination, insult, stigmatization, the right to respect for private and family life. Materials and Methods. 62 students of legal specialities and areas of training were involved in the case study. Case materials were structured according to the levels of educational goals in accordance with Bloom’s classic taxonomy. The case is devoted to the analysis of the controversial commentary of Savva Terentyev. Results. The use of the case-method for decision-making under conditions of value-normative uncertainty (using the example of counteracting hate speech) made it possible to integrate the general cultural and professional competencies of law students, to involve students, who do not usually participate in discussions, in active group work. However, there are limitations to the use of the case method for integrating “hard” and “soft” skills: preparation for the lesson is resource-intensive for both teacher and students; case materials quickly become obsolete and require constant updating and processing; the choice of material and its presentation in the classroom require a special pedagogical tact and a clear arrangement of axiological accents. Discussion and Conclusion. The results can be used to develop educational cases where general cultural and professional competencies of law students can be integrated, as well as to teach students how to make decisions in the face of value and norm uncertainty and to carry out personal and professional development.

Introduction

2018 ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Anushka Singh
Keyword(s):  
Free Speech ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
University Of California ◽  
American Democracy ◽  
Mob Violence ◽  
A Chain ◽  
The Right ◽  
The University ◽  
Public Lecture

On 1 February 2017 at the University of California, Berkeley, USA, mob violence erupted on campus with 1,500 protesters demanding the cancellation of a public lecture by Milo Yiannopoulos, a British author notorious for his alleged racist and anti-Islamic views.1 Consequently, the event was cancelled triggering a chain of reactions on the desirability and limits of freedom of expression within American democracy. The Left-leaning intellectuals and politicians were accused of allowing the mob violence to become a riot on campus defending it in the name of protest against racism, fascism, and social injustice. In defending the rights of the protesters to not allow ‘illiberal’ or hate speech on campus, however, many claimed that the message conveyed was that only liberals had the right to free speech....

7. Freedom of religion and expression

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
Essential Information ◽  
European Court ◽  
State Restriction ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter focuses on freedom of religion and freedom of expression, which are classified as qualified rights, and examines Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which explains the right to hold or not hold a belief as well as the right to manifest a belief. It also considers how the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) decides if there has been manifestation of belief, interpretation of Article 10 with respect to views that shock and disturb and some forms of hate speech, and state restriction of expression. The chapter concludes with a discussion of freedom of religion and expression in the UK.

11. Thought, expression, association, and assembly

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic McGoldrick
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Freedom Of Conscience ◽  
Freedom Of Association ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Common Interests ◽  
Freedom Of Thought ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Assembly

This chapter discusses the sources, scope, and limitations of the four fundamental freedoms: thought, expression, association, and assembly. Freedom of thought includes freedom of conscience, religion, and belief. Freedom of expression includes freedom of opinion and freedom of information. Freedom of association concerns the right to establish autonomous organizations through which individuals pursue common interests together. The right of assembly protects non-violent, organized, temporary gatherings in public and private, both indoors and outdoors.

scholarly journals Charlie Hebdo: Testing the Limits of Freedom of Expression

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Niaz A. Shah
Keyword(s):  
Public Space ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Muslim Community ◽  
The Public ◽  
Shared Space ◽  
The Right ◽  
Charlie Hebdo

AbstractThe right to freedom of expression is a qualified right: it allows expression that might ‘offend, shock or disturb’ but prohibits ‘insults’, ‘abusive attacks’ and ‘hate speech’. Applying the Convention test I argue that all cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, which although might offend Muslims, are an acceptable form of expression in Western democracies except cartoon number two implying the Prophet Muhammad as a ‘terrorist’ which is ‘insulting’ and ‘an abusive attack’ on the Muslim community and Islam. In the post-9/11 circumstances, it may be viewed as a vehicle for instigating hatred against the Muslim community. By critiquing the inaction of Denmark and France, I argue that failure to prosecute Jyllands-Posten and Charlie Hebdo violates Articles 9(1) of the European Convention and the Danish Criminal Code and the French Freedom of Press Act 1881. Relying on ECtHR’s jurisprudence, I argue that the values of the Convention and democracy aim to nurture a society based on tolerance, social peace, non-discrimination and broad-mindedness. The public space is a shared space and no single group – religious and non-religious – can monopolise nor intimidate it.

scholarly journals Ketika Demokrasi Menjadi Ancaman?: Kasus Jerinx dan Refleksi Kritis Bagi Pelaksanaan Demokrasi di Indonesia

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 98-107
Author(s):  
Fatih Abdulbari
Keyword(s):  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Interesting Case ◽  
Electronic Transactions ◽  
The Media ◽  
Fundamental Value ◽  
The Times ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right

The most important and fundamental value in democracy is freedom of expression. This freedom is considered a part of human rights and is the most important feature of democracy. In the times, on the one hand, the media to speak out is increasingly numerous and varied, but on the other hand there is a dilemma where this freedom is actually used to sow and spread false information or conspiracy theories without evidence. In addition, the concept of freedom of opinion has not developed much following the latest developments, so this concept is increasingly abstract because there are no clear boundaries for freedom of expression. In Indonesia, the emergence of the Law on Information and Electronic Transactions (UU ITE) is actually used as a threat to criminalize individuals whose opinions are considered to be disturbing and attack others.  The Jerinx case is a very interesting case study of how freedom of opinion has actually created a counterfactual narrative. He was convicted in 2020 for making hate speech on his social media accounts. The ITE Law which allows arrests for expressing opinions is problematic because it clearly contradicts the main principle of democracy, namely freedom of expression. This research will critically examine the Jerinx case from the perspective of democratic values to see and analyze how the right to speak and have an opinion in Indonesia. The extent to which freedom of opinion is actually facilitated is considered not to violate the rights of others, and the extent to which the democratic climate has a place in Indonesia.

scholarly journals Freedom of expression and reputation protection in the European Court of Human Rights practice.

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 39-44
Author(s):  
Andriy Kuchuk
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Clear Understanding ◽  
Human Rights Practice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right

The article is devoted to the issue of understanding freedom of expression and reputation protection by the European Court of Human Rights. New opportunities to exercise the right to freedom of expression arise and opportunities to implement the right to freedom of expression as well as the possibilities for defamation increase within a democratic and information society. It is emphasized that within a law-based state guarantees provided to the press are of particular importance, as the media should disseminate information and ideas of public interest, and the public has the right to receive such information and ideas. A clear understanding of the content of the right to freedom of expression and the right to reputation protection is the basis for resolving the issue of finding a balance between them, which designates the relevance of the study. The paper elucidates the results of the European Court of Human Rights decisions analysis under Articles 8 and 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the right to privacy and the right to freedom of expression). Emphasis is placed on the various features of these rights and the peculiarities of their implementation in different circumstances. It is pointed out that the domestic judicial system actively uses the European Court of Human Rights practice in resolving cases related to reputation protection. Attention is placed on the fact that freedom of expression does not extend to hate speech. The spread of the right to reputation protection as for defamation of family members and relatives is analyzed. Emphasis is placed on the dynamic approach of the European Court of Human Rights towards the interpretation of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Even before the beginning of 2000, the European Court of Human Rights noted that the protection of reputation does not fall under the protection of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The study describes the genesis of the positions of the European Court of Human Rights on a person’s reputation protection. It is stated that a person’s right to protection of his or her reputation is covered by Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as part of the right to respect for private life (provided that causing considerable damage to reputation if it affects a person’s private life).

17. Article 10: freedom of expression

2021 ◽  
pp. 360-389
Author(s):  
Howard Davis
Keyword(s):  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Liberal Democratic Society ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Domestic Law

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. It discusses European Convention law and relates it to domestic law under the HRA. Questions, discussion points, and thinking points help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress and knowledge can be tested by self-test questions and exam questions at the chapter end. This chapter focuses on Article 10, one of the fundamental rights acknowledged in a liberal, democratic society—freedom of expression. Article 10 is a qualified right which reflects the idea that there can be important and legitimate reasons as to why freedom of expression may need to be restricted in order to protect other important rights and freedoms. While the first paragraph of Article 10 establishes a general right to freedom of expression, its second paragraph identifies the only bases upon which the right can be restricted. Restriction of the freedom of expression is subject to scrutiny by the courts, and its necessity must be established by the state. In particular the chapter discusses human rights in the context of political speech and the impact of restraints on hate speech.

Art.30 Participation in Cultural Life, Recreation, Leisure, and Sport

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bantekas Ilias ◽  
Chow Pok Yin Stephenson ◽  
Karapapa Stavroula ◽  
Polymenopoulou Eleni
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Disabled Persons ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

This chapter examines Article 30 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). The article covers many, sometimes disparate, issues, although the underlying entitlements are accessibility and availability. One of the cornerstones of Article 30 is access to culture, one of the least studied human rights and its content remains contested. Culture is subject to several limitations, such as censorship, freedom of expression constraints, sensitivities towards religions, and hate speech. Do these limitations apply to the right of access to culture of disabled persons in the same way as they do to their non-disabled counterparts? Paragraph 3 is perhaps the most contentious of all. It suggests that existing intellectual property laws should be construed in such a way as to avoid imposing any unreasonable or discriminatory barriers against persons with disabilities to the enjoyment of their right of access to cultural materials.

scholarly journals Freedom of Expression: what lessons should we learn from US experience?

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 274-302
Author(s):  
Ronaldo Porto Macedo Junior
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Analysis ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Religious Discrimination ◽  
Religious Groups ◽  
European Model ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Right

Abstract Freedom of Expression is becoming a theme of growing importance and visibility in Brazil. Newspapers report daily legal suits against “hate speech” concerning race and religious discrimination. Many courts are also imposing high compensation damages that are challenging the “right to ridicule” in comedy shows and newspapers cartoons. The Brazilian public opinion in general tends to be sympathetic to more restrictive rules that may threaten freedom of expression in Brazil. There is nowadays in Brazil an unexpected agreement among the right wing, religious groups, and many human rights movements that support a European model of free speech. In many ways, the “Brazilian Model” based on balancing doctrine and a vague conceptualization of Human Dignity gives a lot of discretion for courts to decide the limits of freedom of expression. Court decisions based on balancing rhetoric is becoming dominant in Brazilian Constitutional court and usually try to avoid some epistemological issues concerning objectivity and moral justification. This article advocates that Brazilian interpretation of freedom expression has a lot to learn from the US model and doctrine. The US more strict and conceptual jurisprudence on this issue offers a powerful and democratic alternative to the balancing model and represents a rich conceptual analysis still unknown by Brazilian courts.

scholarly journals But names will never hurt me: Extending hate speech legislation to protect gender and sexual minorities in New Zealand

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Vanessa Haggie
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Sexual Minorities ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Minority Group ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Voice

<p>Hate speech legislation involves a fundamental conflict with the right to freedom of expression. However, it is a conflict that can be justified in a constitutional framework in which free speech is not paramount and can be balanced against other rights and freedoms. This paper discusses the concept of “hate speech” legislation, the conflict between freedom of expression and hate speech censorship, and ways in which these seemingly-incompatible concepts might be harmonised. It considers, drawing on legislation and case law from other jurisdictions, and in light of the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Act 2013, the possibility of extending such legislation to protect gender and sexual minorities in New Zealand, and suggests a potential framework for such legislative change. Any provision concerning hate speech must avoid overreaching into the realm of free expression. As a result, ‘hate speech’ should be clearly defined and narrowly focussed in scope, as words or matter which “exposes or tends to expose to hatred or contempt” the minority group at which the protection is aimed. In New Zealand’s constitutional/rights framework, this limitation on freedom of expression can be justified as reasonable and appropriate. While hate speech legislation does create a conflict with freedom of expression, to protect hate speech at the risk of perpetuating harm, discrimination, marginalisation and silencing is not appropriate. It sends the message that the voice of hate speakers is worth more than that of minorities, and undervalues the dignity and social assurance of those minority groups as valued members of society.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document