scholarly journals Immaculate Defamation

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 583-614
Author(s):  
Alan M. Weinberger
Keyword(s):  
First Amendment ◽  
Right To Know ◽  
Free Press ◽  
Chilling Effect ◽  
Media Companies ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
World Records

At the confluence of three major rivers, Madison County, Illinois, was also the intersection of the nation’s struggle for a free press and the right of access to appellate review in the historic case of the Alton Telegraph. The newspaper, which helps perpetuate the memory of Elijah Lovejoy, the first martyr to the cause of a free press, found itself on the losing side of the largest judgment for defamation in U.S. history as a result of a story that was never published in the paper—a case of immaculate defamation. Because it could not afford to post an appeal bond of that magnitude, one of the oldest family-owned newspapers in the country was forced to file for bankruptcy to protect its viability as a going concern. Attention must be paid to a case in which plaintiff’s counsel earns a place in the Guinness Book of World Records and his adversary is honored for distinction in the defense of a free press and the people’s right to know. Notwithstanding subsequent reform of the supersedeas bond process, the inability to appeal a defamation award for lack of sufficient resources to secure a bond still presents an existential threat to all but the largest media companies. The appeal bond process thus has a chilling effect on organizations engaged in newsgathering and dissemination, abridging freedoms protected by the First Amendment. This Article proposes a re-imagination of the appeal bond to accommodate the legitimate interests of the judgment creditor while protecting a media defendant’s constitutional right to appeal.

Deferring Citizens' “Right to Know” in an Information Age

2019 ◽  
pp. 264-286
Author(s):  
William Edward Heuva
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Information Age ◽  
Right To Know ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Emerging Democracies ◽  
The Right To Know ◽  
Policy Frameworks ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Right

Namibia is one of the emerging democracies that have not yet enacted the Access to Information legislation. While the country has guaranteed freedom of expression and media in its constitution, it has not provided for Access to Information as a constitutional right. This chapter seeks to examine Namibia's reluctance to adopt an Access to Information legislation. It interrogates views that locate the omission of this fundamental human right in the country's constitutional (legal) and policy frameworks. It underscores the failure by Namibia to reverse the information black-out suffered under the Apartheid dispensation. The chapter starts with a theoretical/philosophical rationale for the right to know to elicit an understanding of this discourse and its relevance to emerging democracies, such as Namibia. It then examines attempts by state and civil society to introduce the legislation in the country. Predicted on praxis, the chapter in conclusion provides some suggestions that may help resolving the impasse in adopting the Access to Information legislation in the county.

Information Is Power

2021 ◽  
pp. 230-245
Author(s):  
Mary-Rose Papandrea
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Government Information ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Press ◽  
Security Information ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
Government Secrecy ◽  
Right Of Access

Balancing the equally important but sometimes conflicting priorities of government transparency for public accountability versus government secrecy for national security seems intractable. One possibility is to recognize a constitutional right of access to government information. This would support democratic self-governance, allow the public to engage in meaningful oversight, and provide access to necessary information without the game of leaks. It could radically refocus arguments regarding the rights of government employees to reveal national security information and of third parties to publish it. Recognizing this right faces an uphill battle against decades of First Amendment jurisprudence. It also faces innumerable logistical and practical obstacles. It would not eliminate the need to determine when the public, the press, and government insiders can disclose national security information. Nevertheless, the ongoing collapse of press access norms and government’s increasing desire to operate outside public view may warrant dramatically rethinking First Amendment scope and protections.

scholarly journals The Legal Framework and Barriers to Access to Environmental Information in Ethiopia

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-172
Author(s):  
Abdulkader Mohammed Yusuf
Keyword(s):  
Legal Framework ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
Environmental Information ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Multilateral Environmental Agreements ◽  
The Public ◽  
Barriers To Access ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

Information plays a vital role, both in terms of its importance for a democratic order and as a prerequisite for public participation. Many countries have made provisions for access to information in their respective constitutions. The FDRE Constitution explicitly provides that everyone has the right to seek and receive information. The Freedom of Mass Media and Access to Information Proclamation –which entered into force in 2008– gives effect to this Constitutional guarantee. Moreover, the number of laws on different environmental issues is on the rise, and the same could be said of the multilateral environmental agreements that Ethiopia has ratified. Many of the laws incorporate the right of the public to access environmental information held by public bodies. Despite the existing legal framework, there are still notable barriers to access to environmental information. By analyzing the relevant laws, the aim of this article is to contribute to the dialogue on the constitutional right of access to information with particular emphasis on the legal framework on, and the barriers to, access to environmental information within the meaning of Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration.

scholarly journals Constitutionalizing Access

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Jessica Terkovich ◽  
Aryeh Frank
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Explicit Recognition ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Government ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
The U.S

State constitutions receive relatively little academic attention, yet they are the source of significant substantive rights—and, when compared to the U.S. Constitution, they are relatively easily amended to comport with contemporary needs and values. Unlike the constitutions of dozens of other nations, the U.S. Constitution contains no explicit recognition of a right to information from the government, and the Supreme Court has declined to infer that such a right exists, apart from narrow exceptions. Conversely, seven states expressly memorialize the public’s right of access to government meetings and records in their constitutions. In this paper, the authors examine case law applying the constitutional right of access, concluding that the right is somewhat underutilized and rarely seems to produce an outcome clearly different from what a litigant could expect relying on state statutory rights alone. 

scholarly journals Problematic issues of appealing against the decision of the investigating judge, the court on sending a person to a medical institution for a psychiatric assessment

2021 ◽  
pp. 328-334
Author(s):  
O.I. Tyshchenko
Keyword(s):  
Court Decision ◽  
Medical Institution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Psychiatric Assessment ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
Forensic Psychiatric ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection

The article reveals the problem of appealing against the decision of the investigating judge, the court on sending a person to a medical institution for a psychiatric assessment, in particular: a) it is stated that sending a person to a medical institution for assessment is a form of restriction of his or her constitutional right to liberty, which is equivalent to detention. It is proposed to amend the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter – the CPC), which provides for the right to a separate appeal against a court decision on sending a person to a medical institution for assessment, decided in court before the court decision on the merits. The lack of possibility to appeal against such a court decision creates a potential danger of illegal restriction of a person’s constitutional right to liberty and security during their placement in a medical institution for the inpatient forensic psychiatric assessment (hereinafter – the IFPA), which violates the essence of the right to judicial protection; b) it is proved that the decision of the investigating judge, the court to send a person to a medical institution for the IFPA may limit not only the rights of the suspect, accused, but thus also affect the legitimate interests of others who do not have procedural status in criminal proceedings. It is determined the expediency of granting the right to appeal the said court decision to the victim and other persons whose interests it concerns; c) it is noted that the mechanism of prolongation of the term of the IFPA is not regulated in the domestic criminal procedural law, however judges continue it in the absence of a legislative basis. Therefore, it is expressed the scientific position on the rationality of appealing not only the decision of the investigating judge, but also the court’s decision to extend the term for sending a person to a medical institution for assessment. 

scholarly journals Rhodes University v Student Representative Council of Rhodes University: The constitutionality of interdicting non-violent disruptive protest

2017 ◽  
pp. 93-102
Author(s):  
Safura Abdool Karim ◽  
Catherine Kruyer
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Eastern Cape ◽  
Student Protests ◽  
High Court ◽  
Chilling Effect ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

Section 17 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 enshrines the right to assemble, peacefully and unarmed, and the Regulation of Gatherings Act 205 of 1993 enables the exercise of this right peacefully and with due regard to the rights of others. The recent student protests across South Africa have occasioned litigation seeking to interdict protest action, which the universities claim is unlawful. Overly broad interdicts, which interdict lawful protest action, violate the constitutional right to assembly and have a chilling effect on protests. In a decision of the High Court of South Africa, Eastern Cape Division, Grahamstown, a final interdict was granted interdicting two individuals from, among other things, disrupting lectures and tutorials at Rhodes University and from inciting such disruption. In this note, the constitutionality of interdicting non-violent disruptive protest is discussed and analysed, using Rhodes University v Student Representative Council of Rhodes University and Others (1937/2016) [2016] ZAECGHC 141.

scholarly journals The limitation of the discovery rules of Court against the right of access to information in South Africa

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 1029-1051
Author(s):  
Rashri Baboolal-Frank ◽  
Fola Adeleke
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
South African ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
Access Information ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
South African Constitution ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

Abstract In South Africa, the Promotion of Access to Information Act 2 of 2000 (PAIA) gives effect to the right of access information in Section 32 of the South African Constitution (the Constitution). Section 7 of PAIA provides that PAIA does not apply to records required for criminal or civil proceedings after commencement of proceedings where access to that record is already provided for in any other law. Where records are obtained in contravention of Section 7, they are not admissible as evidence in criminal or civil proceedings. The aim of this paper is to determine whether the discovery rules of Court limit the constitutional right of everyone to access information. Consequently, the methodology employed in this paper involves a legal analysis namely: a limitations analysis utilising Section 36, the limitations clause of the Constitution. This paper further engages in case law analysis interpreting the exercise of the right of access to information before PAIA was passed and after PAIA was passed to highlight the anomaly of the application of Section 7. This paper argues that Section 7 unconstitutionally limits the ambit of the right of access to information and a direct constitutional challenge on this provision is necessary.

scholarly journals NORMS OF ADMINISTRATIVE-TORT AND CRIMINAL LEGISLATION IN THE MECHANISM OF REALIZATION OF THE RIGHT TO FREE USE OF ONE'S ABILITIES AND PROPERTY FOR ENTREPRENEURIAL AND OTHER ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES NOT PROHIBITED BY LAW

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-61
Author(s):  
I.N. Akhmetova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Business Community ◽  
Economic Activities ◽  
Negative Image ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Consciousness ◽  
Important Means ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Right ◽  
Criminal Legislation

Illegal business conduct by one entrepreneur can harm the legitimate interests and rights of other representatives of the business community, carries reputational risks, creates a negative image of the entrepreneur's personality in the public consciousness, and thus damages the constitutional right to freely use their abilities and property for entrepreneurial and other economic activities not prohibited by law. Therefore, the detection, suppression and prevention of offenses and abuses is an important means of protecting the constitutional law under consideration. The article is devoted to the analysis of administrative and criminal legislation in the mechanism of realization of the right to free use of one's abilities and property for entrepreneurial and other economic activities not prohibited by law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document