The freedom of expression is one of the things that calls for conflicts. It is not permitted in the dictatorship in order to speak about everything. It is observed that very many subjects are forbidden. An example of a forbidden topic is the critical opinion on the power, on religion. The Handyside case states that the freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society. Further, it is the right which serves as one of the basic conditions for the country's progress and for the overall development of every human being. Subject to paragraph 2 of article 10, it is applicable not only to ?information' or ?ideas' that offend shock or disturb the state or any sector of the population. These are the demands that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no existence of a ?democratic society.' It is ideal and an applicable situation that each society tries to look for its right to speech. However, it is complicated because this right of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) can be in conflict with other rights. For example, the right to fair trials or right to private life. Your freedom is limited by the rights of the others. So there is always some choice to make and the question is which one is the most important right to embark upon? Freedom of expression is often put aside. Therefore, if this right is put aside too often, the right becomes empty in its meaning.
[...] Freedom of expression includes freedom of the press, a domain where a lot of progress must be done. The article 10 is not something acquired; it must always be updated, redefined in order to keep the balance between rights of everyone. Now, the challenge of the ECHR is to protect the article 10 from the abuse of the business media. Bibliography - Alastair, Mowbray, Cases and Materials on the European Convention on Human Rights, Butterworths. - Clements, Mole, and Simmons, European Human Rights: Taking a case under the Convention, Sweet & Maxwell. [...]
[...] Freedom of politic expression is really wide. Another example, in Thorgeirson v Iceland A.239 (1992) 14 EHHR 843, a journalist wrote an article alleging police brutality, he was prosecuted for defamation. The government tried to make a difference between political discussion and discussion of other matters of public concern. The European Court rejected this distinction. The interference was not justified; the article was to promote debate about the need for a reformed police complaints system. The other type of freedom of expression is the artistic expression. [...]
[...] The European Court held that wider margin of appreciation is generally available to Contracting States when regulating freedom of expression in relation to matters liable to offend intimate personal convictions within the sphere of morals or, especially, religion'. It was necessary in a democratic society. The artistic expression is not so wide than the politic one, but it could be hindered only because of the social need. The last type of freedom of expression protected by the article 10 of the ECHR is the commercial expression. [...]
[...] The clothes producer has to sell his clothes; the editor of a newspaper has to sell his copies. A pinup on the cover pages will help to send more copies than the best political article in the world. The European Court has to continue to keep the balance in the usage of the freedom of expression and the others right. Freedom of expression is a right which must agree with other rights. It is a need in a democracy, but it must not squash the rights from others. [...]
[...] The European Court stated that the sanction complained, does not appear to have been necessary in a democratic society, so there is a breach of article 11 of the ECHR, because this manifestation was authorised by the authority and he has not done any offences. Most of the problem about freedom of expression, concern the press, the media. It is clear that the rights of journalists under Article 10 of the ECHR are at the very heart of freedom of expression. The goal of the ECHR is to have free journalists, who can investigate on whatever they wanted. But because of the interference of States, it is not possible. [...]
Bibliographie, normes APA
Citez le doc consultéLecture en ligne
et sans publicité !Contenu vérifié
par notre comité de lecture
