Meaning a Global Perspective

Meaning of a Global Perspective

A global perspective on freedom of expression borrows from different disciplines and theories, including international law, global norms formation, comparative jurisprudence and international legal pluralism. As such, it covers the international institutions, treaties, soft law and jurisprudence underpinning international free speech standards. It includes analyses of national constitutions, laws and jurisprudences to identify convergence and conflicts across jurisdictions. It focuses on the extent to which global norms of freedom of expression have emerged and cascaded around the world and the actors and forces responsible for it. Finally, a global perspective on freedom of expression is predicated on the notion that multiple legal orders support judicial dialogues but the existence of a “global village of precedents.”

2 items found, showing 31 - 2

International Law

Author: Joost Pauwelyn, Ramses A. Wessel, Jan Wouters
Media Type Icon

"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 It is increasingly superseded by ‘informal international lawmaking’ involving new actors, new processes, and new outputs, in fields ranging from finance and health to internet regulation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’)."

Joost Pauwelyn, Ramses A. Wessel and Jan Wouters, “When Structures Become Shackles: Dynamics in International Lawmaking,” European Journal of International Law, 25 No. 3, 2014. doi:10.1093/ejil/chu051 .http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/25/3/2520.pdf

Author: Human Rights Watch, Florida Rising, and Rule of Law Impact Lab at Stanford Law School
Media Type Icon

This report, published by Human Rights Watch in collaboration with Florida Rising and Rule of Law Impact Lab at Stanford Law School, argues Florida’s school curriculum distortions constitute censorship and are inconsistent with “international human rights standards on education, access to information, and discrimination.” The report outlines the legal framework that contributes to harassment and discrimination based on race, sex, and gender in Florida classrooms: House Bill 7, or the Stop WOKE Act; House Bill 1557, or the “Don’t Say Gay or Trans” law; and House Bill 1069, an extension of the “Don’t Say Gay or Trans.” What adds to the laws are state education policies, one of which forwards a “patriotic” curriculum with incorrect facts about the history of slavery in the US. The report’s “International Human Rights Law Analysis” section lists Florida’s obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, namely: upholding the rights to education free of discrimination, culturally appropriate education, free expression, and health.

Human Rights Watch, Florida Rising, and Rule of Law Impact Lab at Stanford Law School. “Why Do They Hate Us So Much?” Discriminatory Censorship Laws Harm Education in Florida. Human Rights Watch, June 2024. https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/media_2024/06/us_florida0624%20web.pdf