Freedom of expression

Bonotti, Matteo; Seglow, Jonathan

doi:10.1111/phc3.12759

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 89 publications

(99 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From a philosophical point of view, freedom of expression can be interpreted as a unique liberty -distinct from other liberties and/or more robust than liberty in generalon different grounds. It is said to be vital to protect the diversity and pluralism liberal societies value; an adjunct of liberal tolerance and means of promoting tolerant attitudes; a safety valve that enables public grievances to be raised peacefully, or a route to civic order and stability more generally; and a bulwark against the slippery slope of governments tendency to arrogate ever greater legal and policy powers to themselves (Bonotti, Seglow, 2022).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, guarantees of the media's work, their rights, and responsibilities have received adequate regulation in national legislation, international law, and researchers' papers. Accordingly, the theoretical basis for this study was the works devoted to the content and methods of realizing freedom of media and freedom of expression (Bonotti, Seglow, 2022;Bresner, 2015;Bychawska-Siniarska, 2017;Macovei, 2004;Skirbekk, 2019). Also, to achieve the goals of this article, the results of research in related areas were used, in particular, devoted to the study of the impact of the ECtHR practice on the regulation of information relations in the Council of Europe member states (Plotnikova et al 2021), the formation of lawful behavior patterns due to the level of critical assessment of information (Lebid et al, 2020;Zavhorodnia et al, 2019) and legal remedies under martial law (Panasiuk et al, 2022).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Freedom оf Expression under Martial Law

2023

International Journal of Media and Information Literacy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article examines realizing the right to freedom of expression under martial law conditions. The authors analyze the concept, content, and guarantee of the right to freedom of expression within national and international legal orders. In particular, the guarantees right to freedom of expression are considered. The study explicitly focuses on how the constitutions of various countries determine the conditions for restricting freedom of expression. Most national constitutions consider the right to freedom of expression as a relative right that may be subject to interference to protect national security, the privacy of individuals, the authority of justice, the protection of commercial property, etc. In the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case law, at least such elements of freedom of expression are highlighted: freedom to adhere to views; freedom to disseminate information and ideas; freedom to receive information and ideas; freedom of the press; freedom of radio and television broadcasting.The ECtHR's approaches to derogation are studied. The ECtHR`s jurisprudence contains several cases related to limiting freedom of expression during the derogation. The authors argue that despite security threats, the ECtHR believes that without dialogue within society, a democratic process is impossible. Therefore, imposing disproportionate restrictions on freedom of expression violates Art. 10 of the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter ECHR or Convention). Criteria for determining the proportionality (a necessity in a democratic society) of interference with freedom of expression under martial law can be: the sphere of social relations to which the information belongs; the primary source of information; credibility of information; consequences of dissemination of information; the subject of information dissemination; method of dissemination of information.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Freedom оf Expression under Martial Law

2023

International Journal of Media and Information Literacy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…22 Furthermore, Mill's position has been regarded as over-intellectualised ignoring the fact that much speech is not concerned with truth, say, for example, football chants. 23 Some theorists have pointed out that "the argument from truth presupposes a process of rational thinking and, consequently, the less rational individuals are, the less forceful the theory is. Most sceptical of all have been those who have argued against the claim that truth is objective and maintain that truth is being created rather than discovered."…”

Section: Discovery Of Truthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Justifying Limitations on Freedom of Expression for Contempt of Religion

Waheduzzaman

2024

Dhaka Uni. Law. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the recent past, there have been the cases of making abusive remarks against Prophet Muhammad, drawing cartoons of him, and burning the Holy Quran in public. These incidents no doubt outrage the religious feelings of people belonging to the religion of Islam. Besides this, they also contribute to violence and riot and the consequential deaths of people around the world. There are, however, literatures which seek to justify these conducts having a very liberal and extended view of the right to freedom of expression. They argue as if there should not be any limitation on freedom of expression so far that relates to contempt of any religion. I argue that freedom of expression howsoever valuable that might be, is a qualified as opposed to an unqualified human right. Hence, its exercise cannot extend to making abusive remarks against religious personages or defiling or burning the Holy Book(s) of any religion. If it is acknowledged by all including the relevant stakeholders of the United Nations, this might help reducing the chances of human casualties and deaths of people caused by alleged blasphemous conducts with respect to any religion. Foreseeing this significance, I aim to revisit the justification and limits of freedom of expression in the backdrop of contempt of religion. Dhaka University Law Journal, 2023, 34 (2), 43-65

show abstract

“…Or, through the use of more subtle social coercion, they may succeed in dissuading another from speaking out, a point familiar from feminist criticisms of pornography (see e.g. Bonotti and Seglow 2021, Ch. 5).…”

Section: Relational View: the Recognitional Dimensionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the standard view of it, hate speech attacks the basic civic standing of its targets, communicating that they are not genuine members of the political community (e.g. Waldron 2012; see also Bonotti and Seglow 2021, Ch. 3).…”

Section: Hate Speech and Fake Newsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Freedom of speech: A relational defence

Bonotti

Seglow

2022

Philosophy & Social Criticism

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much of the recent literature on freedom of speech has focused on the arguments for and against the regulation of certain kinds of speech. Discussions of hate speech and offensive speech, for example, abound in this literature, as do debates concerning the permissibility of pornography. Less attention has been paid, however, at least recently, to the normative foundations of freedom of speech where three classic justifications still prevail, based on the values of truth, autonomy and democracy. In this paper we argue, first, that none of these justifications meet all four intuitive desiderata for an adequate theory of free speech. We go on to sketch an original relational view of free speech, one which grounds its value in the recognition that speakers grant each other when engaging in speech practices, and its limits in the republican ideal of non-dominated co-exercisable liberty. We briefly illustrate the relational approach’s implications for the debate on hate speech regulation and for the response to fake news.

show abstract

Freedom of expression

Cited by 6 publications

References 89 publications

Freedom оf Expression under Martial Law

Freedom оf Expression under Martial Law

Justifying Limitations on Freedom of Expression for Contempt of Religion

Freedom of speech: A relational defence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About