scholarly journals How can the law in England and Wales be reformed in order to regulate offensive online communications with respect to the right of freedom of expression?

Author(s):  
Estelle Chambers ◽  
Laura Carr ◽  
Charlotte Bushby ◽  
Rebecca Everson ◽  
Sarah Curran ◽  
...  

The evolution of social media in recent years has significantly changed the way society interacts and engages with each other. Research has shown that there has been a 21% increase in social media usage by UK adults from 2011 to 2017. This drastic shift regarding the way we communicate can be said to bring many benefits; however, it can also impose serious legal issues. Such legal issues include ‘revenge porn’, online blackmail and ‘trolling’. For the purpose of this investigation, the main focus of the research will be on the area of offensive online communications.The investigation will cover the effectiveness of the current criminal law in terms of offensive online communications. In addition to this, the research will be highlighting any gaps within the current law in regard to overcoming this problem. When considering potential reforms, the right to freedom of expression will remain at the forefront of the research to prevent any alienation of human rights.

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (32) ◽  
pp. 39-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thaddeus Manu ◽  
Felipe Romero Moreno

Abstract While freedom of expression has a long and well-established constitutional foundation as a self-governing concept, the right to privacy is a relatively recent norm in the constitutional orientation of the United Kingdom. Until the Human Rights Act 1998, the right to privacy had little standing constitutionally. Following on from this standard-setting, notably, both rights have taken on added importance in our modern technological society. Nevertheless, the formulation of privacy into a legal doctrine of human rights seems to have presented a fundamental tension in relation to freedom of expression. As a matter of legal logic, the courts, through a consideration of the law, examine the substantive legal issues in terms of a balancing process, whereby the interest in privacy is balanced against the interest in freedom of expression. It is a matter of broad principle for the courts to rely on injunctions as ancillary instruments of equity in doing justice in this field. Significantly, while the elementary norm of an injunction is that it commands an act that the court regards as an essential constituent to justice, unfortunately, many contend that judges have gone beyond this point, and this is shifting opinions. In fact, serious concerns have been frequently expressed about the extent to which the rich are easily able to invoke the discretion of the court to grant injunctions in a fashion that remains an antithesis to the principle of open justice and also undermines the exercise of freedom of speech. While this suspicion is not entirely new to matters of procedural law, the recent case, PJS v News Group Newspapers turned on this controversy. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to examine the complexity of celebrity privacy injunctions in the age of the internet and question its relevance, as we outline the extent to which social media is challenging the authority of the state (judiciary) in this direction.


2021 ◽  
pp. 194016122110472
Author(s):  
Punny Kabir

The emergence and the consequent popularity of social media in the 21st century have given dissenters living in exile an unprecedented opportunity to stay involved in domestic debates and disseminate information to local and international audiences. From an authoritarian context, the rebellious voices from exiled spaces are considered threats for building external pressure on the regime. In contemporary Bangladesh, the right to exercise freedom of expression is increasingly curtailed by various state-sponsored repressive measures, forcing many dissidents to leave the country. But many of them are continuously participating in civic affairs taking place in the digital sphere of the society they physically left behind. Why and how do certain exiled dissidents influence public discourse in Bangladesh through social media platforms? This is a vital question that drives the qualitative ethnographic research which employs interviews of five exiles and analysis of their social media usage from May to October 2020.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (15) ◽  
pp. 111-125
Author(s):  
Yuriivna Timofeyeva

The article considers some issues of interpretation of the right to privacy in the practice of the ECtHR and its impact on the criminal law of Ukraine. Numerous violations of the articles of the Convention require systematic response of the state and appropriate changes in both legislation and changes in law enforcement practices. The violations relate in particular to problems of interpretation of the provisions of the Convention. Provisions of Art. 8 of the Convention are related to other provisions of the Convention and the development of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on certain issues. It is noted that the Convention is dynamic, it changes under the influence of society, its provisions change in the process of development and acquire new meanings. In particular, the ECtHR recognizes a violation of Art. 8 (right to respect for private life) in those contexts in which he has not previously recognized. In particular, interpretation of Art. 8 of the Convention in the context of the right to environmental safety in case significant harm to the persons health (cases Dubetska and others v. Ukraine, Grymkivska v. Ukraine), the right to beg in the context of the right to freedom of expression (Lakatush v. Switzerland). It is established that the development of these provisions requires analysis and consideration in the development of a new Criminal Code. At the same time, care must be taken to maintain a balance between freedoms and human rights and the security of society and the state. It is important that the rights enshrined in the Convention remain fundamental and do not go beyond the interests and needs of the individual. In addition, it is also necessary to take into account the national characteristics of the state.


2021 ◽  
Vol 93 (4) ◽  
pp. 1145-1174
Author(s):  
Dimitrije Đukić

Freedom of expression represents an important aspect of liberty that has had a profound influence on the development of human society. Also, the protection of this freedom been explicitly stated in numerous national and international legal acts. This paper presents an analysis of the way in which the right to freedom of expression of a particular group of persons (i.e. lawyers) is protected through the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. The author's view is that lawyers have to enjoy a higher degree of protection of the right to freedom of expression than other persons because of the importance of their role in society. Consequently, the limitations of this freedom should be restricted. Furthermore, the manner in which freedom of expression is protected by the European Convention on Human Rights and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights is analysed. Finally, a special emphasis is placed on the possibility of limiting this freedom through an analysis of the European Court of Human Rights' verdicts on this matter.


Author(s):  
Shai Dothan

There is a consensus about the existence of an international right to vote in democratic elections. Yet states disagree about the limits of this right when it comes to the case of prisoners’ disenfranchisement. Some states allow all prisoners to vote, some disenfranchise all prisoners, and others allow only some prisoners to vote. This chapter argues that national courts view the international right to vote in three fundamentally different ways: some view it as an inalienable right that cannot be taken away, some view it merely as a privilege that doesn’t belong to the citizens, and others view it as a revocable right that can be taken away under certain conditions. The differences in the way states conceive the right to vote imply that attempts by the European Court of Human Rights to follow the policies of the majority of European states by using the Emerging Consensus doctrine are problematic.


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):  
Lisa Rodgers

‘Ordinary’ employment contracts—including those of domestic servants—have been deemed to attract diplomatic immunity because they fall within the scope of diplomatic functions. This chapter highlights the potential for conflict between these forms of immunity and the rights of the employees, and reflects on cases in which personal servants of diplomatic agents have challenged both the existence of immunity and the scope of its application. The chapter examines claims that the exercise of diplomatic immunity might violate the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the way in which courts have dealt with these issues. The chapter analyses diplomats’ own employment claims and notes that they are usually blocked by the assertion of immunity, but also reflects on more recent developments in which claims had been considered which were incidental to diplomatic employment (eg Nigeria v Ogbonna [2012]).


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.


2004 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver Gerstenberg

In this paper I want to address, against the background of the ECtHR’s recent attempt to resolve the clash between property rights and the right to freedom of expression in its decision in Appleby v. UK, two questions, both of which I take to be related to the overarching theme of “social democracy”. First, there is the problem of the influence of “higher law”-of human rights norms and constitutional norms-on private law norms; second, the question of the role of adjudication in “constitutionalizing” private law, in other words, the question of the “judicial cognizability” of constitutional norms within private law.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-41
Author(s):  
Donato VESE

Governments around the world are strictly regulating information on social media in the interests of addressing fake news. There is, however, a risk that the uncontrolled spread of information could increase the adverse effects of the COVID-19 health emergency through the influence of false and misleading news. Yet governments may well use health emergency regulation as a pretext for implementing draconian restrictions on the right to freedom of expression, as well as increasing social media censorship (ie chilling effects). This article seeks to challenge the stringent legislative and administrative measures governments have recently put in place in order to analyse their negative implications for the right to freedom of expression and to suggest different regulatory approaches in the context of public law. These controversial government policies are discussed in order to clarify why freedom of expression cannot be allowed to be jeopardised in the process of trying to manage fake news. Firstly, an analysis of the legal definition of fake news in academia is presented in order to establish the essential characteristics of the phenomenon (Section II). Secondly, the legislative and administrative measures implemented by governments at both international (Section III) and European Union (EU) levels (Section IV) are assessed, showing how they may undermine a core human right by curtailing freedom of expression. Then, starting from the premise of social media as a “watchdog” of democracy and moving on to the contention that fake news is a phenomenon of “mature” democracy, the article argues that public law already protects freedom of expression and ensures its effectiveness at the international and EU levels through some fundamental rules (Section V). There follows a discussion of the key regulatory approaches, and, as alternatives to government intervention, self-regulation and especially empowering users are proposed as strategies to effectively manage fake news by mitigating the risks of undue interference by regulators in the right to freedom of expression (Section VI). The article concludes by offering some remarks on the proposed solution and in particular by recommending the implementation of reliability ratings on social media platforms (Section VII).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document