|
Advancing understanding of the norms and institutions
that best protect the free flow of information and expression.
|
|
|
Dear Friends,
It has been an eventful summer. On July 11, 2024, CGFoE submitted written observations on hate speech to the Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR).
As the Office of the Special Rapporteur is preparing a thematic report on freedom of expression and unprotected speech, CGFoE contributes with observations on the main jurisprudential approaches to “hate speech” and similar expressions. The submission also discusses whether Article 13.5 of the American Convention on Human Rights imposes an obligation to criminalize hate speech and considers the relevance and applicability of the UN Rabat Plan of Action. We invite you to have a look at all the detailed remarks – and many case law references – here.
The written contribution adds to the online public consultation in which Dr. Hawley Johnson, Associate Director at CGFoE, participated on July 8, 2024. In her presentation, Dr. Johnson emphasized that “the IACHR should urge States to foster a better environment for freedom of expression and should prevent the proliferation of hate speech regulations which have the potential to be instrumentalized by authoritarian governments against critical voices, dissenters, and the most vulnerable.”
|
|
|
|
Dr. Hawley Johnson participated in the online public consultation hosted by the IACHR's Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression.
|
|
UN Human Rights Committee
Katorzhevsky v. Belarus
Decision Date: February 12, 2024
The UN Human Rights Committee held that Belarus violated Pavel Katorzhevsky's right to freedom of expression by initiating legal proceedings against him, and fining him, for the dissemination on a social network of an article published on a platform open to the public without having examined its content. Katorzhevsky posted on the social network “Vkontakte” a link to a newspaper article entitled "Idiocy and fake honor to the victims of war in a capital city gymnasium," published on the same day on “vk.com/rdbelarus.” Following a police complaint, the Belarusian courts issued a 230 rubles fine (approximately 110 euros) against Katorzhevsky for violating the Law against Extremism in Belarus. Katorzhevsky argued before the UN Human Rights Committee that Belarus violated his right to freedom of expression because the article he disseminated did not contain extremist material that threatened national security. For its part, Belarus argued that the fine was a permissible limit to freedom of expression because it was backed by a law aimed at combating extremism. The State also argued that in Belarus any information or ideas published on the site “vk.com/rdbelarus” were considered “extremist material.” The Committee held that Belarus violated the petitioner's right to freedom of expression. It noted that the article was originally published on a public platform. Moreover, the Committee held that Belarus cannot automatically consider all content posted on a website to be extremist or to affect national security. It also argued that the lack of an individualized assessment of the article’s content, regarding its impact on national security—on behalf of national authorities and courts—, did not satisfy the requirements of legitimacy, necessity, and proportionality, laid out in Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Maslova v. Kyrgyzstan
Decision Date: October 13, 2023
The UN Human Rights Committee held that the State of Kyrgyzstan violated a journalist's right to freedom of expression, under Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), after ordering her to pay compensation for non-pecuniary damages and to remove an article from on an online news portal, for allegedly defaming former President Almazbek Atambaev. The petitioner, journalist Dina Maslova, faced a civil lawsuit, brought by the Prosecutor General of Kyrgyzstan, for publishing, on an internet news portal, an anonymous article criticizing Atambaev. The domestic courts of Kyrgyzstan granted the Prosecutor General's claim and ordered Maslova to pay the sum of 38.000 euros in favor of Atambaev and to remove the article in question from the news site. The petitioner filed a communication before the UN Human Rights Committee arguing that the domestic courts' rulings violated her right to freedom of expression, as the measures issued against her were unnecessary in a democratic society and disproportionate. The State, for its part, claimed that the restriction of the petitioner's freedom of expression was compatible with Article 19 of the ICCPR and that the former President had waived his right to compensation—thus mitigating any chilling effect on expression. The UN Human Rights Committee found that the restrictions imposed on Maslova's expression were neither necessary nor proportionate. The Committee stressed that in a democratic society, public figures—including heads of state—can be legitimately criticized and that national courts failed to properly assess the content of the article or the context of its publication. Furthermore, the Committee rejected the State's argument that the former President had waived his right to compensation, concluding that the domestic judgments had a chilling effect on the petitioner's right to freedom of expression in her role as a journalist.
Brazil
Cruz v. Whatsapp Inc.
Decision Date: May 14, 2021
A Brazilian court ordered WhatsApp and Facebook to disclose the personal data and IP addresses of three phone numbers associated with the WhatsApp application. These accounts had disseminated an image of a pamphlet containing defamatory and false information about a state deputy seeking reelection during the electoral period. Acknowledging the importance of combating fake news and that the inviolability of private life and data secrecy are not absolute, the Court ordered that the personal data of the phone number owners be provided, and fined the service providers for failing to do so.
|
|
|
COMMUNITY HIGHLIGHTS & RECENT NEWS
|
|
|
● IJC Submits Letter to UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression on Japan’s Rejection of Journalist’s Passport Application. The International Justice Clinic (IJC) at the University of California, Irvine School of Law, filed a letter bringing the case of Japanese journalist Junpei Yasuda to the attention of Irene Khan, UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression. Yasuda is an international reporter who had been held captive by an armed group in northern Syria between 2015 and 2018. Once released, Yasuda traveled to Japan through Istanbul in October 2018, when the Turkish authorities imposed a five-year entry ban on Yasuda, providing him with no opportunity to seek defense. In 2019, Yasuda submitted a passport application in Japan, but the Ministry of Foreign Affairs rejected it, citing the clause in the Passport Act of Japan that allows for a passport denial in the case of an entry ban issued by any country. “[...] for five years, I’ve been unable to fulfill my profession,” Yasuda states. The IJC argues at least two of the journalist’s fundamental rights have been violated: freedom of movement and freedom of expression.
● Urgent Appeal to UN Special Special Rapporteur on Torture in Guatemalan Journalist José Rubén Zamora Case. International counsel Caoilfhionn Gallagher KC and Tatyana Eatwell submitted an urgent appeal to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, detailing how the imprisonment conditions of journalist José Rubén Zamora in Guatemala constitute “torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment.” In a case widely recognized as political persecution, Zamora, founder of the newspaper elPeríodico, has been imprisoned since July 2022. An expert report, included in the Urgent Appeal, concludes Zamora has been tortured and spells out six violations of international law: 1) Solitary confinement with water and light deprivations; 2) Nonstop surveillance; 3) Aggressive, humiliating treatment; 4) Unnecessary use of restraints; 5) Intentional infestation of Zamora’s cell with mites; and 6) Prolonged unsanitary conditions that caused his underlying health problems to worsen.
● Cyprus: Prison for Fake News, by Natalie Alkiviadou. As a new legislative proposal introducing criminal punishment for fake news is in the works in Cyprus, Dr. Natalie Alkiviadou, Senior Research Fellow at The Future of Free Speech, argues the proposed amendment would be detrimental to freedom of expression and democracy. In her article for Verfassungsblog, Alkiviadou unpacks the “chilling effect” the amendment would have on media and civil society in Cyprus and discusses the contested nature of the fake news concept. She draws from the perspectives of the EU, Council of Europe, and UN, which caution states against imposing criminal punishment for spreading disinformation and call for other measures of tackling the challenging phenomenon – through media literacy, fact-checking, research, and empowerment of users.
● Uruguay: Court Dismisses $450k SLAPP Suit Against La Diaria, by Edison Lanza and Matías Jackson. Media Defence reports on a recent landmark ruling in Uruguay in a case with distinct SLAPP features: a Civil Court in Montevideo held that a disputed journalistic investigation contained no “illicit act” due to the public interest in its subject matter. The lawsuit was brought against media outlet La Diaria by a senior official who had led an NGO running a program that provided support to families with children with disabilities; after La Diaria’s investigation detailed a 2020 criminal inquiry into the program, the official resigned from her position and claimed $450,000 in damages from the media outlet. Ending the two-year civil process in dismissing the lawsuit, the Court cited Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights, establishing “a high and precise threshold of evidence for damage claims against the press to succeed.”
|
|
|
TEACHING FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION WITHOUT FRONTIERS
|
|
|
|
This section of the newsletter features teaching materials focused on global freedom of expression which are newly uploaded on Freedom of Expression Without Frontiers
Digital Inclusion and Internet Content Governance. The Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights published a thematic report on the digital age challenges to inclusion and public debate, focusing specifically on digital literacy and content moderation processes. Premised on the international human rights principles, the report offers normative guidance – in essence, a content governance framework – to states and other relevant actors “in promoting an internet that is truly accessible to all persons, without discrimination.” The report concludes with a list of recommendations, one of which urges states to adopt policies that address “hate speech or disinformation coming from public figures” but warns that “[s]uch policies should be aligned with international human rights standards, especially the three-part test of legality, legitimate aim, and necessity and proportionality.” You can read the report in English and Spanish.
|
|
|
● Call for Applications: CFJ Invites Women Lawyers in Africa to Apply for a Year of Fully Funded Fellowship. Waging Justice for Women, a project of the Clooney Foundation for Justice (CFJ), seeks to promote gender justice for women and girls across Africa and welcomes applications for the 2025 fellowship. CFJ will select ten women lawyers (with less than five years of professional experience) in sub-Saharan Africa, granting them a fully-funded opportunity to work with prominent human rights organizations in the region for a year. The deadline to apply is August 4, 2024, at 11 PM SAST. Would you like to know more? Visit this page. Apply here.
|
|
|
|
