scholarly journals When law enters history: prohibition of crime negationism and its limits in international law

2021 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
pp. 845-874
Author(s):  
Mihajlo Vučić
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Court ◽  
Legal Foundation ◽  
European Standards

The topic of this article is the interaction between the freedom of expression and the memorial laws concerning historical crimes. The author offers an analysis of the phenomenon of negationism through the prism of international law. The article is based on two interrelated hypotheses. The first is that the prohibition of negationism has a legal foundation in international law only if accompanied by the ability to incite hatred or violence. For this purpose, international and regional European standards on negationism are analyzed. The second hypothesis is that in the practice of implementation of memorial laws, the border between hate speech and legitimate historical denialism becomes blurred. This fact might lead to excessive encroachment upon the freedom of expression. The author offers an analysis of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights as a referential framework for the application of memorial laws in practice aimed at evading these excesses.

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.

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).

DANGEROUS EXPRESSIONS: THE ECHR, VIOLENCE AND FREE SPEECH

2014 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 491-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antoine Buyse
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Grey Zone ◽  
Prevention Of Violence ◽  
European Court

AbstractHow should one balance the freedom of expression and the prevention of violence? This article delves into the grey zone between hate speech and incitement to violence by assessing the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights in cases of allegedly dangerous speech. Rather than labelling this case law as simplistic, as some critics even within the Court have done, it is shown that the jurisprudence reveals cleavages within the Court on whether to adopt a more or less consequentialist approach on the links between speech and violence. Freedom of expression cases should preferably be assessed on the merits under Article 10 ECHR since this allows for a balancing of the various interests involved. The application of the abuse of rights clause of Article 17 ECHR is for that very reason undesirable, in addition to its inconsistent use by the Court.

‘Bad Tendencies’ in the ECtHR's ‘Hate Speech’ Jurisprudence

2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Sottiaux
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Canadian Charter ◽  
Sharp Distinction ◽  
European Court ◽  
Us Supreme Court

European Court of Human Rights – Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms – ‘Hate speech’ – Féret – Le Pen – Keegstra – Commonalities between Canadian and ECtHR jurisprudence –Development of uniform test of incitement – Sharp distinction from US Supreme Court jurisprudence on freedom of expression

scholarly journals USE OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICE AS A MECHANISM FOR PROTECTION OF THE RIGHTS OF CONVICTS

2019 ◽  
pp. 145-149
Author(s):  
O. V. Ilina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Forced Labour ◽  
European Standards ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
The Right

The research paper discusses the use of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights as a mechanism for ensuring the rights of convicts. Today, the practice of the ECHR has become increasingly important not only in the fight against crime, but also in the protection of the rights and freedoms of convicts. This is evidenced by the adoption in 2014 of the Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to the Criminal Executive Code of Ukraine on the Adaptation of the Legal Status of a Convict to European Standards”, which is aimed at eliminating the shortcomings of the Criminal Executive Code of Ukraine in respect of compliance with constitutional requirements and European standards regarding the regime of serving the sentences by convicts and so on. Adoption of the said law entailed the implementation of various directions of ensuring the rights of convicts, which became the subject of this study. As part of the research, Article 1 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is analyzed, which states that States – Parties to the Convention undertake to ensure that everyone under their jurisdiction has the rights and freedoms set forth in the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. In view of the above, we believe that ensuring of rights and freedoms should also apply to convicts. Today, the practice of the ECHR is actively used in national law enforcement practice in the aspect of ensuring the rights of convicts. Such a statement is based on the own analysis of relevant judgments. The study leads to the conclusion that there are different ways of ensuring the rights of convicts, in particular, ensuring the right to a fair trial, the prevention of torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, etc. These directions of activity constitute a mechanism for ensuring the rights of convicts. In addition, we can say with certainty that convicts must be guaranteed all the rights enshrined in the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which is possible taking into account the stay of persons in penitentiary institutions, in particular the right to life, prohibition of slavery and forced labour; freedom of thought, conscience and religion; freedom of expression; the right to an effective remedy; prohibition of discrimination, etc.

scholarly journals The concept of hate speech as a threat to the information security of Internet communication

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 555-573
Author(s):  
Elena I. Galyashina ◽  
◽  
Vladimir D. Nikishin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Speech Acts ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Internet Communication ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Linguistic Support ◽  
European Court ◽  
Religious Extremism ◽  
Comprehensive Examination

The article is devoted to a comprehensive examination of the hate speech phenomenon in the aspect of legal and linguistic support for countering the information threats of Internet communication. The legal and linguistic analysis of the concept of “hate speech” is carried out by the authors according to the approaches of the European Court of Human Rights in the context of human rights and freedoms, as well as the protection of national security, constitutional order, public order, health and morality of the population. Verbal extremism as a criminalized part of hate speech is considered in the article from the standpoint of Russian, international and foreign legislation. The authors also analyzed the correlation of the following legal phenomena in international law: verbal religious extremism, insulting the feelings of believers, blasphemy and defamation of religions. The analysis of the scientists’ positions regarding the concept of “hate speech” and its criminalized part — verbal extremism: the analysis of the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights, the Council of Europe, the United Nations, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe regarding what kind of speech acts should be criminally punishable; as well as the analysis of the elements of crimes covered by the concept of “hate speech” in the criminal law of foreign states allowed the authors to formulate a list of features corresponding to extremist speech acts.

Comparative Views on the Right to Vote in International Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shai Dothan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
Right To Vote ◽  
The Right ◽  
Democratic Elections ◽  
The Way

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.

Introductory Note

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guido Raimondi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
European Public ◽  
Introductory Note ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document