29 August 2024
Lights, Camera, Inclusion?
On July 8th, 2024, the Supreme Court of India ruled on a case challenging the movie "Aankh Micholi" for allegedly reinforcing harmful stereotypes about disabilities. The Court declared that “disabling humor” which demeans persons with disabilities would not be fully protected as freedom of speech. While the judgment provided an in-depth analysis of creative freedom and the rights of persons with disabilities, it stopped short of issuing binding directives, thus lacking the teeth necessary to effect meaningful change in how disabilities are portrayed in media. Continue reading >>
0 
24 April 2024
The Ball is in the Game
In 2017 strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) became an important topic on the EU level. As a result, the EU adopted the anti-SLAPP Directive, which shall protect journalists from abusive lawsuits that do not serve justice but only the sinister aim of silencing free press. However, there is important litigation as well. In 2024 the Real Madrid Club de Fútbol vs Le Monde case addressed the problem of exorbitant damages targeting press and introducing a deterrent effect on freedom of speech in transnational cases. From a rule of law and, especially, freedom of the press angle, the case is of paramount importance as it forwards a simple but groundbreaking argument: two of EU law’s most fundamental principles, mutual recognition and freedom of speech, are a strong basis to fight SLAPPs. Continue reading >>
0
21 August 2023
A Plea for Proportionality
In recent months the burning of the Koran in Sweden has caused headlines and severe anger in many parts of the Muslim world as well as bewilderment across the EU as to why Sweden continues to permit the practice. The Government is currently looking into how the law can be changed to include a ban on the burning of the Koran in the Public Order Act. In this blog post, I explain why it might be wise to do so and how this might be done. Continue reading >>25 May 2023
Strong on Hate Speech, Too Strict on Political Debate
Online hate speech is a topic that has gained importance in recent years. The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) made an important ruling in this context on 15 May 2023 in Sanchez v. France. From a democratic theory and individual rights’ perspective, I would endorse the first decision because it tackles the so-called “silencing” and “desensitization effect” of hate speech. The second decision, however, runs the risk of adversely affecting free political debate, especially when individual politicians are called upon to delete comments by third parties. Continue reading >>
0
07 March 2023
Freeing Political Expression
The South Korean parliament is in the midst of an intensive debate on electoral reform. Yet, a crucial element of necessary electoral law reform is missing in these debate: Last year, the Constitutional Court declared a controversial paragraph from the Electoral Act as unconstitutional and unjustly restricting freedom of expression. Failing to revise the targeted paragraph corresponding to the Constitutional Court’s decision in the upcoming legislature periods - by the latest of July 31, 2023 - would inevitably lead to a legal vacuum. In this blog post, I shed some light on the Constitutional Court’s 2022 decision and explain why the ruling could have a major impact on how election campaigns are conducted in South Korea. Continue reading >>
0
02 March 2023
On the Road to Censorship
Freedom of expression is in peril in India. To be fair, the Indian Supreme Court has never been a devout protector of freedom of expression. When presented with the option, it has often leaned towards permitting limitations, so long as the restrictions are properly framed under the language of Article 19(2) of the constitution. Yet, faced with the current illiberal onslaught, there is a possibility that even the few gains that have been made in this area of the court’s jurisprudence will be lost. Situated in this context, this article discusses the recent ban issued by the Indian government on a BBC documentary on India’s prime minister, the jurisprudence of the Indian supreme court on the interception of online material, and the legal measures introduced to regulate freedom of expression on the internet. Continue reading >>
0
30 December 2022
#DefendingTheDefenders – Episode 4: Turkey
In the fourth episode of #DefendingTheDefenders we talk about the situation of lawyers in Turkey with Veysel Ok. He is an attorney in Istanbul and the Co-Director of the Media and Law Studies Association, a non-profit which monitors and defends freedom of expression cases against journalists. Continue reading >>
0
15 December 2022
To Speak, or not to Speak
Several national football federations and their teams had planned to wear a rainbow armband (also called the “One-Love” armband) when entering the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, which symbolizes solidarity with the LGBTQ+ community. Promptly, this simple gesture in favor of respect of human rights and diversity was forbidden by FIFA. The days following the ban, players and teams expressed their unease about FIFA’s strict position and about the uncertainty of the potential sanctions. FIFA’s practice towards freedom of expression lacks consistency, which further highlights the protection gap that exists between the lex sportiva, the rules and regulations governing sports, and human rights law in respect of freedom of expression. How could the differences be reconciled? Continue reading >>15 December 2022
Articulating Legitimacy through Policy Recommendations
On 6 December, Meta's Oversight Board issued a policy advisory opinion on 'cross-check', a content moderation system used by the company to avoid the erroneous removal of content shared by highly influential users on its platforms. Despite the opinion’s directness in calling Meta out for the disproportionate attention paid to corporate interests to the detriment of its human rights commitments, the OB’s decision presents an underlying duplicity, as it criticises policy and design choices replicated in the OB’s own architecture. This curtails the institution's capacity to enhance accountability and legitimacy. Continue reading >>
0
19 October 2022
Sex, God, and Blasphemy
Blasphemy used to be a grave offence once. Now, it is on the decline, making room for freedom of expression. Yet, two judgments of last week show that blasphemy has managed to re-enter the stage through the back door. In this blogpost, I argue that although both cases ended well, i.e. were decided in favour of freedom of expression of artists and activists, both courts erred in their assessment of the role of religion and religious sentiment in European secular democracies. Continue reading >>
0