Should There Be a Limit to Freedom of Expression - Coursework Example

SHOULD THERE BE A LIMIT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION? By Location Introduction Freedom of expression is viewed asone of the pillars of a democratic society, Verpeaux (2010) asserts. Over the past few decades, numerous publications have pointed out troublesome freedom of expression decline in states around the world. Freedom of expression should and is the right of every person to hold opinions without meddling and to search, get and convey information and notions through any means. Freedom of expression is usually regardless of any limits put in place. It contributes to respect for the principle of the rule of law. Nonetheless, this vital right of humans is often restricted through several stratagems such as restrictive press legislation, journalists harassments, and expurgation. It also includes other religious freedom suppression. It is more accepted in different quarters that freedom of expression is of significance to development, democracy, and dialogue. Discussion Without freedom of expression, concepts concerning protecting the common good in the societies will be impoverished. A square of ideas is necessary for democracy to succeed. It is for this particular reason that the Human Rights European Court place such significance to political discourse and to speech and other expressive forms that may upset (Finkelman 2013). It may even conflict with the duty to shield order of the public or morals. Societies need pluralism to develop yet democracy also seeks to restrict extreme speech forms that preach hate and advocate for violence. Citizens often rely on journalists to report truthfully the controversies of the day and protect their right not to divulge sources. However, journalists are expected to be responsible for their actual reporting or commenting on issues that affect other individuals rights (Essays in Honor of Nicolas Bratza 2012). Freedom of expression doctrine is thought to single out a class of shielded acts, which it holds to be immune from restrictions to which other persons are subject (Scanlon 2003). Specifically, there will be cases where the shielded acts are held to be immune from restriction regardless of the fact they have harms that would be adequate to impose legal sanctions. The existence of these cases makes freedom of expression an important doctrine. Censorship studies and freedom of expression are most times associated with government censorship. Numerous crusaders of the civil society are concerned that restrictions supported by the state on information are on the rise hence threatening freedom of expression. Most individuals contend that freedom of expression institute the cornerstone of any society that is democratic and a solid and a central basis for development. Certainly, the right that safeguards freedom of expression is mostly viewed as supporting all other rights of humans and democratic freedoms. Justification for freedom of expression Freedom of expression is the freedom to speak anything without being censored. It is not an absolute in any state and is a common subject to limitations. Human rights and international rights law recognize freedom of expression. Freedom of expression is vital in democracies since debates and discussions are indispensable properties in a society that is democratic. It is the freedom of thoughts and debate is essential to arrive at knowledge and attain any progress. The expression is simply thoughts articulation, and if it is forbidden, then the thoughts are banned since thought is denied expression. Flexibility is the basic in freedom of expression, it needs views and ideas diversity. Freedom of expression is an important human right. It also reinforces most other rights and gives them a leeway to flourish. The right to express one’s mind freely on crucial issues in the society plays an important role in any society’s healthy development process. Freedom of speech clearly forbids a government from punishing its citizens for their religious beliefs that are both privately and publicly held. Freedom of expression should also protect individual rights to criticize the policy of the government and the leaders. The lack of freedom of expression access is a problem that specifically affects the individuals that are already marginalized. If they are unable to communicate their concepts, opinions and apprehension efficiently, they are often excluded from meaningful participation in the society. The obstacles to freedom of expression show the reasons why exercising freedom of expression is not as simple as living in a society that is democratic and broadly respects the citizen rights (Voice of Free Expression 2013). A participatory democracy requires citizens to reflect and debate to distill views of the public into a clear will of the individuals. This clearly will enable governments to absorb these values and translate them into policy. In addition, democracy is also about accountability and good governance. The public has both right and obligation to buy the very democracy definition to examine the actions of those in power and to participate in debates about their actions and priorities. One of the most efficient ways of addressing poor governance is through expression. Criticism or expression of individuals that are well documented can augment both knowledge and understanding despite the fact it might be both harsh and contentious. From this viewpoint, any restrictions on freedom of expression and particularly straightforward censorship would destabilize democracy fundamentals, consequently, doing harm to the public good (Schmidt n. d). It is crucial that national, political, and religious themes be discussed without being exposed to reflex criticism designed to suppress debate. It is not the rights of a political entity, religion or conviction that are shielded, but individual citizens or believers’ rights. Respect for freedom of expression help in combating ignorance and lack of understanding with a view to establishing peace and dialogue among civilizations and people. All societies should comply with international standards in advocating for freedom of expression. In cases of any conflict, there should be a peaceful and constructive expression and should provide precedence to seeking collective and lasting solutions. Freedom of expressions can boast a wide number of textual references among the fundamental freedoms. The freedom for a person to express himself is enshrined in many constitutions. The stress on the significance of expression and fulfillment of self of people through their autonomous act is one of the defining aspects of the liberal theory. The activities of human communication are vital to our capacity of individual expression. They are vital since speech is the most directive way of communicating to the rest of the world, which an individual is. However, in most countries, it is accepted that there can be restrictions on freedom of expression. Freedom of expression and censorship laws that are highly restrictive remain in place. According to Asad et al. (2006), freedom of expression is allowed on issues of security of the state and morality of the public. Asad et al. (2006) also states that freedom of expression is assured in almost every international of the human rights instrument and every liberal democracys constitution. Freedom of expression has been regulated in the threats from domestic and foreign foes. In some instances, freedom of expression has been regulated when there is a perception danger to the security. In times of political turmoil and cataclysm and during war periods, freedom of expression has been seen to be a threat to the national security. According to Smith (2011), the Universal Declaration provides for derogation when the freedom exercise would be contrary to the United Nations aims and principles. In war times or other emergencies of the public, derogation from the freedom of expression is always acceptable. In addition, the freedom of expression carries with it distinctive duties and responsibilities. Consequently, it may be subjected to limitations provided by the law that are essential to the respect of the rights of others. Countries are under an obligation to restrict freedom of expression under certain situations war, propaganda, or information that fuels racial, national, or religious hatred. War propaganda was linked with incitement to crimes against humanity (Smith 2011). Allowable restrictions on freedom of expression should be derived from civil and criminal law in any given state. It is significant to note that the allowable limitations should be provided by the law and should be essential to protect a number of public areas, as well as other peoples rights. Universally, these exclusive reasons should conform to principles such as being clearly defined, being applied to a body that is independent and is subject to sufficient safeguards against abuse. Moreover, restrictions should respect the principle that no person should be penalized for accurate statements. The state should also not criminally penalize for hate speech dissemination unless it is proven that individuals did so with the purpose of provoking discrimination and hostility. As for the press, journalists rights to decide how best to communicate information and concepts should be respected, especially when they are reporting on racism and intolerance. Furthermore, prior censorship should not be used as a tool to limit room for debate and discussion. Additionally, when sanctions are put in place, they should be applied respecting some universal principles. Caution should be taken to employ the least invasive and preventive measures to minimize the alarming effect on freedom of expression. Just in case of any imposed sanctions, it should be in strict conformity with the proportionality principle. Freedom of expression offenses should never be considered under a penal code (Schmidt n. d). Restrictions should also be formulated in a manner that makes clear that its main purpose is to shield people holding particular beliefs. Restrictions should not be protecting the systems of belief from criticism. Freedom of expression right infers that it should be possible to examine, openly debate and criticize systems of beliefs so long as it does not amount to advocating hatred against a person. Nonetheless, this does not imply that people should be unreasonable. Good freedom of expression will often be assured through a whole set of self-regulation practices. This includes ethical and professional standards, mechanisms of media accountability and codes of ethics (Kalathi 2011). In response to the developing problem, many groups or organizations are engaging in a campaign to defend freedom of expression as an important human right. An example of such a group is Freedom House that employs advocacy, fiscal support, and technical help to back efforts by the crusaders of local free expression (Freedom House 2013). Some of the efforts include opposing laws of media that restrict the capability of journalists to cover significant issues including defamation, libel laws, or criminal insult. The organization also takes part and organizes experts delegations to States that have in recent times implemented or drafting legislation that restricts freedom of expression. The delegations collaborate with local organizations and the crusaders of free expression to propose alterations to legislation and establish campaigns of advocacy addressing the regulations. Universally, the organization focuses on resisting attempts at the United Nations to restrict current norms protecting freedom of expression. According to Freedom House (2015), the organization also frequently provides oral interventions at the UNHCR, submitting written reports and letters to the council. Freedom House also holds side panel sessions and sends letters promoting freedom of expression directly to the representatives of the state. However, in some cases, governments have stated that they need to restrict freedom of expression to protect the economy. Conclusion In conclusion, freedom of expression is precious, and it deserves to be diligently shielded. Citizens should have an equal voice in debates on issues affecting the society. Freedom of expression is required to be robust and wide-open debate on issues affecting the public. It needs a social context in which people are allowed to voice what they are thinking. It centers on the dimension of distribution to the degree that there are constraints on words distribution. Acts that restrict expression distribution certainly makes it less free. Freedom of expression is that it is a debatable tool in securing good for all citizens. Good results of freedom of expression should be defended by illustrating free expression in the realization of overall good in the society. In addition, generates many criticisms and gives much airtime to opinions that are false. However, it allows for the sporadic, very significant, but unpopular truth reach the citizens. The authorities in a number of positions do not always want the truth to be revealed. References Asad, T, Brown, W, Butler, J, & Mahmood, S 2009, Is Critique Secular? Blasphemy, Injury, and Free Speech. Townsend Center for the Humanities, Library of Cataloging in Publication Data, Canada Essays In Honour of Nicolas Bratza 2012, Freedom of Expression, Available from: https://book.coe.int/usd/en/european-court-of-human-rights/4953-freedom-of-expression- essays-in-honour-of-nicolas-bratza-president-of-the-european-court-of-human-rights.html [April 9, 2015] Finkelman, P 2013, Encyclopedia of American Civil Liberties, Routledge, New York. "Freedom House," 2015, Freedom of Expression. Available from https://freedomhouse.org/issues/freedom-expression#.VSPiRfU5C28 [April 9, 2015] Kalathil, S 2011, Developing independent media as an institution of accountable governance: a how-to Guide, World Bank Publications, London. Scanlon, TM 2003, The Difficulty of Tolerance: Essays in Political Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, London. Schmidt, M, Limits to the restrictions to freedom of expression – Criteria and Application, Available from: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/opinion/articles1920_iccpr/docs/experts_papers/Schmidt.do c [April 9, 2015] Smith, RK 2011, Textbooks on International Human Rights, Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street. Verpeaux, M 2010, Freedom of Expression: In Constitutional and International Case Law, Europe: Council of Europe Publishing. "Voice of free expression," 2013, Why is access to freedom of expression important? Available from http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2013/03/why-is-access-to-freedom-of-expression-important/ [April 9, 2015] Read More