POLITICAL PLURALISM: NOTION, CONCEPTUAL AND INTERPRETATIVE FORESHORTENING

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 32-37
Author(s):  
VALERIA GELUNENKO ◽  
◽  
SERGEY ANDREEV

In order to reveal the content of political pluralism, the article considers conceptual, conceptual and interpretative approaches to its definition in the context of constitutional relations with the foundations of the constitutional system, constitutional values, freedom of speech and expression. It is revealed that the absence of the term “political pluralism” in the constitutional text of Russia is made up for by its disclosure through the interpretation of the related principles of “ideological diversity”, “political diversity” and “multiparty”. It is this perspective of the study of political pluralism that helps to justify it as the basis of the constitutional system of Russia. It is noted that since freedom of speech and expression are associated primarily with political freedoms, they are most logically associated with political pluralism. It is proved that the latter implies the presence of citizens in society who have their own interests, adhere to different views on the development of the state and society and unite on this basis in groups, as well as finding a compromise between them based on common ideals and values when solving issues of national importance. The analysis of the motivational part of the decisions of the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation served to reveal the content of political pluralism. The authors concluded that the structure of political pluralism consists of political diversity, freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and political compromise. As a generalization, the authors noted that the principle of political pluralism is revealed by this body through guarantees of political diversity and the possibility of finding a compromise of political interests at the level of the Parliament. In addition, it was stressed that the principle of political diversity in a democratic state is ensured through the functioning of such institutions of direct democracy as freedom of speech, free elections, freedom of peaceful public events, the right to Association and freedom of their activities, including political parties. It is concluded that the coordination of political interests should be provided by parliaments of various levels.

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-212
Author(s):  
Yayan Sopyan

Abstract: Questioning the Religious Freedom and blasphemy in Indonesia. The presence of the Constitutional Court in the reform era is the strengthening of the foundations of constitutionalism in the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945. The Court in this case a role to enforce and the protector of the citizen's constitutional rights and the protector of the human rights. Including in this case, the right to religion and religious practices and teachings of their respective religions, in accordance with the constitutional mandate. However, on the other hand there is the discourse of freedom of expression and freedom of speech includes freedom to broadcast religious beliefs and understanding of the "deviant" and against the "mainstream" religious beliefs and understanding in general, as in the case of Ahmadiyah. The Court in this case is required to provide the best attitude when faced judicial review in this case still required in addition to guarding the constitution in order to run properly.   Abstrak: Menyoal Kebebasan Beragama dan Penodaan Agama di Indonesia. Kehadiran lembaga Mahkamah Konstitusi di era reformasi merupakan upaya penguatan terhadap dasar-dasar konstitusionalisme pada Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945. MK dalam hal ini berperan menegakkan dan melindungi hak-hak konstitusional warga negara (the protector of the citizen’s constitutional rights) dan pelindung HAM (the protector of the human rights). Termasuk dalam hal ini, hak untuk memeluk agama dan menjalankan ibadah serta ajaran agamanya masing-masing, sesuai dengan amanat konstitusi. Namun, disisi lain ada wacana kebebasan berekspresi dan kebebasan berpendapat termasuk didalamnya kebebasan untuk menyiarkan keyakinan dan pemahaman keagamaan yang “menyimpang” dan bertentangan dengan “mainstream” keyakinan dan pemahaman keagamaan pada umumnya, seperti dalam kasus Ahmadiyah. MK dalam hal ini dituntut untuk mampu memberikan sikap terbaik saat dihadapkan judicial review dalam kasus ini selain tetap dituntut untuk mengawal konstitusi agar dapat berjalan sebagaimana mestinya. DOI: 10.15408/jch.v2i2.2314


Author(s):  
Corey Brettschneider

How should a liberal democracy respond to hate groups and others that oppose the ideal of free and equal citizenship? The democratic state faces the hard choice of either protecting the rights of hate groups and allowing their views to spread, or banning their views and violating citizens' rights to freedoms of expression, association, and religion. Avoiding the familiar yet problematic responses to these issues, this book proposes a new approach called value democracy. The theory of value democracy argues that the state should protect the right to express illiberal beliefs, but the state should also engage in democratic persuasion when it speaks through its various expressive capacities: publicly criticizing, and giving reasons to reject, hate-based or other discriminatory viewpoints. Distinguishing between two kinds of state action—expressive and coercive—the book contends that public criticism of viewpoints advocating discrimination based on race, gender, or sexual orientation should be pursued through the state's expressive capacities as speaker, educator, and spender. When the state uses its expressive capacities to promote the values of free and equal citizenship, it engages in democratic persuasion. By using democratic persuasion, the state can both respect rights and counter hateful or discriminatory viewpoints. The book extends this analysis from freedom of expression to the freedoms of religion and association, and shows that value democracy can uphold the protection of these freedoms while promoting equality for all citizens.


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (S3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergey D. Andreev ◽  
Emma V. Bitsieva ◽  
Olga V. Lepeshkina ◽  
Dmitry M. Polonsky ◽  
Marina S. Savchenko

This paper presents the results of a study devoted to the legal phenomenon of political pluralism as a factor in the development of modern society and the state by the example of classical democratic countries. At the same time, attention is focused on such components of political pluralism as formalization of freedom of speech and assembly; a multi-party system, as well as a mechanism for coordinating the interests of various social groups at the parliamentary level. It was found that the most acceptable is the model operating in the FRG, since it allows people to find a balance between guarantees of political diversity, such as freedom of speech and the right to public events. The interaction between civil society institutions and parliamentarians is especially advisable when making decisions in the domestic and foreign policy of the state.


Author(s):  
Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde ◽  
Mirjam Künkler ◽  
Tine Stein

In this article Böckenförde contrasts his concept of open encompassing neutrality (found in most Scandinavian countries and in Germany) with that of distancing neutrality, as practised in France. While the latter champions negative religious freedom, open encompassing neutrality aims for a balancing of negative and positive religious freedom. Religious freedom for Böckenförde is multidimensional and includes the right to have (or not) a religious faith (freedom of belief), to affirm (or not) this faith privately and openly (freedom to profess), to exercise (or not) one’s religion publicly (freedom of worship), and to join together (or not) in religious communities (religious freedom of association). The correlate to these individual and group rights is the open and overarching principle of the state’s neutrality towards religion and other worldviews, entailing a prohibition on the state justifying law on religious grounds. Furthermore, it requires the state not to privilege religion over non-religion and one religious faith over another. Siding with the ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court (at a time when he was not a sitting judge), Böckenförde underlines that even religious communities who reject the democratic state have the right to be recognized and legally protected. What matters is not whether communities accept or reject the state, but whether they obey or violate its laws. This was the court’s view on the Jehovah’s Witnesses, and it must also be applied, Böckenförde writes, to religious fundamentalists who do not accept the secular order, as long as they do not violate any laws.


Author(s):  
Richard Clements

The Q&A series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each chapter includes typical questions; diagram problem and essay answer plans, suggested answers, notes of caution, tips on obtaining extra marks, the key debates on each topic and suggestions on further reading. This chapter moves on from the previous one to examine the freedom of expression. Under common law, freedom of speech is guaranteed unless the speaker breaks the law, but this is now reinforced by the right of free expression under the European Convention on Human Rights. The questions here deal with issues such as obscenity law and contempt of court; the Official Secrets Act; freedom of information; breach of confidence and whether there is a right of privacy in English law.


Author(s):  
Latiefa Albertus

The case of Johncom Media Investments Limited v M 2009 4 SA 7 (CC) required of the Constitutional Court to strike a balance between the rights to privacy and the right to freedom of expression as a consequence of section 12 of the Divorce Act 70 of 1979. According to the Court, it felt that the "remedy" it provided was the best under the circumstances. However, there are certain concerns regarding the Court’s judgment which require clarification, possibly through legislative intervention


Author(s):  
José Mateos Martínez

RESUMEN: El presente artículo analiza el reforzamiento de la libertad de expresión que se produce cuando ésta es ejercida en conexión con el derecho de defensa, y se centra en un concreto supuesto que ha sido recientemente examinado por el Tribunal Constitucional: el ejercicio del derecho de defensa en primera persona por un funcionario que es objeto de un expediente disciplinario. A la vez que estudiamos la solución dada por el TC al citado caso, reflexionamos sobre los efectos de la misma más allá del caso específico que resuelve, planteando la posibilidad de su extrapolación a la generalidad de supuestos donde el ciudadano ejerce su derecho de defensa en primera persona y sin asistencia letrada. ABSTRACT: The present article analyzes the reinforcement of the freedom of expression that takes place when this one is exercised in connection by the right of defense, and centres on a concrete supposition that has been recently examined by the Constitutional Court: the exercise of the right of defense in the first person for a civil servant who is an object of a disciplinary process. Simultaneously that we study the solution given by the Constitutional Court to the mentioned case, we think about the effects of the same one beyond the specific case that resolves, raising the possibility of its extrapolation to the generality of suppositions where the citizen exercises his right of defense in the first person and without legal aid service.PALABRAS CLAVE: libertad de expresión, derecho de defensa, funcionario público, autotutela, expediente disciplinario.KEYWORDS: freedom of expression, right of defense, civil servant, autoguardianship, disciplinary process.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-36
Author(s):  
Titis Anindyajati

Nowadays, everyone tends to use the right to freedom of speech without limitation, such as emergences of hate speech expression on various social media platforms. However, such expression is regulated by Article 28, paragraph (2) of the ITE Law and deemed to be contrary to public order. On the other hand, this law was considered by some people as a criminalization towards the right to freedom of speech. This paradox becomes a big issue that never ceases to be discussed. That is why Constitutional Court had conducted judicial review on some norms related to freedom of speech. This study aims to analyze the Constitutional Court decision towards the polarity of the right to freedom of speech and the public order. This study uses normative research with the statutory, analytical and comparative approach. Therefore, the results show the importance of limitation in implementing the freedom of speech to protect the constitutional right of society as stated in the 1945 Constitution. Despite the already decided judicial review by the Court, there is still an urgency to revise The ITE law in order to clarify certain rules related to hate speech in social media.


Author(s):  
Gautam Bhatia

This chapter examines religious speech, and the tensions between religion and freedom of expression. As a wide-ranging system of moral beliefs and commitments, religion, by its very nature, assigns to the freedom of expression a particular place in its hierarchical order of values. In non-theocratic States, this may clash with the (higher) normative value accorded to the freedom of expression under the secular order. Religious claims themselves will often be made from within the constitutional system: that is, the State’s own constitutional commitment to protect religious freedom will be invoked to argue that, in certain domains, the secular order must defer to religion’s hierarchy of values. This may include the subordination of religious expression to revealed religious truth. Disputes will often also involve contestation over a constellation of other constitutional norms, such as the commitment to maintaining diversity and pluralism, the right to equality and cultural dissent, and not least, the imperatives of public order. Consequently, such disputes raise a host of complex issues. The State’s adjudicatory authorities must decide whether to attempt an accommodation between the conflicting claims of religion and free speech, or privilege one over the other. The chapter then discusses the role of religion in censorship.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 58-83
Author(s):  
Janusz Roszkiewicz

This article concerns the right to the protection of religious feelings as a value which justifies a restriction of freedom of expression. The right to the protection of religious feelings can be protected by three methods: civil, penal and administrative. The issue is discussed from the point of view of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and the European Convention on Human Rights, with particular emphasis on the case-law of the Polish Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document