4 ms·
The European Convention of Human Rights explicitly protects freedom of expression.
by Maken 1y ago
The European Convention of Human Rights explicitly protects freedom of expression.
- account42 1y agoIf it doesn't protect someone denying the holocaust then it won't protect any other expression that the government in power doesn't like.
- pqtyw 1y agoThe first amendment in the US did too but it took more than a 100 years for the current interpretation to become the consensus in the legal system.
- wmf 1y agoYeah but look how many exceptions there are: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_10_of_the_European_Convention_on_Human_Rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_10_of_the_European_Con...
- ekianjo 1y agonope. part 2 of the article 10 basically nullifes the freedom of speech for any bs reason given by the government. that counts for nothing.
- FranzFerdiNaN 1y ago[flagged]
- layer8 1y agoThe judiciary deciding about reasons is independent from the governments.
- ekianjo 1y agonational security is not up to the judiciary > The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- dkiebd 1y agoOctober, 2018: "In Europe, Speech Is an Alienable Right: [the European Court of Human Rights] upheld an Austrian woman’s conviction for disparaging the Prophet Muhammad." >On Thursday, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) upheld her 2011 conviction for “disparagement of religious precepts,” a crime in Austria. The facts of what E.S. did are not in dispute. She held “seminars” in which she presented her view that Muhammad was indeed a child molester. Dominant Islamic traditions hold that Muhammad’s third wife, Aisha, was 6 at the time of their marriage and 9 at its consummation. Muhammad was in his early 50s. The Austrian woman repeated these claims, and the Austrian court ruled that she had to pay 480 euros or spend 60 days in the slammer. The ECHR ruled that Austria had not violated her rights. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/its-not-free-speech-criticize-muhammad-echr-ruled/574174/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/its-not-fr...