The authors of this book "reflect on the concept of “favourable environment for the participation of all in public debate”, in particular of journalists, and the “pre-eminent role in a State governed by the rule of law” that the [European Court of Human Rights] acknowledges as belonging to them. Each author took a closer look at one of the aspects of such an environment and highlighted not only the pressing problems, but also the standards and principles prevailing in the European and even international landscape, as well as the gaps and the potential of the existing protection mechanisms."

Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to member States on the protection of journalism and safety of journalists and other media actors.

"The European Centre for Press and Media Freedom with the support of Council of the Europe (CoE) organised the conference “Promoting dialogue between the European Court of Human Rights and the media freedom community. Freedom of expression and the role and case law of the European Court of Human Rights: developments and challenges”. The three key themes of this conference were: (1) defamation, privacy and the processing of personal data, (2) investigative journalism in relation to newsgathering, access to official documents and the importance of the protection of sources and whistleblowers, as well as (3) the right to protest and the role of the media during protests. The conference resulted in fruitful discussions of the ECtHR’s recent case law relating to freedom of expression, media and journalism. The keynote speakers, the moderators, the speakers and participants played a crucial role on the productive dialogue between judges and civil society. These discussions have been collected and presented in this conference e-book in form of conclusions. In addition, unedited speeches and presentations of the speakers are incorporated in this publication. The conference was broadcast live and video links to all speakers’ presentations are included as well. Lastly, a summary of social media coverage is also integrated."

"This revised edition contains summaries of over 270 judgments or decisions by the Court and provides hyperlinks to the full text of each of the summarised judgments or decisions (via HUDOC, the Court’s online case-law database). It can be read in various ways: for initial orientation in the steadily growing Article 10 case-law; for refreshing one’s knowledge of that case-law; for quick reference and checking, as well as for substantive research."

This is a a handbook for legal practitioners on protecting the right to freedom of erxpression under the European Convention on Human Rights. The chapters  are: 1: General consideration on Article 10; 2: Duties under Article 10; 3 Unprotected speech-hate, speech, incitement to violence; 4: The system of restrictions within the exercise of the right to freedom of expression; 5: Limitations due to "public" reasons; 6: Freedom of expression and reputation; 7: Rights of others; 8: Freedom of expression and the media; 9: Freedom of expression and new technologies.

This toolkit for judicial officials in Africa on international and regional standards on freedom of expression "encompasses a broad variety of issues, which should be considered by judi-cial actors in the course of their work to protect human rights. It covers legal standards of freedom of expression according to international and regional instruments and core texts and surveys pertinent jurisprudence on freedom of expression from regional and sub-regional courts or quasi-judicial bodies that deal with human rights issues.

The toolkit explicates conditions under which speech can be legitimately restricted, while also giving prominence to the safety of journalists and the issue of impunity, the latter representing one of the main obstacles to guaranteeing freedom of expression and freedom of information. Finally, the toolkit also addresses recent challenges to freedom of expression on the internet, including on social media, which have become vital means for sharing information and expressing views. The question of gender representation in media content and careers, and gender-specific threats for women journalists, are also addressed.The protection of freedom of expression requires the active efforts of a great variety of actors. While this toolkit has been conceived primarily for judges, prosecutors, trainers of judges, lawyers and other legal experts, it is my hope that civil society actors, members of security forces and media professionals will also find its contents of great value to their work. Given the importance of freedom of expression as a foundational value of free societies, I believe the toolkit’s material and messages will be of relevance to all concerned stakeholders — that is to say, to all individuals everywhere."

"This article will present the profound and real changes that took place in Africa, specifically in the areas of press freedom and free speech, particularly in the 1990s, but will argue that there remain much unfinished business and many unfulfilled promises, including stalled legal reform, limited media pluralism, and a lack of political will to move from the rhetoric of transparency to its reality. It is in this context that a global human rights recession has struck. This article will show that the observed global human rights setback applies with equal force to Africa. The setback has not necessarily been greater in Africa than elsewhere, but neither has it been less visible or less marked. In fact, in an environment characterized by weak political institutions and a nascent, and thus fragile democratization process, it is probable that this setback will take longer to reverse."

"This study, conducted by the Internet Monitor project at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, documents the practice of Internet censorship around the world through empirical testing in 45 countries of the availability of 2,046 of the world’s most-trafficked and influential websites, plus additional country-specific websites. The study finds evidence of filtering in 26 countries across four broad content themes: political, social, topics related to conflict and security, and Internet tools (a term that includes censorship circumvention tools as well as social media platforms). The majority of countries that censor content do so across all four themes, although the depth of the filtering varies."

"This paper offers thoughts on the evolving nature and scope of Internet governance in the context of the development of the right to be forgotten. It summarises traditional frameworks for: (a) defining and operationalizing principles of Internet governance; and (b) distinguishing the types of issues that raise transnational governance concerns from the types of issues that are commonly considered the domain of local laws and norms.

If an issue falls within the ambit of Internet governance, it may lend itself to a certain set of solutions (with input from a broad cross-section of global public and private stakeholders). Issues outside that domain tend to be subjects of local regulatory mechanisms, in accordance with notions of national sovereignty. Categorizing a set of legal, policy, or technical considerations as one or the other, thus, has consequences in terms of the types of approaches to governance that may best be deployed to address them.

The paper provides examples of how recent technical and legal developments have put pressure on narrow conceptions of Internet governance as concerned primarily with Internet architecture and infrastructure. It posits that Internet governance models may be relevant to more and more conduct that occurs above the level of Internet’s metaphorical pipes, including developments that occur at what is traditionally conceived of as the content layer. The paper suggests that various global implementations of the right to be forgotten —and, in particular, implementations that are directed at the activities of search engines— offer a useful case study in examining and assessing this transformation."

These materials are part of the Multimedia Training Kit (MMTK). Here you will find links to a) Module Handout; b) Module Trainers' notes; c) Module Questions and case studies; d) Module Power Point Slides. "The MMTK provides an integrated set of multimedia training materials and resources to support community media, community multimedia centres, telecentres, and other initiatives using information and communications technologies (ICTs) to empower communities and support development work. [...] This module explores the relationship between human rights, as understood in the Inter-American Human Rights System, and ICTs such as the internet. As well as this handout, it includes a set of presentation slides, exercises and case studies, and a list of additional readings. It raises the following general questions which should be considered by participants: 1. How has the internet changed people’s lives? What rights have been affected positively or negatively due to access to the internet? 2. Should online and offline human rights be understood differently? 3. What should the role of the state be regarding the exercise of human rights online? 4. What are the implications of the global nature of the internet for national human rights laws and international human rights instruments?" 

"The idea of an “Internet Bill of Rights” is by no means a new one: in fact, serious efforts to draft such a document can be traced at least as far back as the mid-1990s. Though the form, function and scope of such initiatives has evolved, the concept has had remarkable staying power, and now — two full decades later — principles which were once radically aspirational have begun to crystallize into law. In this paper, we propose a unified term to describe these efforts using the umbrella of “digital constitutionalism” and conduct an analysis of thirty initiatives spanning from 1999 to 2015. These initiatives have great differences, and range from advocacy statements to official positions of intergovernmental organizations to proposed legislation. However, in their own way, they are each engaged in the same conversation, seeking to advance a relatively comprehensive set of rights, principles, and governance norms for the Internet, and are usefully understood as part of a broader proto-constitutional discourse. While this paper does not attempt to capture every facet of this complex political behavior, we hope to offer a preliminary map of the landscape, provide a comparative examination of these diverse efforts toward digital constitutionalism, and — most importantly — provoke new questions for further research and study. The paper proceeds in four parts, beginning with a preliminary definition for the concept of digital constitutionalism and a summary of our research methodology. Second, we present our core observations related to the full range of substantive rights, principles and themes proposed by these initiatives. Third, we build on that analysis to explore their perceived targets, the key actors and deliberative processes which have informed their character, and the changes in their substantive content over time. Finally, we look forward, identifying future directions for research in this rapidly changing policy arena and for the broader Internet governance community."

"For many  years  now, an apparent  conundrum  has lurked just  beneath the  surface among European jurisdictions.  In  the Common Law countries – namely  the United Kingdom and  Ireland – full court decisions, including  the names of  the parties, are generally accessible  to  the public.  In  the  rest of Europe, governed by  the civil law, however, such decisions are normally published only with the names of the parties redacted. The apparent rationale for the former is the idea of open justice, while in the latter group of countries the idea of personal data protection reigns supreme."

“The report aims to translate in a concise and clear manner more than 70 years of international jurisprudence on freedom of expression, and outline a road map for judicial operators so that they can make decisions that are in line with international standards.” Available only in Spanish.

"The MLDI Training Manual on Digital Rights and Freedom of Expression Online is designed to assist lawyers represent web-based journalists, bloggers and other online media. It comprises a comprehensive overview of international and comparative law on access to the internet, digital privacy and online data protection as well as specific types of speech-related offences online."

"This manual has been produced as a resource material for training workshops on media and freedom of expression law. It contains resources and background material to help trainers prepare and participants to understand the issues being discussed [...] The manual and training presentations are aimed at an audience of lawyers, with experience of litigation, but not necessarily of media, freedom of expression or human rights law. It covers international and comparative law only, and should be supplemented with relevant national law standards for the country in which they are being used.” 

 Syllabus for ‘World Communication: Principles, Politics and Law’ (Spring 2010)

The toolkit “is organized in six thematic modules that offer up to date information on the protection and promotion of freedom of expression, access to public information and safety of journalists in Judicial Systems in Ibero America. It also provides a range of learning activities, assessment tools, and didactic resources, with the aim of becoming a dynamic component of basic and advance training in Judicial Schools”. Available only in Spanish.

This lesson is part of an International Human Rights free online course created by the MOOC Chile project. The lesson answer the questions: What is freedom of expression? And why it is an important right? "In this class [they] first refer to the sources of freedom of speech in international human rights law as well as to which aspects are covered by it. [They] will also explain which types of discourse are protected and which not. Then [they] will summarize the main justifications given for protecting speech freedom. After that, [they] will deal with the main restrictions to which the freedom of expression may be subjected." 

"This article is based on the premise that whistleblowers can play a valuable role in modern society. The UK Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA 1998), which only applies to workers and requires that disclosures are made in “good faith”, makes no mention of the law of defamation. This article considers the impact of the law relating to libel and slander on actual and potential whistleblowers. It is observed that those who are not covered by PIDA 1998 are particularly exposed – if they cannot prove the truth of their allegations their motives may be examined in an action for defamation. The author concludes that it would be consistent with the principle of freedom of expression if statutory privileges were introduced and if Parliament removed the requirement of “good faith” for a disclosure to be protected under PIDA 1998."

This manual describes the historical evolution of Sedition laws and the recent developments in this field. It also provides a comparative study of sedition laws across different countries. It deals with how sedition laws have been dealt with in contemporary India, and brings together various arguments to make the case for the repeal of these laws.

The New Zealand’s Law Commission Report reviews the law of sedition in New Zealand, and traces its history in common law. It has concluded that the width of the seditious offences under the law means they are an unjustifiable breach of the right of freedom of expression. Considering that defaming the Government is right of every citizen, the Law Commission recommended the repeal of the sedition laws in the country.

This book is an analysis of the draconian provisions in the Sedition Act 1948 of Malaysia,its history and how it affects the citizen’s constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression as enshrined in the Constitution. It provides some understanding of, and reasons why, the Sedition Act as enacted and adopted in 1948 by the British colonial government must be abolished, or alternatively, reformed to reflect the changes in national and global political dimensions, particularly the threat of terrorism.

This article provides a review of the history, structure and form of the law of sedition, focusing on the new provisions inserted into the Criminal Code Act 1995 in 2005 as part of a wider counter-terrorism package. A short historical review of sedition in Australia is followed by a critical analysis of the new offences, which explores the constitutional and human rights implications of these new offences. It concludes that the law does not achieve the proposed balance between national security and human rights.

This article examines the new phenomenon of sedition laws being used to counteract speech considered offensive to racial and religious groups in Singapore. It investigates the manner in which these laws have been employed and jurisprudentially developed to restrain speech on race and/or religion in Singapore. The article argues that the current state of the law is highlyproblematic for its adverse impact on free speech as well as for its conceptual confusions with alternative bases for restraining speech.

“This article reviews the application of laws against sedition in China and, in particular, recently publicised applications of these laws against two leading political dissidents in China. This analysis is placed within the context of a preliminary review of the development of laws against sedition principally in the United States. It concludes that it is not the abuse of China’s anti-sedition laws, as laws, which we need to be most concerned about. The more crucial problem relates to the political context, influenced often by international factors, which shapes decisions to use these laws.”

This article analyses sedition and related laws in the United States of America and the United Kingdom to determine the circumstances under which the interests of the State are secured and the opportunism of terrorist organizations avoided. It argues that the changes in the American or British law that were touted to protect free speech, are more restrictive than is widely understood. The article concludes that the national security exceptions are too broad, and has led to the use of counter-terrorism measures against non-violent opposition.

This article considers the law of sedition, tracing its history through the origins and evolution of such laws in England. It discusses the philosophy behind freedom of expression, identifying the four commonly held justifications for the principle. It contemplates the tradition of free speech in the United States and the relationship between First Amendment free speech, defamation, and sedition, as illustrated in the case New York Times v Sullivan. It argues that sedition (in the form of defamation against the government) strikes at the very heart of democracy and that political freedom ends when government can use its powers and its courts to silence its critics.

This article debates the question of whether the First Amendment repudiated seditious libel at the time of its adoption. It discusses the widely criticized Sedition Act of 1798 and concludes that even though the modern consensus is that the 1798 Act violated the First Amendment guarantees of right to freedom of speech and press, the proposition that the First Amendment at its adoption repudiated the common law crime of seditious libel remains doubtful.

The article examines fragments of the history of sedition and like prosecutions in Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States of America in the twentieth century. It argues that, as long as the various sedition offences remain, governments will inevitably be tempted to use them improperly, especially when highly unpopular opinions are expressed, that the law of sedition is anachronistic and an unjustified interference with freedom of expression, and that abolition of sedition offences at both Commonwealth and State level is therefore to be preferred to any attempt to “modernise” the crime of sedition.

This article, by looking back through almost the last 100 years of American history, shows that the current laws on sedition and free speech in the post-9/11 era parallel those adopted from two other time periods in American history, i.e. World War One and the Cold War. It also argues that changes in current sedition laws are not needed to fight the war on terrorism five years after the attacks on September 11, 2001.

This report reviews the laws and practices in nations relating to protection of journalists’ sources around the world. The first section discusses by topic the areas of relevance relating to protection of sources and how they are reflected in legislation, starting with international standards and concluding with domestic practices and issues of special concern such as national security, surveillance and defamation. The second section examines by region the situation and the challenges that journalists face. Several examples and cases are presented to illustrate the current situation in the different regions. Finally, based on the collected information, guidelines based on the best laws and practices are included. These can be used when considering new laws and re-examining and amending existing legislation in countries on the protection of sources.

This article is a comprehensive take on the entire issue pertaining to whistleblowers. It compares the text of laws pertaining to whistleblowing across several jurisdictions including USA, UK, Japan and South Africa. The article concludes that countries such as South Africa, Japan and the UK are more comprehensive in their scope, coverage, and types of protection for whistleblowers, with clearly outlined definitions.

This article discusses the various elements of a definition of whistleblowing and brings out the notion of whistleblowing as an element of free speech and the right of individuals to express dissent. It then goes on to discuss the utility of whistleblowing and the barriers to the same. In order to analyze the international position on whistleblower protection, the article discusses the various international conventions that relate to it, including the UN Convention against Corruption and the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression. The article also analyzes the national laws on whistleblowing from USA, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa.

"Thee inter- American system of human rights (IASHR) is one of the three regional human rights systems, together with the European and the African systems. This contribution aims to offer a general overview of its structure and functions in order to understand the tools that have been used by the system to contribute toward its transformative role in the region. The IASHR has both a legal and an institutional dimension, in addition to a systemic one, and the sections of this contribution respect this tripartite division."

"Judicial globalization, by contrast, describes a much more diverse and messy process of judicial interaction across, above and below borders, exchanging ideas and cooperating in cases involving national as much as international law. This essay sets forth five different categories of judicial interaction: relations between national courts and the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the European Union (EU); interactions between the European Court of Human Rights and national courts; the emergence of "judicial comity" in transnational litigation; constitutional crossfertilization; and face-to-face meetings among judges around the world. The contexts are very different, involving both "vertical" relations between national and international tribunals and "horizontal" relations across national borders. The factors driving these forms of interaction also vary widely, including a structural provision in an international treaty, the globalization of commerce, and the need for judicial training in many fledgling democracies."

“The inquiry in this essay thus begins not with classical international law, but with the dominant positive analytical framework shared by both international lawyers and political scientists - Realism. Part I outlines the basic tenets of Realism and introduces the principal alternative to Realism in international relations scholarship — Liberalism. […] The project here, consistent with an overall commitment to a new generation of interdisciplinary scholarship, is to reimagine international law based on an acceptance of this distinction and an extrapolation of its potential implications. Part II distills various factors that political scientists have correlated with the 'liberal peace', factors that can be translated into assumptions about political and economic relations among liberal States. Part III introduces the concept of a world of liberal States, acknowledging the distance between such a world and the present international system but arguing that the hypothesis may nevertheless describe an important dimension of the current system. Part IV constructs a model of international law based on a hypothetical world of liberal States, integrating assumptions about relations among such States with the broader assumptions of Liberal international relations theory.”

"Part II of this article sets a background for the possibilities of regional international criminal law enforcement by exploring regionalization of other substantive areas of international law enforcement. Part III argues that regionalization of international criminal law could be a normatively positive development as it might better balance the benefits and drawbacks of national and supranational enforcement. Part IV applies political science and international relations methods, particularly from a neo-functionalist perspective, to develop a theory of regionalization of international criminal law, arguing that states are highly likely to support regionalization. Part V explores various pathways to regionalization including the creation of regional criminal courts as well as a variety of softer forms of regionalism. Part VI considers two possible impacts of regionalization on  substantive international law and suggests the likely development of procedural differentiation within a universal system."

"This symposium has sought to examine the fragmentation of the international legal system.  Such a task presupposes that international law is, in fact, undergoing some form of fragmentation. A range of recent scholarship has described this so-called fragmentation in various ways and generally considered it a negative development, a threat to the legal system as we know it.  This commentary challenges both these assumptions by suggesting that international law is not fragmenting, but rather is being transformed into a pluralist system. Instead of being undermined by fragmentation, the rules, the institutions, and practices of the international legal order can be strengthened by the emergence of an international legal pluralism."

"The dynamics by which norms emerge and spread in international society have been the subject of strikingly little study. This article focuses on norms that prohibit, both in international law and in the domestic criminal laws of states, the involvement of state and nonstate actors in activities such as piracy, slavery, counterfeiting, drug trafficking, the hijacking of aircraft, and the killing of endangered animal species. It analyzes the manner in which these norms have evolved into and been institutionalized by global prohibition regimes and argues that there are two principal inducements to the formation and promotion of such regimes. The first is the inadequacy of unilateral and bilateral law enforcement measures in the face of criminal activities that transcend national borders. The second is the role of moral and emotional factors related to neither political nor economic advantage but instead involving religious beliefs, humanitarian sentiments, fears, prejudices, paternalism, faith in universalism, the individual conscience, and the compulsion to proselytize. The ultimate success or failure of an international regime in effectively suppressing a particular activity depends, however, not only on the degree of commitment to its norms or the extent of resources devoted to carrying out its goals but also on the vulnerability of the activity to its enforcement measures."

“The power of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) to shape government behavior varies greatly from country to country. All states subject to the Court’s jurisdiction accept its authority to adjudicate disputes, and all take at least some meaningful steps toward judgment compliance. […] But in some states the Court’s judgments play a far greater role: they are untethered from the particular dispute that gives rise to them and take on a life as law-like rules that guide the subsequent behavior of public actors and the outcomes of disputes that never reach the Court. In some states the Court’s judgments even come to shape policymaking and public debates, constraining the range of options that are put on the table […] This article demonstrates that variation of the Inter-American Court’s authority across states can be explained in great part by the practice of constitutional law in each state. This is not to say that differences in constitutional texts explain the variation. Rather, the article suggests that for the Court’s authority to expand beyond mere judgment compliance, two factors other than the black-letter law must be in place. The first factor is the presence of lawyers—be they scholars, judges, public-interest lawyers, or other practitioners—who adhere to and promote a particular vision of constitutional law as containing within it international human rights law. […] The second factor explaining this variation is that those who advance these ideas must have political impact at the national level: they must be able to forge alliances with legislative and executive reformers who adopt the movement’s vision of law and advance it as part of their own project of political reform.”

"Some portion of the political left in the United States has called for the restriction of pornography and hate speech. Those who advocate such censorship do so on the ground that pornography and hate speech cause harm to disadvantaged "outsider" groups in society. For this reason, the leftist censorship advocates do not accept traditional First Amendment doctrines that protect much pornography and hate speech. In calling for censorship, the author argues, leftists endanger a great deal of activist speech, particularly in the form of artwork, that in fact seeks to undermine the very pornography and hate speech the censorship advocates target. Because much postmodern art appropriates the language and images of hate speech and pornography in order to deconstruct or otherwise subvert them, leftist attempts at censorship carry a grave danger of silencing leftist activists. Furthermore, the author maintains, leftist advocates of censorship have not, and ultimately cannot, develop theories of interpretation capable of protecting activist expression while still restricting or banning pornography and hate speech. Because of the indeterminacy of language, censorship advocates must choose whether to sacrifice vital voices of protest and criticism from within the left or whether to suppress pornography and hate speech."

"International regimes are defined as principles, norms, rules, and decision making procedures around which actor expectations converge in a given issue-area. As a starting point, regimes have been conceptualized as intervening variables, standing between basic causal factors and related outcomes and behavior. There are three views about the importance of regimes: conventional structural orientations dismiss regimes as being at best ineffectual; Grotian orientations view regimes as an intimate component of the international system; and modified structural perspectives see regimes as significant only under certain constrained conditions. For Grotian and modified structuralist arguments, which endorse the view that regimes can influence outcomes and behavior, regime development is seen as a function of five basic causal variables: egoistic self-interest, political power, diffuse norms and principles, custom and usage, and knowledge."

Norms are a major focus of attention of all social sciences, particularly sociology, political science, economics, anthropology, and social psychology. The social sciences are interested in the empirical study of norms, whereas jurisprudence and philosophy (moral philosophy and deontic logic) address the question of what 'good' norms are and how normative reasoning can be formalized. This article addresses the most important issues in the empirical study of norms. We begin by outlining some basic facts about norms because explanations of norms should address these facts. Before proceeding further, it is useful to elaborate on the major dimensions of the norms concept that are found in the literature and to ask what norms definition is to be preferred. The next issue is how norms can be measured. The central theoretical questions are how norms originate and, if they exist, what effects they have. These questions are addressed in the last two sections of the article. Norms are a major focus of attention of all social sciences, particularly sociology, political science, economics, anthropology , and social psychology. The social sciences are interested in the empirical study of norms, whereas jurisprudence and philosophy (moral philosophy and deontic logic) address the question of what 'good' norms are and how normative reasoning can be formalized. The literature on norms is so vast that a short article on this subject has to be restrictive. The following sections address the most important questions of the study of norms. We begin by outlining some basic facts about norms because explanations of norms should address these facts. Before proceeding further, it is useful to elaborate on the major dimensions of the norms concept that are found in the literature and to ask what norms definition is to be preferred. The next issue is how norms can be measured. The central theoretical questions are how norms originate and, if they exist, what effects they have. These questions are addressed in the last two sections of the article. 

"This article examines the process of consensus formation by the international community on how to confront the problem of trafficking in persons. We analyze the corpus of UNGA Third Committee resolutions to show that (1) consensus around the issue of how to confront trafficking in persons has increased over time; and (2) the formation of this consensus depends on how the issue is framed. We test our argument by examining the characteristics of resolutions’ sponsors and discursive framing concepts such as crime, human rights, and the strength of enforcement language. We conclude that the consensus formation process in international relations is more aptly described as one of “accommodation” through issue linkage than a process of persuasion."

"This article examines the process of consensus formation by the international community on how to confront the problem of trafficking in persons. We analyze the corpus of UNGA Third Committee resolutions to show that (1) consensus around the issue of how to confront trafficking in persons has increased over time; and (2) the formation of this consensus depends on how the issue is framed. We test our argument by examining the characteristics of resolutions’ sponsors and discursive framing concepts such as crime, human rights, and the strength of enforcement language. We conclude that the consensus formation process in international relations is more aptly described as one of “accommodation” through issue linkage than a process of persuasion."

"Constructing the World Polity brings together in one collection the theoretical ideas of one of the most influential International Relations theorists of our time. These essays, with a new introduction, and comprehensive connective sections, present Ruggie's ideas and their application to critical policy questions of the post-Cold War international order. Themes covered include:* International Organization. How the 'new Institutionalism' differs from the old. The System of States. Explorations of political structure, social time, and territorial space in the world polity. Making History. America and the issue of 'agency' in the post-Cold Was era. NATO and the future transatlantic security community. The United Nations and the collective use of force."

“Kathryn Sikkink examines the important and controversial new trend of holding political leaders criminally accountable for human rights violations […] Sikkink offers a landmark argument for human rights prosecutions as a powerful political tool. She shows how, in just three decades, state leaders in Latin America, Europe, and Africa have lost their immunity from any accountability for their human rights violations, becoming the subjects of highly publicized trials resulting in severe consequences. This shift is affecting the behavior of political leaders worldwide and may change the face of global politics as we know it. Drawing on extensive research and illuminating personal experience, Sikkink reveals how the stunning emergence of human rights prosecutions has come about; what effect it has had on democracy, conflict, and repression; and what it means for leaders and citizens everywhere, from Uruguay to the United States. The Justice Cascade is a vital read for anyone interested in the future of world politics and human rights.”

“Norms have never been absent from the study of international politics, but the sweeping “ideational turn” in the 1980s and 1990s brought them back as a central theoretical concern in the field. Much theorizing about norms has focused on how they create social structure, standards of appropriateness, and stability in international politics. Recent empirical research on norms, in contrast, has examined their role in creating political change, but change processes have been less well-theorized. [The authors] induce from this research a variety of theoretical arguments and testable hypotheses about the role of norms in political change. [They] argue that norms evolve in a three-stage “life cycle” of emergence, “norm cascades,” and internalization, and that each stage is governed by different motives, mechanisms, and behavioral logics. [They] also highlight the rational and strategic nature of many social construction processes and argue that theoretical progress will only be made by placing attention on the connections between norms and rationality rather than by opposing the two.”

"This volume argues that international human rights law has made a positive contribution to the realization of human rights in much of the world. Although governments sometimes ratify human rights treaties, gambling that they will experience little pressure to comply with them, this is not typically the case. Focusing on rights stakeholders rather than the United Nations or state pressure, Beth Simmons demonstrates through a combination of statistical analyses and case studies that the ratification of treaties leads to better rights practices on average. Simmons argues that international human rights law should get more practical and rhetorical support from the international community as a supplement to broader efforts to address conflict, development, and democratization."

"The first section of this essay defines a few key terms and provides some historical background on the relationship between international law and international relations. The second section discusses the major theoretical approaches, from those that highlight material incentives to those that rest on more ideational foundations. The third section discusses international law development – concepts of legalization, judicialization, constitutionalization, and global administrative law. The fourth section reviews theories and empirical studies of compliance with public international law. The final section concludes that theory has become less compartmentalized by “school” and empirical research has become more rigorous over the past decade."

"Formal international law is stagnating in terms both of quantity and quality. It is increasingly superseded by ‘informal international lawmaking’ involving new actors, new processes, and new outputs, in fields ranging from finance and health to internet regulation and the environment. On many occasions, the traditional structures of formal lawmaking have become shackles. Drawing on a two-year research project involving over 40 scholars and 30 case studies, this article offers evidence in support of the stagnation hypothesis, evaluates the likely reasons for it in relation to a ‘turn to informality’, and weighs possible options in response. But informal structures can also become shackles and limit freedom. From practice, we deduce procedural meta-norms against which informal cooperation is increasingly checked (‘thick stakeholder consensus’). Intriguingly, this benchmark may be normatively superior (rather than inferior) to the validation requirements of traditional international law (‘thin state consent’)."

"The conceptual, and more recently empirical, study of compliance has become a central preoccupation, and perhaps the fastest growing subfield, in international legal scholarship. The authors seek to question this trend. They argue that looking at the aspirations of international law through the lens of rule compliance leads to inadequate scrutiny and understanding of the diverse complex purposes and projects that multiple actors impose and transpose on international legality, and especially a tendency to oversimplify if not distort the relation of inter-national law to politics. Citing a range of examples from different areas of international law – ranging widely from international trade and investment to international criminal and humanitarian law – the authors seek to show how the concept of compliance (especially viewed as rule observance) is inadequate for understanding how international law has normative effects. A fundamental flaw of compliance studies is that they abstract from the problem of interpretation: interpretation is pervasively determinative of what happens to legal rules when they are out in the world, yet ‘compliance’ studies begin with the notion that there is a stable and agreed meaning to a rule, and we need merely to observe whether it is obeyed."

The authors "examine why international actors-including states, firms, and activists-seek different types of legalized arrangements to solve political and substantive problems. [They] show how particular forms of legalization provide superior institutional solutions in different circumstances. [They] begin by examining the baseline advantages of "hard" legalization (that is, precise, legally binding obligations with appropriate third-party delegation). [They] emphasize, however, that actors often prefer softer forms of legalization (that is, various combinations of reduced precision, less stringent obligation, and weaker delegation). Soft legalization has a number of significant advantages, including that it is easier to achieve, provides strategies for dealing with uncertainty, infringes less on sovereignty, and facilitates compromise among differentiated actors. Although [their] approach is largely interest-based, [they] explicitly incorporate the normative elements that are central in law and in recent international relations theorizing. [They] also consider the important role of nonstate actors who, along with states, are central participants in contemporary international legalization. [They] illustrate the advantages of various forms of international legal arrangements with examples drawn from articles in this special issue and elsewhere.

"Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights has become a crucial instrument to stimulate and compel the national authorities of the 47 member states not only to abstain from interferences restricting media freedom and investigative journalism, but also to promote transparency, media pluralism and internet freedom. This paper explores some of the characteristics and developments of the European Court’s case law regarding media, journalism, internet freedom, newsgathering, whistleblowing and access to information. The perspective of the analysis is that effectively guaranteeing the right to freedom of expression and information helps developing the quality of democracy, the protection of other human rights and ultimately contributes to realise a more sustainable, and hence a better, world to live in"

Lee Bollinger argues that free speech establishes tolerance. Through a free speech regime, a vast number of ideas circulate even those that some may consider as extreme, dangerous, hateful, or wrong. Bollinger reasons that if we run up against ideas and opinions that differ from our own, we will learn to accept their existence. We will learn to manage our impulse, almost instinct to forbid such views. We will learn to manage our impulse to excessive intolerance. Through freedom of expression, we are forced to encounter others, others' opinions, others' dignities, others' autonomy, and to tolerate their existence. In his view, a free speech regime is a great social experience in tolerance. The extraordinary zone of freedom of expression tests our ability to live in a society that is necessarily defined by conflict and controversy. It trains us in the art of tolerance and steels us from vicissitudes. The best way to think of freedom of speech and press then, is not just as an aid in the search for truth, but also as creating an unregulated public arena, a special zone of social interaction. Bollinger argues that through the free speech experiment, we commit ourselves to being people of fortitude.    

This book review discusses the theory of Contempt of Court, in the context of its removal from the English courts, the European Convention on Human Rights, the Australian High Courts, and the Tasmanian case of a newspaper called The Mercury, and concludes with the note that though our Constitution adopted British law as frozen in 1950, it has failed to since then keep up with the developments in it, or with its spirit.

Traditionally the role of the media was to help shape the debate that would largely inform the electorate on issues of relevance to democracy. In recent times however, the media has come under attack for dereliction of its duty to inform and resorting to cheap gimmicks that target ratings. Essentially it is perceived, that the media is now seeking to “dumb down” viewers placating them with voyeuristic entertainment. In this article however Stockwell seeks to challenge this presumption that ‘infotainment’ is essentially negative. Deconstructing this inherent negativity attributed to ‘infotainment’, he posits that it actually offers a more.

This book mounts a criticism of the Millian defense of freedom of expression and the underlying harm principle and provides for an alternate paradigm in the “offense principle”. Discussions are based around US First Amendment precedent.

Discusses the doctrine of prior restraint, its nature and development as well as the speech and speech acts in respect of which it has been applied by the U.S. Supreme Court.

This article discusses the importance of the freedom of expression and the freedom of press in the Indian context, and in the specific context of the constitution and the restrictions it allows to be placed on it. It then discusses censorship as an inevitable result of this, focusing on prior restraint and traces the history of legislation and cases on these principles, from the perspective of both civil and criminal law, and concludes with recommendations on changes which are needed, mentioning the law of contempt specifically.

This article is a comment on the EMS Namboodiripad v. T N Nambiar case (ref. ), which also discusses the evolution of the Indian law of Contempt, the influence of the English law on it, and suggests that the power of the courts under ‘contempt’ should be redefined in the context of ‘reasonableness’, and says that the dicta of the chief justice insofar as it restricts the restriction on freedom of expression only to cases where contempt is ‘manifest’ or ‘substantial’ is a definite improvement. It notes that the law of contempt is necessary, but should be redefined and limited to cases where it actually interferes with the administration of justice.

The article discusses Sedition Law in the American context. It examines the historical interplay between Sedition laws and the Freedom of Speech.

This Article argues that the law on seditious libel is essentially anti-democratic. It seeks to demonstrate that authoritarianism, political insecurity, diabolization of dissenters, and a hysterical fear of opposition have traditionally accompanied waves of prosecution for seditious libel. In conclusion, it proposes a theory of how courts should decide these cases under an enlightened view of freedom of speech and suggest the outlines of a first amendment theory that would spell the death of seditious libel.

This article advances a new understanding of the original guarantee of freedom of speech under the American Constitution, before the First Amendment. It is also about the modern implications of the original guarantee about speech-how it provides tougher and more juridical standards for limiting discretionary government power over speech and how it avoids costs to speech that America presently tolerates under a wholly rights-oriented and litigation-intensive mode of protecting speech.

The author analyses the Alien and Sedition Laws in America in the backdrop of Freedom of Press and the Alien and Sedition Laws.

This article examines the constitutionality of Sedition Laws in the United States and its relation with the freedom of speech and expression. The author also provides an account of the historical underpinnings of Sedition Laws.

The author provides an account of the historical evolution of the doctrine of sedition which is important for analyzing the basis of modern Sedition Laws.

In many common law liberal democracies today, news gatherers are resisting efforts to use the powers of the courts to compel them to identify their confidential sources. Often the struggles are epic. Often the public interest in effective news gathering fuelling the vitality of a modern liberal democracy is insufficiently recognised. The article uses recent cases to spotlight the shortfalls in the approach and legacy of the common law in dealing with news gatherer/ confidential source relationships. Post Human Rights Act English decisions, especially that of Tugendhat J in Ackroyd, combining European style commitment to the public interest in vigorous newsgathering with common law style analysis of evidence, point the way to a more effective approach. US and Hong Kong cases remind news gatherers of their public interest responsibilities.

This article provides a detailed overview about the considerations that need to be kept in mind while drafting a whistleblower protection law. It explains the pre-requisites for whistleblower laws and analyses the laws across various jurisdictions. Further it explains the different consideration that need to be put in place for public and private sector employees and the channels of disclosure that need to be implemented. The article concludes that effective whistleblower protections must include access to the normal legal process including trial by jury, protection for the whistleblower and protection of lawful disclosure. There must be no retaliation and there must be effective resolution of the wrongdoing disclosed by the whistleblower. It thus concludes that an effective legislation is the backbone of any proposed whistleblower protection.

This article constitutes a basic reading to understand the concept of whistleblowing and the need to afford protection to them in a modern democratic age. It also analyses the laws relating to whistleblower protection in various countries, including USA and Australia.

The chapter on Legal Principles in Whistleblower Laws provides the basic legal principles surrounding protection of whistleblowers in USA.

Gillwald examines the public sphere, contextualising it in terms of the debate between the liberalist school of thought and the Marxist school of thought. While the traditional liberalist position that locates the media “at the interface between the governors and governed”, the Marxist school characterises the media as bourgeoisie. Gillwald in elucidating on the shortcomings of both these notions, seeks to understand the public sphere in the sense of Habermas’ critical sphere. Through the debunking of certain misplaced assumptions with regard to the public sphere, she seeks to reconstruct the public sphere, thereby redefining the role of the media in a democracy.

Rawls’ discussion of the first principle of justice, which he terms the “liberty principle”, particularly when it would be justified to limit basic liberties such as that of speech.

Bennett in examining the scholarship on the different theories of media seeks to understand the assumptions at play in the various schools of thought, which have gone on to shape our understanding of media. Through this exercise he also aims to comprehend the implications of the terminology “mass, media and communications”, so as to discern the nature of the media as perceived.

"The press, long enshrined among our most highly cherished institutions, was thought a cornerstone of democracy when its name was boldly inscribed in the Bill of Rights. Freed from governmental restraint, initially by the first amendment and later by the fourteenth, the press was to stand majestically as the champion of new ideas and the watch dog against governmental abuse. Professor Barron finds this conception of the first amendment, perhaps realistic in the eighteenth century heyday of political pamphleteering, essentially romantic in an era marked by extraordinary technological developments in the communications industry. To make viable the time-honored "marketplace" theory, he argues for a twentieth century interpretation of the first amendment which will impose an affirmative responsibility on the monopoly newspaper to act as sounding board for new ideas and old grievances."

Originally intended as the preface to Animal Farm, discusses the motivations to self-censorship in literary endeavours.

Bentham’s statement of press freedom argues to permit political associations/assemblies in public and resistance to governmental authority as a check to abuse of power. Special mention of permitting criticism, including of state officials, and a discussion of how sedition and defamation of public officials should be addressed.

Mill argues for limited governmental intervention in silencing or compelling speech, emphasizes the value of contrary and minority opinions and presents a principle on which any governmental action in respect of speech should be based.

Bagehot argues for toleration by the state and under law of a diversity of opinions, and argues that discussions and exchange of opinions must be in pursuit of uncovering truths.

Blasi provides, in the context of the US First Amendment, the canonical iteration the notion that free speech performs the function of checking governmental abuse of power, and discusses its utility as a consideration in adjudication on free speech issues.

“The normal treatment of governmental regulation of markets makes a sharp distinction between the ordinary market for goods and services and the activities covered by the First Amendment-speech, writing, and the exercise of religious beliefs -which [. H. Coase] call[s], for brevity, "the market for ideas." […] What is the general view that [R. H. Coase] will be examining? It is that, in the market for goods, government regulation is desirable whereas, in the market for ideas, government regulation is undesirable and should be strictly limited. In the market for goods, the government is commonly regarded as competent to regulate and properly motivated. Consumers lack the ability to make the appropriate choices. Producers often exercise monopolistic power and, in any case, without some form of government intervention, would not act in a way which promotes the public interest. In the market for ideas, the position is very different. The government, if it attempted to regulate, would be inefficient and its motives would, in general, be bad, so that, even if it were successful in achieving what it wanted to accomplish, the results would be undesirable.” 

Nimmer argues that the existence of both a speech and a press clause suggests that a speech-press duality was intended under the First Amendment. He discusses precedent at the US Supreme Court which make apparent and engage with the distinction.

The report (A/72/135) is divided in seven sections. In section III, the Special Rapporteur “outlines the factors that shape her vision.” This section includes subsections on ‘freedom of peaceful assembly and of association as fundamental rights; ‘Democracy and freedom of peaceful assembly and of association; ‘Development and freedom of peaceful assembly and of association’. 

First Joint Declaration of OAS and ACHPR Special Rapportuers on Freedom of Expression

This article unpacks and explains the chilling effect and discusses how uncertainty generally and the chilling effect will affect how various classes of speech are treated.

The report (A/69/335)“focuses on the right of the child to freedom of expression. [The Special Rapporteur] calls for a greater focus by the international community and States on children’s right to freedom of expression and access to information, while noting with concern the adoption of various restrictive measures allegedly aimed at protecting children from harmful information.” 

The report (A/HRC/26/30) “focuses on the realization of the right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts, paying particular attention to the establishment and enforcement of legal instruments regulating political communications. [The Special Rapporteur] details the human rights framework applicable to the question of freedom of opinion and expression in political communications and electoral processes. [T]hen describes common violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral periods. Finally, [p]rovides recommendations on the alignment of national legal frameworks to the most relevant international human rights standards, emphasizing the importance of promoting pluralism, transparency and accountability.” 

“In the present report [A/68/362], the Special Rapporteur focuses on the right to access information. He describes how the right is established through international human rights law, emphasizing its interrelationships with the right to truth. Taking into account that framework, he discusses the permissible limitations to access to information, in particular the exceptions justified by national security concerns. He describes principles that may guide the design and implementation of laws on access to information and examines common obstacles noted in existing experience. He makes recommendations for the better translation of international human rights standards into national laws and practices that promote access to information.”

The report (A/HRC/23/40) “analyses the implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression. While considering the impact of significant technological advances in communications, the report underlines the urgent need to further study new modalities of surveillance and to revise national laws regulating these practices in line with human rights standards.”

The report “presents an overview of the [hate speech and incitement to hatred] phenomenon, the relevant international norms and standards, including distinctions between types of hate speech, and examples of domestic legislation that contravene international norms and standards. While noting the importance of clear laws that conform to international norms and principles to combat hate speech, the Special Rapporteur underscores the importance of non-legal measures to tackle the root causes of hatred and intolerance. The report concludes with a set of recommendations to combat hate speech effectively without unduly curtailing the right to freedom of opinion and expression.” 

The report “expands upon the last report submitted to the Council […] (A/HRC/17/27), and addresses the issue through two equally important dimensions of Internet access: access to online content (sect. III), and access to Internet connection (sect. IV). In section III, the Special Rapporteur outlines the types of expression that States are exceptionally required to prohibit under international law (III.A) and also discusses impermissible restrictions (III.B), given the ongoing debate regarding regulation of content on the Internet. The report also addresses the importance of digital literacy and training in information and communications technology skills for individuals to enable them to access online content in an effective and meaningful manner. […] (sect. IV). The report concludes with recommendations to ensure full access to online content that is free of censorship and access to Internet connection, particularly for marginalized and disadvantaged groups.” 

The report (A/HRC/17/27) “underscores the unique and transformative nature of the Internet not only to enable individuals to exercise their right to freedom of opinion and expression, but also a range of other human rights, and to promote the progress of society as a whole. Chapter III of the report underlines the applicability of international human rights norms and standards on the right to freedom of opinion and expression to the Internet as a communication medium, and sets out the exceptional circumstances under which the dissemination of certain types of information may be restricted. Chapters IV and V address two dimensions of Internet access respectively: (a) access to content; and (b) access to the physical and technical infrastructure required to access the Internet in the first place.” 

Human right to freedom of opinion and expression: Frank La Rue speaks about the role of social media and human rights.

Chapter III OF THE REPORT (A/HRC/14/23) "expands on four main themes: (a) general considerations on the freedom of opinion and expression; (b) freedom of expression for groups in need of particular attention and the role of freedom of expression in combating discrimination; (c) permissable restrictions and limitations on freedom of the expression; and (d) protection of journalists and freedom of the press. Chapter IV presents the Special Rapporteur’s conclusions and general recommendations concerning these main subjects.”