European Court of Human Rights
Suprun v. Russia
Decision Date: June 18, 2024
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) held that Russia violated the right to freedom of expression by obstructing or denying access to historical archives on gross human rights violations. The five applicants—researchers, a descendant of a victim of Soviet state-sanctioned atrocities, and an NGO founded to document political repression—complained that in their attempts to access records about past human rights violations, they faced restrictions (a ban on making copies or taking photographs of the documents, for example), or the information was outright denied by Russian authorities. Russian courts even found one of the applicants guilty of unlawfully obtaining “personal and family secrets” while gathering information on past human rights violations. The ECtHR held that the pursuit of historical truth was integral to freedom of expression and that the applicants’ research constituted a matter of public interest in contemporary Russia. The Court concluded that Russian authorities had neither pursued any “pressing social need” nor presented “relevant and sufficient” reasons to restrict the applicants’ right to receive information. Additionally, the Court argued that the authorities’ restrictions on access to the historical records about the victims and perpetrators of Soviet political repression undermined a socially significant public discussion. 

Hong Kong
HKSAR v. Au Kin Wai
Decision Date: September 20, 2024
The West Kowloon Magistrates’ Court in Hong Kong sentenced Au Kin Wai to 14 months in prison for sedition following his guilty plea. The case concerned Au’s maintenance of four social media accounts where he posted 239 alleged provocative messages advocating for the overthrow of the central government and promoting revolution against lawful authorities. The Court evaluated the nature and seriousness of the offenses, considering Au’s previous conviction for similar activities and the impact of his posts on national security. While acknowledging Au Kin Wai’s age and circumstances, the Court emphasized the need for a deterrent sentence to address the potential threat posed by such seditious content, ultimately arriving at a final sentence of 14 months after adjustments for his guilty plea.

India
Moitra v. Directorate of Enforcement
Decision Date: February 23, 2024
An Indian High Court dismissed a former Member of Parliament’s petition to prevent the publication of information on a foreign-exchange investigation against her. The MP believed that the law enforcement body responsible for investigating violations of foreign exchange laws had leaked the information to the media and approached the Court seeking an order prohibiting any further leaks on the grounds that her right to privacy had been violated. The Court examined the news articles that had been published and found that there were no discussions of the MP’s private life and that they adhered to media standards. It highlighted the role the media plays and that public figures have a heightened accountability to the public and stressed that courts are hesitant to restrict media publication unless there is clear harassment or invasions of privacy.  

Belgium
The Case of UGent’s Student Protests
Decision Date: June 13, 2024
A Belgian Appellate Court overturned a lower court’s decision and held that a university was entitled to evict students occupying a building in protest over the university’s connections with Israeli institutions during the war in Gaza. After an initial concession from the university and request for mediation were rejected by the student protestors, and after there was a violent incident at the occupation, the university approached the courts ex parte seeking an eviction. The lower court emphasized the right to peaceful protest and stressed that a single act of violence cannot change the peaceful nature of the protests. On appeal, the Court found that the protest was no longer peaceful and that its duration had become problematic. It highlighted safety concerns arising out of the occupation and recognized the university’s willingness to negotiate. The Court held that the university had not intended to restrict free speech or the right to protest.

NOVEMBER 18: ​​From Seed to Storm – The legacy of protest in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Marking the tenth anniversary of the Sunflower and Umbrella Movements, ARTICLE 19 will host a webinar on the legacies and impacts of protests in Taiwan and Hong Kong. The discussion will also cover the evolving transnational repression, exploring the solidarity and lessons learned from Taiwan and Hong Kong. The panel will welcome Wu Rwei-Ren, Research Fellow and Professor at Academia Sinica, Taiwan; Chen Fang Yu, Professor at Soochow University, Taiwan; Anna Kwok, Executive Director at Hong Kong Democracy Council (HKDC); and Alex Chow, Board Chair at HKDC and former Secretary-General of the Hong Kong Federation of Students Umbrella Movement. Michael Caster, Head of Global China Program at ARTICLE 19, will moderate the conversation. Monday, November 18, 2024. 7-8:00 AM ET (New York). 8-9:00 PM TST (Taipei). Online. Register here.

● India: Court Lifts Ban on The Satanic Verses for Missing Notification. The JURIST reports that India’s Delhi High Court ruled to lift the ban on The Satanic Verses due to the authorities’ failure to make the notification of the ban publicly available in 1988. The novel, authored by Salman Rushdie, is his most celebrated and most controversial one because of the passages about the Prophet Muhammad – in 1989, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini issued a fatwa condemning Rushdie to death. In the present case in India, the petitioner claimed that his right to information was violated because a copy of the ban could not be located, which the government representatives confirmed during the hearing – they could not present the copy of the ban, either. “We have no other option except to presume that no such notification exists,” the Court stated, “and therefore, we cannot examine the validity thereof and dispose of the writ petition as infructuous. The petitioner will, therefore, be entitled to take all actions in respect of the said book as available in law.”

● Hong Kong: New Report Exposes Transnational Repression in Digital Space. Hong Kong Watch, a rights advocacy organization based in the UK, just published a new report on transnational repression aimed at Hong Kongers in the digital space – in Hong Kong and around the world. The report, authored by Anouk Wear, Research and Policy Advisor at Hong Kong Watch, assesses digital rights in light of the ongoing human rights decline and the legal framework currently in place, including the 2020 National Security Law and the 2024 Safeguarding National Security Ordinance. There are three case studies examined: the case of HKLEAKS, a group of websites and social media channels that doxxed pro-democracy activists; the case of “Glory to Hong Kong,” a protest anthem banned by a court; and the case of Mika Yuen Ching-ting, a 23-year-old student arrested for “inciting Hong Kong independence.” Last month, CGFoE hosted a webinar on the “Glory to Hong Kong” decision and the broader impact of the National Security Law – you can learn more and watch the full recording here.

● Russia: Exiled Journalist Fined for Allegedly Engaging with an “Undesirable Organization.” The Coalition for Women in Journalism condemns the recent Russian court ruling against exiled journalist Margarita Liutova. Liutova received a fine for her affiliation with Meduza, a media outlet recognized as an “undesirable organization” – and thus outlawed – by the Russian authorities. The ruling was based on Liutova’s appearance in a YouTube show, during which she was introduced as a reporter for Meduza. Earlier, Liutova told Mediazona, another Russian media outlet designated as a “foreign agent,” that she regarded the case against her as a “small abomination”; Liutova called for support of journalists remaining in Russia who “are facing much more serious risks and real dangers.” 

● US: Knight Institute and Foundation for Global Political Exchange Settle Case Challenging Treasury Department’s Unlawful Suppression of Political Speech. Knight First Amendment Institute agreed on a settlement in a lawsuit against the US Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). Last December, together with the Foundation for Global Political Exchange, which hosts political discussions with participants from across the world, Knight Institute filed a complaint against OFAC, arguing that the Treasury Department’s Office violated the First Amendment. The complaint was filed in response to OFAC stating that it could prevent American groups, such as the Foundation for Global Political Exchange, from hosting discussions with sanctioned individuals or organizations. “We’re pleased with this settlement, which will limit the government’s ability to use sanctions law to shut down vital political discussions,” said Nicholas Noe, the Foundation’s Director and Co-Founder. “Free and open political dialogue is vital for achieving mutual understanding and for finding pathways to peace.”

Free to Think 2024: Report of the Scholars at Risk Academic Freedom Monitoring Project. Scholars at Risk (SAR) released their latest annual report on the state of academic freedom globally. The findings are alarming and go beyond authoritarian countries – liberal democracies have also been culpable of undermining higher education. From July 1, 2023, to June 30, 2024, SAR identified 391 attacks on scholars, students, and academic institutions in 51 countries and territories, highlighting troubling developments in 18 of them, namely Afghanistan, China, Colombia, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Iran, Israel, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Palestine, Russia, Türkiye, Sudan, Ukraine, the UK, and the US. Over the reporting period, SAR documented the devastating impact of military conflicts on entire education systems, crackdowns on political dissent with arrests and prosecution of professors and students, silencing and dismissal of those criticizing officials, and new laws and policies eroding university autonomy. The report put a spotlight on campus protests prompted by the Israel-Gaza conflict and the now-limited freedom of expression spaces at universities in several countries, including the US.

New Podcast on Speech & the Border: Knight Institute Launches Third Season of “Views on First.” What is the impact of government censorship and surveillance at the border? In the new season of “Views on First: Speech & the Border,” attorneys at Knight First Amendment Institute dig into ways the US government’s authority over the border expands into the realm of information and ideas. In the first episode, “What are we so afraid of?”, just released, attorney George Wang speaks to lawyer and historian Julia Rose Kraut and immigration activist Ravi Ragbir.  

In case you missed it…

ABA CHR Webinar – The Role of Justice Actors in Combating SLAPPs. The American Bar Association Center for Human Rights (ABA CHR) recently hosted a discussion on how judges, prosecutors, lawyers, and bar associations can fight back against SLAPPs. Margaret Satterthwaite, the UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, presented findings from her recent report, Justice Is Not for Sale: the Improper Influence of Economic Actors on the Judiciary. Judicial and legal experts joined the panel, including Fernando Enrique de Oliveira Biolcati, Honorable Judge of the Court of Justice of São Paulo and CGFoE expert. The full recording is available on YouTube.