When Does Cultural Satire Cross the Line in the Global Human Rights Regime? 'Charlie Hebdo Controversy' Discussion and Its Implication for a New Paradigm of the Bounds of Freedom of Expression

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kwang Hyuk Yoo
Author(s):  
Yusuf Dalhat

This paper discusses the Freedom of Expression and Morality in the West with special reference to Charlie Hebdo attack and its implications. It highlights some of the reactions to the attack, with many western Scholars calling on Muslims to apologize. The paper has rather drawn their attention to the root cause of the attack which seems to have been ignored by them, being the attitude of the western society to Islam. Solution has been suggested for the attention of the Western Powers and other International Human Rights Organizations to set out Standards of respect for people’s faith for which one may be indicted for violating the moral laws.


2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 229-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Keane

This short comment assesses the situation of cartoons, comics and human rights after the Charlie Hebdo massacre. It engages questions on the meaning and history of cartoons, as well as freedom of expression, to find a new pathway beyond the parameters of the current debate. In particular, it asks why the protection of freedom of expression on Europe became contingent on drawing cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad. Rather than assigning a role for law in preventing such cartoons, or for freedom of expression in protecting them, it argues that desisting from drawing them would have no discernible impact. It highlights other means by which cartoons and comics can advance the human rights discourse, including pioneering comics authors in this regard. In conclusion it argues for an end to the largely dysfunctional terms of the debate and envisages a more progressive horizon.


Author(s):  
Guido Raimondi

This article comments on four important judgments given by the European Court of Human Rights in 2016. Al-Dulimi v. Switzerland addresses the issue of how, in the context of sanctions regimes created by the UN Security Council, European states should reconcile their obligations under the UN Charter with their obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights to respect the fundamentals of European public order. Baka v. Hungary concerns the separation of powers and judicial independence, in particular the need for procedural safeguards to protect judges against unjustified removal from office and to protect their legitimate exercise of freedom of expression. Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary is a judgment on the interpretation of the Convention, featuring a review of the “living instrument” approach. Avotiņš v. Latvia addresses the principle of mutual trust within the EU legal order and the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the Convention.


Author(s):  
Allan Hepburn

In the 1940s and 1950s, Britain was relatively uniform in terms of race and religion. The majority of Britons adhered to the Church of England, although Anglo-Catholic leanings—the last gasp of the Oxford Movement—prompted some people to convert to Roman Catholicism. Although the secularization thesis has had a tenacious grip on twentieth-century literary studies, it does not account for the flare-up of interest in religion in mid-century Britain. The ecumenical movement, which began in the 1930s in Europe, went into suspension during the war, and returned with vigour after 1945, advocated international collaboration among Christian denominations and consequently overlapped with the promotion of human rights, especially the defence of freedom of worship, the right to privacy, freedom of conscience, and freedom of expression.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 607-640
Author(s):  
Thiago Dias Oliva

Abstract With the increase in online content circulation new challenges have arisen: the dissemination of defamatory content, non-consensual intimate images, hate speech, fake news, the increase of copyright violations, among others. Due to the huge amount of work required in moderating content, internet platforms are developing artificial intelligence to automate decision-making content removal. This article discusses the reported performance of current content moderation technologies from a legal perspective, addressing the following question: what risks do these technologies pose to freedom of expression, access to information and diversity in the digital environment? The legal analysis developed by the article focuses on international human rights law standards. Despite recent improvements, content moderation technologies still fail to understand context, thereby posing risks to users’ free speech, access to information and equality. Consequently, it is concluded, these technologies should not be the sole basis for reaching decisions that directly affect user expression.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Tiberiu Dragu ◽  
Yonatan Lupu

Abstract How will advances in digital technology affect the future of human rights and authoritarian rule? Media figures, public intellectuals, and scholars have debated this relationship for decades, with some arguing that new technologies facilitate mobilization against the state and others countering that the same technologies allow authoritarians to strengthen their grip on power. We address this issue by analyzing the first game-theoretic model that accounts for the dual effects of technology within the strategic context of preventive repression. Our game-theoretical analysis suggests that technological developments may not be detrimental to authoritarian control and may, in fact, strengthen authoritarian control by facilitating a wide range of human rights abuses. We show that technological innovation leads to greater levels of abuses to prevent opposition groups from mobilizing and increases the likelihood that authoritarians will succeed in preventing such mobilization. These results have broad implications for the human rights regime, democratization efforts, and the interpretation of recent declines in violent human rights abuses.


2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 419-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
PIETRO SULLO

AbstractThis article discusses the Rwandan Law 18/2008 on genocide ideology in the light of international human rights standards. In order to put the genocide ideology law into context, it sketches a brief overview of the post-genocide scenario. Because of the influence that provisions restricting freedom of expression aimed at fighting negationism might exert on testimonies during genocide trials, it pays particular attention to the transitional justice strategies adopted in Rwanda. Finally, it assesses the law on the genocide ideology against the background provided by the measures implemented in some European countries to deal with the phenomenon of negationism.


2004 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver Gerstenberg

In this paper I want to address, against the background of the ECtHR’s recent attempt to resolve the clash between property rights and the right to freedom of expression in its decision in Appleby v. UK, two questions, both of which I take to be related to the overarching theme of “social democracy”. First, there is the problem of the influence of “higher law”-of human rights norms and constitutional norms-on private law norms; second, the question of the role of adjudication in “constitutionalizing” private law, in other words, the question of the “judicial cognizability” of constitutional norms within private law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document