Freedom of Speech as Related to Journalists in the ECtHR, IACtHR and the Human Rights Committee – a Study of Fragmentation

2017 ◽  
pp. 50-71
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Speech

On the question about opposition to the information component aggression of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
pp. 59-63
Author(s):  
O. Vasylchenko
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
State Committee ◽  
The State ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

Ukrainian law guarantees freedom of speech and expression. This is in line with international and regional instruments (Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Declaration of Human Rights) to which Ukraine is a party. Unfortunately, Ukraine is no exception, due to the conflict with the Russian Federation. The Revolution of Dignity of 2014 and the subsequent illegal activities of the neighbouring state (annexation of Crimea, occupation of the territories in the South-East of Ukraine) affected the legislative and regulatory framework of Ukraine regarding freedom of speech and freedom of expression. In order to counter aggression, the state has adopted a number of laws aimed at counteracting foreign interference in broadcasting and ensuring Ukraine’s information sovereignty. The implementation of these laws has been criticized for being seen by NGOs as imposing restrictions on freedom of expression and expression. However, censorship and selfcensorship create another serious restriction on freedom of speech and the press. The Law on Transparency of Mass Media Ownership, adopted in 2015, provides for the disclosure of information on the owners of final beneficiaries (controllers), and in their absence – on all owners and members of a broadcasting organization or service provider. In 2019, Ukraine adopted a law on strengthening the role of the Ukrainian language as the state language, which provides for language quotas for the media. According to the Law on Language, only 10% of total film adaptations can be in a language other than Ukrainian. Ukraine has adopted several laws in the field of information management to counter foreign influence and propaganda. According to the report of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, for the period from January 1, 2017 to February 14, 2018, the State Committee banned 30 books published in the Russian Federation. Thus, for the first time faced with the need to wage an “invisible” war on the information front, Ukraine was forced to take seriously the regulation of the media and the market. By imposing a number of restrictions on a product that can shake sovereignty and increase the authority of the aggressor in the eyes of citizens, the legislator, guided by the needs of society, also contributes to the promotion of Ukrainian (for example, by introducing quotas).

9. Freedom of Expression

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Clements
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Free Expression ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Obscenity Law ◽  
Right Of Privacy ◽  
The Right

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.

15. Defamation

2021 ◽  
pp. 391-450
Author(s):  
Kirsty Horsey ◽  
Erika Rackley
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
A Company

This chapter focuses on defamation which enables an individual (or, more controversially, a company) to prevent the publication of, or recover damages for, public statements which make, or are likely to make, people think less of them. At its heart is a balance between freedom of speech (protected under the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998) and the interests of an individual in the protection of their reputation. The chapter examines the Defamation Act 2013 and explains who can sue for, and be liable in, defamation, when a statement is ‘defamatory’ and innuendo. It also considers the defences of truth, honest opinion, publication in a matter of public interest and privilege. It concludes with a discussion of damages for defamation.

15. Defamation

2019 ◽  
pp. 380-438
Author(s):  
Kirsty Horsey ◽  
Erika Rackley
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
A Company

This chapter focuses on defamation which enables an individual (or, more controversially, a company) to prevent the publication of, or recover damages for, public statements which make, or are likely to make, people think less of them. At its heart is a balance between freedom of speech (protected under the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998) and the interests of an individual in the protection of their reputation. The chapter examines the Defamation Act 2013 and explains who can sue for, and be liable in, defamation, when a statement is ‘defamatory’ and innuendo. It also considers the defences of truth, honest opinion, publication in a matter of public interest and privilege. It concludes with a discussion of damages for defamation.

Thinking Allowed in the Academy

2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-146
Author(s):  
Paul Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Academic Freedom ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
International Standards ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Model Code ◽  
Institutional Power

The recent Review of Freedom of Speech in Australian Higher Education Providers (‘the Review’), overseen by the Hon Robert French AC, identified areas for improving freedom of speech and academic freedom, and to that end proposed the adoption of umbrella principles embedded in a Model Code. The Review’s engagement with international human rights law standards was confined, even though many are binding on Australia. As universities consider implementing the Review’s recommendations, this article reflects on the Model Code in the light particularly of  the standards established by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (‘ICCPR’). If the drafters of the Model Code had paid closer regard to the ICCPR and other international standards, the result may have been a scheme that more clearly and predictably distinguishes permissible from impermissible restriction on free speech and academic freedom, and gives greater priority to promoting the human rights of those in the academic community than to the institutional power to limit them.

Jurisprudence of Tolerance: Hate Speech, Article 17 and Theory of Democracy in the European Convention on Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-88
Author(s):  
Majid Nikouei ◽  
Masoud Zamani
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Political Power ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Half Century ◽  
European Court ◽  
Specific Direction ◽  
Theory Of Democracy ◽  
Tripartite Relationship

What does the protection or prohibition of a speech tell us about the tripartite relationship between political power, democracy and rights? This question has somehow underscored the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights in hate speech cases for more than a half century. We argue that this question has invariably placed the Court in an uneasy position, which is, choosing between a democracy empowered by unlimited freedom of speech, but with recurrent social tensions, and a democracy with rather strict hate speech laws, but at ease with different segments of population. That said, the jurisprudence of the European Court outlines a pattern by which to identify a specific direction for the evolution of rights and democracy. This article considers this pattern. Not only does this article, examine the pattern in the Court’s and the Commission’s jurisprudence, but it also argues that this pattern unfolds a subtle presence of Hobbesian and Lockean theories of political power and the limits in its midst. By invoking this presence, we indicate how the debate in the jurisprudence of the European Court has shifted from the language of protecting democracy to that of rights.

scholarly journals Menyoal Kebebasan Beragama dan Penodaan Agama Di Indonesia

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-212
Author(s):  
Yayan Sopyan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Religious Beliefs ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Reform Era ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

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

scholarly journals BRIEF CONSIDERATOINS REGARDING THE JURIDICAL PROTECTION OF PRIVATE LIFE IN THE REGULATION OF THE NEW ROMANIAN CIVIL CODE

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 66-71
Author(s):  
Georgeta Valeria Georgeta Valeria
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Personal Privacy ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Private Lives ◽  
The Right

This article, entitled Brief Considerations Regarding the Juridical Protection of PrivateLife in the Regulation of the New Romanian civil Code, examines the new legal regime of howthe private life of the person is respected, in connection to the inseparable link between the rightto a private life, lato sensu, and its four intrinsic rights – the right to freedom of speech, the rightof the person to dignity, the right to a private life and image rights.The regulation was imperatively necessary, both to complete the framework of the valuesguaranteed by art. 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights, but also to establish aninterference between the concept of private life and personal privacy, in the context of theexcessive broadcasting of peoples’ private lives.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document