scholarly journals Study of the Concepts Related to the Boundaries of Freedom Expression

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 21
Author(s):  
Ahmad Bazyar ◽  
Alireza Nasseri ◽  
Mohammad Taher Babari

The right of freedom of expression can be named as one of the most important rights and freedoms that have been emphasized on by all the international documents of human rights. Despite the fact that the aforementioned right is a universal right, most of the experts believe that it cannot be absolute and in order to be able to support the public and private rights, it must be restricted to some extent. Now the question is that the restrictions on the freedom of expression are needed to be implemented in what frameworks and based on what principles? In reply to that question we can say that ethics, national security, public order and preservation the rights and reputations of others are the key principles of restrictions on freedom of expression.

Author(s):  
Clooney Amal ◽  
Webb Philippa

This chapter examines the right to a public trial, which protects both the defendant in a criminal trial and the interests of society as a whole in having a fair system of open justice. Under international human rights law, the right requires that a criminal trial should be held in public and that the court’s judgment is pronounced publicly. However, the right to a public trial is not absolute. The right may, for instance, be limited by valid national security concerns, or to protect the interests of a child or victim of sexual assault. This chapter examines the circumstances in which international bodies have found that exceptions to the right to a public trial are justified, and the additional measures that may be required to ensure that a criminal trial remains fair when there are restrictions on the public nature of proceedings. right to fair trial


2021 ◽  
pp. 263-270
Author(s):  
William A. Schabas

Political rights are often grouped with civil rights as if both adjectives apply to certain categories, and some fundamental rights, such as freedom of expression, can be described as belonging to both categories. But the concept of political rights has an autonomous meaning. It applies specifically to the democratic vision of human rights, encompassing the right to participate in government, the right to vote and the right to participate in government. Elections must be both genuinie and periodic, based upon universal and equal suffrage and by secret vote or an equivalent free voting procedure. Equal access to the public service is also comprised within political rights.


2014 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 361-378 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Perrone

The protection of ‘morals’ appears frequently as a limitation on the exercise of fundamental rights, both in international covenants and in constitutional charters. The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights is not an exception, and ‘public morals’ may be called upon to justify the restriction of several important rights granted by the Convention, such as freedom of expression or the right to respect for private and family life. To avoid arbitrary restrictions of these rights it is important to understand the meaning of this general clause. This article aims to suggest a reading of the ‘public morals’ clause that singles out its scope and its boundaries.


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. 69
Author(s):  
Kamila Danilovna Shaibakova

The article shed light on a problem of freedom of expression through Online Education. Nowadays, the intermediaries such as Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc. play crucial role in educating people. Their policies in addition to the governmental regulations could seriously affect the human rights. The extraterritoriality and non-state actor status of transnational companies are also problems when considering violation of human rights as legally transnational corporations cannot violate rights as non-state actors and have no obligation towards people. In addition, fake news and trolley factories became a true problem that claimed to be able to affect even elections. Moreover, they could affect the right to know and receive information which constitutes a part of the general right to freedom of expression. However, as recent examples show, social media platforms knowingly keep fake information despite the public announcement of human rights commitments. In addition, while claiming the dedication to the human rights protection, business still more interested in profit. 


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (S4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ganna Sobko ◽  
Galyna Muliar ◽  
Ivan Draliuk ◽  
Myroslav Hryhorchuk ◽  
Oleksandr Holovko ◽  
...  

The first paragraph of Article 6 states that the right to a fair trial is when everyone has the right to a fair and impartial hearing in a court of law within a reasonable time, independently of the law governing the dispute over his rights and obligations. both civil and other (criminal, administrative) nature and the establishment of the accusation against her. The court decision must be made public, but the press and the public may not be allowed in the courtroom during the entire time the case is heard in court or only part of the hearing in the interests of a democratic society, namely morality, public order, national security, and this is required by the interests of the juvenile or the protection of the privacy of individuals, or, if the Court has found the measure necessary, when, in special circumstances, the publicity of the proceedings may be prejudicial to the interests of justice.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 114-124
Author(s):  
Tat Marlina ◽  
Duwi Handoko

The purpose of this paper is to find out the problem of fulfilling the right to express opinions and violations of the right to health in Indonesia. This type of research is normative legal research specifically discussing human rights in the field of expressing opinions and rights to health. Data analysis in this study was carried out systematically based on the research problems described qualitatively. In relation to expressing opinions in public, such as demonstrations or demonstrations with many participants, restrictions on freedom are usually associated with "public order" or public orders. The most difficult is how to provide a balance between freedom and public order. Demonstrations by a number of doctors certainly have an impact on patient care, which in principle has harmed the public interest. In addition, the demonstration by blocking the road body certainly hurts the public interest, namely the interests of all road users. Based on the results of Komnas HAM's investigation, at least 15 types of human rights violations were affected by Lapindo mudflow victims. The problem when it is associated with the right to health is in the form of: not a few refugees whose health is disrupted resulting in people falling ill and some dying due to the absence of a proper environment for displaced people; and gas contaminated air and clean water facilities that are damaged are not handled properly by the government. Keywords: human rights, freedom of opinion, right to health


Public Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 671-718
Author(s):  
John Stanton ◽  
Craig Prescott

This chapter examines the rights contained within Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (freedom of expression), Article 11 (freedom of association and assembly), Article 5 (the right to liberty), and Article 8 (the right to a private and family life). It considers the domestic application of these rights as well as the various cases in which they have been raised. In doing this, the chapter explores the balance that must be struck between certain rights on the one hand and competing interests and needs on the other. With this in mind, it focuses on two areas: first, the freedoms of association and assembly, balanced against the need to ensure public order; and secondly, the freedom of liberty and right to a fair trial, against the need to ensure that the police can carry out their functions and responsibilities appropriately.


Jurnal HAM ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 45
Author(s):  
Tony Yuri Rahmanto

AbstrakProses demokratisasi di Indonesia saat ini menempatkan publik sebagai pemilik dan pengendali utama ranah penyiaran. Namun permasalahan utama dalam penyiaran di negeri ini adalah tidak konsistennya kebijakan pemerintah sebagai salah satu regulator penyiaran, lemahnya lembaga regulator pengawas penyiaran dan ketidaktaatan penyelenggara penyiaran. Jawa Barat dengan budaya yang beragam telah memiliki lembaga penyiaran, namun pada praktiknya di lapangan belum menampilkan keberagaman isi siaran dan keberagaman kepemilikan. Oleh karena itu persoalannya adalah bagaimanakah implementasi Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2002 tentang Penyiaran memberikan perlindungan hak kebebasan berekspresi masyarakat khususnya di Jawa Barat. Metode penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif serta menganalisa substansi, konteks, dan relasi antara lembaga penyiaran, pemerintah daerah serta masyarakat dilihat dari aspek Hak Asasi Manusia. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa berlakunya Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2002 tentang Penyiaran belum sepenuhnya memberikan jaminan perlindungan terhadap hak kebebasan berekespresi yang dimiliki pemerintah, lembaga penyiaran serta masyarakat di Provinsi Jawa Barat, masih ditemukan permasalahan terkait keberagaman isi siaran, sentralisasi kepemilikan lembaga penyiaran, kurangnya pemanfaatan lembaga penyiaran publik dan teguran serta sanksi yang diberikan seringkali diabaikan oleh para pelaku penyiaran.Kata Kunci: Kebebasan Berekspresi, Regulasi, Hak Asasi Manusia.AbstractDemocratization process in Indonesia is currently putting the public as the owner and the ultimate controller in broadcasting sphere. The main problem in Indonesia is the inconsistent governments policy as one of broadcasting regulators, the weak regulatory of monitoring agencies and the disobedient broadcasting operators. West Java as one of the provinces that has cultural diversity have a brodcasting operator, in practice, they do not present the diversity of broadcast content and diversity of ownership. The question is how the implementation of Law No. 32 of 2002 on Broadcasting in terms of protecting the freedom of expression, especially in West Java. This research applies qualitative approach, conducted analysis of the substance, context and relationships between broadcasters,local governments and community from a human rights perspective. The result shows that the enactment of Law No. 32 of 2002 on Broadcasting has not fully guarantee the protection of the right to freedom of expression owned by the government, broadcasters and communities in West Java province, other problems are related to: the diversity of broadcast content, centralization of ownership of broadcaster, the lack of utilization of public broadcasters, and the reprimands and sanctions are often overlooked by the broadcasters.Keywords: Freedom of Expression, Regulation, Human Rights.


Jurnal HAM ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 45
Author(s):  
Tony Yuri Rahmanto

AbstrakProses demokratisasi di Indonesia saat ini menempatkan publik sebagai pemilik dan pengendali utama ranah penyiaran. Namun permasalahan utama dalam penyiaran di negeri ini adalah tidak konsistennya kebijakan pemerintah sebagai salah satu regulator penyiaran, lemahnya lembaga regulator pengawas penyiaran dan ketidaktaatan penyelenggara penyiaran. Jawa Barat dengan budaya yang beragam telah memiliki lembaga penyiaran, namun pada praktiknya di lapangan belum menampilkan keberagaman isi siaran dan keberagaman kepemilikan. Oleh karena itu persoalannya adalah bagaimanakah implementasi Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2002 tentang Penyiaran memberikan perlindungan hak kebebasan berekspresi masyarakat khususnya di Jawa Barat. Metode penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif serta menganalisa substansi, konteks, dan relasi antara lembaga penyiaran, pemerintah daerah serta masyarakat dilihat dari aspek Hak Asasi Manusia. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa berlakunya Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2002 tentang Penyiaran belum sepenuhnya memberikan jaminan perlindungan terhadap hak kebebasan berekespresi yang dimiliki pemerintah, lembaga penyiaran serta masyarakat di Provinsi Jawa Barat, masih ditemukan permasalahan terkait keberagaman isi siaran, sentralisasi kepemilikan lembaga penyiaran, kurangnya pemanfaatan lembaga penyiaran publik dan teguran serta sanksi yang diberikan seringkali diabaikan oleh para pelaku penyiaran.Kata Kunci: Kebebasan Berekspresi, Regulasi, Hak Asasi Manusia.AbstractDemocratization process in Indonesia is currently putting the public as the owner and the ultimate controller in broadcasting sphere. The main problem in Indonesia is the inconsistent governments policy as one of broadcasting regulators, the weak regulatory of monitoring agencies and the disobedient broadcasting operators. West Java as one of the provinces that has cultural diversity have a brodcasting operator, in practice, they do not present the diversity of broadcast content and diversity of ownership. The question is how the implementation of Law No. 32 of 2002 on Broadcasting in terms of protecting the freedom of expression, especially in West Java. This research applies qualitative approach, conducted analysis of the substance, context and relationships between broadcasters,local governments and community from a human rights perspective. The result shows that the enactment of Law No. 32 of 2002 on Broadcasting has not fully guarantee the protection of the right to freedom of expression owned by the government, broadcasters and communities in West Java province, other problems are related to: the diversity of broadcast content, centralization of ownership of broadcaster, the lack of utilization of public broadcasters, and the reprimands and sanctions are often overlooked by the broadcasters.Keywords: Freedom of Expression, Regulation, Human Rights.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 170-180

This paper examines the degree of permissible interference with a judge’s freedom of expressing his/her own opinion and convictions. A question is raised about the limits of a judge’s freedom of expression and discretion of the state in establishing his/her communicative behaviour, taking into account the established practice of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter ECtHR, the Court). Understanding these limits is important not only for individual judges but also for society as a whole, as restrictions on freedom of expression may affect the state’s perception of the rule of law. Systematic analysis of the key documents that regulate the issue of freedom of expression of a judge in Ukraine allows us to identify several spheres of imperative regulation of a judge’s behaviour in the context of communicative activity: during the administration of justice (in court procedure); in public speeches, particularly in the media; during the implementation of other activities not prohibited for the judge – literary, scientific, educational; during Internet communication; in everyday life. ECtHR case-law in the context of assessing the limits of a judge’s freedom of expressing one’s opinion develops in two directions. In the first, the judge’s freedom is considered in the context of Art. 10 (freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, freedom of expression, and freedom of assembly and association) of the European Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter ECHR, the Convention). In the second, the right to freedom of expression is limited to the right to a fair trial of others (in the context of impartiality and independence of a court within the meaning of Art. 6 of the ECHR). In general, the matter of judicial evaluation was the statements of judges concerning cases that were in their proceedings; those criticising judicial reform measures and other administrative actions; those which criticised their colleagues. The results of the analysis allow us to conclude that, despite the different preconditions, different circumstances, and varying implementation reflections, the freedom of a judge to express his/ her opinion is limited by his/her special status as a state servant (in a broad sense). Where the boundary is in a particular case should be determined by considering the specific circumstances. However, national law enforcement authorities must develop their own criteria for assessing the balance of public and private interests in a judge’s communicative behaviour


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document