m of expression Limitations
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
HUMAN RIGHTS
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
INTERNATIONAL GUARANTEE
KEY ASPECTS
SCOPE
LIMITATIONS
ENFORCEMENT
MEDIA REGULATION
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
CENSORSHIP, VIOLENCE & PRESS FREEDOM
GOVERNANCE & DEMOCRACY
DISCRIMINATION
DEFAMATION
CONFLICT & SECURITY
ICT
TELL US WHAT YOU THINK!
Limitations
Most expression is completely harmless and protected under the right to freedom of expression from interference by the state.
However, ‘seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas’ includes expression which few societies could tolerate, such as incitement to murder or the sale of pornography to children. As a result, freedom of expression is not absolute and can be limited when it conflicts with other rights.
International law declares freedom of expression to be the rule. Limitations are the exception, permitted only to protect:
the rights or reputations of others
national security
public order
public health
morals.
Limitation is legitimate if it falls within the very narrow conditions defined in the three-part test in Article 19(3) of the ICCPR:
1. ‘…PROVIDED BY LAW...’
The right to freedom of expression cannot be limited at the whim of a public official. They must be applying a law or regulation that is formally recognised by those entrusted with law making.
The law or regulation must meet standards of clarity and precision so that people can foresee the consequences of their actions. Vaguely worded edicts, whose scope is unclear, will not meet this standard and are therefore not legitimate. For example, vague prohibitions on ‘sowing discord in society’ or ‘painting a false image of the State’ would fail the test.
The rationale
It is only fair that people have a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited, so that they can act accordingly
A situation where officials can make rules on a whim is undemocratic. Decisions limiting human rights must be made by bodies representing the will of people
Vague laws will be abused. They often give officials discretionary powers that leave too much room for arbitrary decision-making
Vague laws have a ‘chilling effect’ and inhibit discussion on matters of public concern. They create a situation of uncertainty about what is permitted, resulting in people steering far clear of any controversial topic for fear that it may be illegal, even if it is not.
m of expression LimitationsFREEDOM OF EXPRESSIONHUMAN RIGHTSFREEDOM OF EXPRESSIONINTERNATIONAL GUARANTEEKEY ASPECTSSCOPELIMITATIONSENFORCEMENTMEDIA REGULATIONFREEDOM OF INFORMATIONCENSORSHIP, VIOLENCE & PRESS FREEDOMGOVERNANCE & DEMOCRACYDISCRIMINATIONDEFAMATIONCONFLICT & SECURITYICTTELL US WHAT YOU THINK!LimitationsMost expression is completely harmless and protected under the right to freedom of expression from interference by the state.However, ‘seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas’ includes expression which few societies could tolerate, such as incitement to murder or the sale of pornography to children. As a result, freedom of expression is not absolute and can be limited when it conflicts with other rights.International law declares freedom of expression to be the rule. Limitations are the exception, permitted only to protect:the rights or reputations of othersnational securitypublic orderpublic healthmorals.Limitation is legitimate if it falls within the very narrow conditions defined in the three-part test in Article 19(3) of the ICCPR:1. ‘…PROVIDED BY LAW...’The right to freedom of expression cannot be limited at the whim of a public official. They must be applying a law or regulation that is formally recognised by those entrusted with law making.The law or regulation must meet standards of clarity and precision so that people can foresee the consequences of their actions. Vaguely worded edicts, whose scope is unclear, will not meet this standard and are therefore not legitimate. For example, vague prohibitions on ‘sowing discord in society’ or ‘painting a false image of the State’ would fail the test.The rationaleIt is only fair that people have a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited, so that they can act accordinglyA situation where officials can make rules on a whim is undemocratic. Decisions limiting human rights must be made by bodies representing the will of peopleVague laws will be abused. They often give officials discretionary powers that leave too much room for arbitrary decision-makingVague laws have a ‘chilling effect’ and inhibit discussion on matters of public concern. They create a situation of uncertainty about what is permitted, resulting in people steering far clear of any controversial topic for fear that it may be illegal, even if it is not.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..