Internet and Freedom
Introduction
Freedom of expression has always been a great source of contention. It is a concept that lawmakers have grappled with over the centuries as new methods of communication such as print , radio and television bring with them new scenarios that push the rights of the communicators even further. In this same regard new responsibilities are also created as these methods become more technologically advanced and instant. It is in this context that this assignment examines the current dynamic of freedom of expression on the internet, arguably “ the greatest advance in technology of the media since Gutenberg’s invention of the printing press in the 15th century. “
Our first issue requires us to define freedom of expression. It is defined in different ways under different jurisdictions but contains the same key characteristics. In Ireland for example, under Article 40.6.1 of the Irish constitution, the state guarantees liberty to exercise the right of its citizens to express freely their convictions and opinions subject to public order , morality and security of the state . One can express themselves “freely” providing that they simultaneously respect other significant fundamental human rights. This deems freedom of expression as a qualified right , not an absolute right. As a consequence problems arise as the legislation passed to protect freedom of expression and the legislation used to qualify it such as defamation laws are constantly vying for the court’s ears.It is the battle between what we are entitled to say versus what other interested parties do not want to publicised.Frequently it involves issues such as race, colour, creed, politics (as in the case of censorship in China), crime, sex, pornography and the simple matter of being entitled to express an opinion.
Increasingly archaic laws are certainly no match for these advances and most laws are reactive in nature. To mitigate these difficulties, The European Convention on Human Rights
Freedom of expression has always been a great source of contention. It is a concept that lawmakers have grappled with over the centuries as new methods of communication such as print , radio and television bring with them new scenarios that push the rights of the communicators even further. In this same regard new responsibilities are also created as these methods become more technologically advanced and instant. It is in this context that this assignment examines the current dynamic of freedom of expression on the internet, arguably “ the greatest advance in technology of the media since Gutenberg’s invention of the printing press in the 15th century. “
Our first issue requires us to define freedom of expression. It is defined in different ways under different jurisdictions but contains the same key characteristics. In Ireland for example, under Article 40.6.1 of the Irish constitution, the state guarantees liberty to exercise the right of its citizens to express freely their convictions and opinions subject to public order , morality and security of the state . One can express themselves “freely” providing that they simultaneously respect other significant fundamental human rights. This deems freedom of expression as a qualified right , not an absolute right. As a consequence problems arise as the legislation passed to protect freedom of expression and the legislation used to qualify it such as defamation laws are constantly vying for the court’s ears.It is the battle between what we are entitled to say versus what other interested parties do not want to publicised.Frequently it involves issues such as race, colour, creed, politics (as in the case of censorship in China), crime, sex, pornography and the simple matter of being entitled to express an opinion.
Increasingly archaic laws are certainly no match for these advances and most laws are reactive in nature. To mitigate these difficulties, The European Convention on Human Rights
Bibliography: Akdeniz, Y. Walker, C. and Wall, D. 2000. The Internet, Law and Society. Britain: Pearson Education Akdeniz, Yaman Beigal, S. 2003. Beyond our Control: confronting the limits of our legal system in the age of cyberspace. USA: Massichusetts Institue of Technology Council of Europe, Convention on Cybercrime, 23.11.2001 Dai, Xiudian, 2007. Prospects and Concerns of e-Democracy at the European Parliament The Journal of Legislative Studies, 13:3, 370-387 Doolan, B Electronic Frontiers Australia, 2002. [Online]. Available from http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/cens3.html. Accessed on 20 November 2007. Grewlich, K. 1999. Governance In “Cyberspace” – Access and Public Interest in Global Communications (Volume 9). London: Kluwer Law International. Horgan, J. 1999. Nothing is Sacred: Blasphemy in Ireland. [Online] Avaiilable from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1252/is_1999_Sept_24/ai_56954919. Accessed on November 23 2007. McGonagle Marie, (2003), A Textbook on Media Law (2d edition), Thomson Round Hall Mardsen, C McMahon, B. Binchy, W. 2000. Law of Torts (Sixth Edition) Ohio: LexisNexis Robertson, G Tyre, J. 2004. Australia Rejects Mandatory Censorware. The Censorware Project [Online] Available from www.censorware.net. Accessed on 25 November 2007 United Nations [Online] Available from www.un.org U.S. Department of Justice, Intellectual Property Theft, 2002, October 2004, NCJ 205800 http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/ipt02.txt accessed on the 27/11/07 Weatherill, S. 2003. Cases & Materials on EU Law (Sixth Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.