The rights in this act are subject to section Human rights may be subject only to reasonable limits set by Territory laws that can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. In deciding whether a limit is reasonable, all relevant factors must be considered, including the following: the nature of the right affected; b. Section 15 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act Vic provides: Every person has the right to hold an opinion without interference.
Every person has the right to freedom of expression which includes the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, whether within or outside Victoria and whether- a orally; or b in writing; or c in print; or d by way of art; or e in another medium chosen by him or her.
Special duties and responsibilities are attached to the right of freedom of expression and the right may be subject to lawful restrictions reasonably necessary- a to respect the rights and reputation of other persons; or b for the protection of national security, public order, public health or public morality. As with other rights recognised in the CRC this provision should be read with Article 5, which states: States Parties shall respect the responsibilities, rights and duties of parents or, where applicable, the members of the extended family or community as provided for by local custom, legal guardians or other persons legally responsible for the child, to provide, in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child, appropriate direction and guidance in the exercise by the child of the rights recognized in the present Convention.
Article 17 goes on to state: States Parties recognize the important function performed by the mass media and shall ensure that the child has access to information and material from a diversity of national and international sources, especially those aimed at the promotion of his or her social, spiritual and moral well-being and physical and mental health. To this end, States Parties shall: a Encourage the mass media to disseminate information and material of social and cultural benefit to the child and in accordance with the spirit of article 29; b Encourage international co-operation in the production, exchange and dissemination of such information and material from a diversity of cultural, national and international sources; c Encourage the production and dissemination of children's books; d Encourage the mass media to have particular regard to the linguistic needs of the child who belongs to a minority group or who is indigenous; e Encourage the development of appropriate guidelines for the protection of the child from information and material injurious to his or her well-being, bearing in mind the provisions of articles 13 and Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities recognises that people with disability have the rights to freedom of expression and information which are recognised for all people in ICCPR Article The CRPD also goes on to make clear that positive measures and not only non-interference are needed to ensure the enjoyment of these rights and specify some of the measures needed.
This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises. It also includes and cannot be separated from the right to use whatever medium is deemed appropriate to impart ideas and to have them reach as wide an audience as possible.
This means that restrictions that are imposed on dissemination represent, in equal measure, a direct limitation on the right to express oneself freely. The importance of the legal rules applicable to the press and to the status of those who dedicate themselves professionally to it derives from this concept.
In its social dimension, freedom of expression is a means for the interchange of ideas and information among human beings and for mass communication. It includes the right of each person to seek to communicate his own views to others, as well as the right to receive opinions and news from others. For the average citizen it is just as important to know the opinions of others or to have access to information generally as is the very right to impart his own opinions.
The two dimensions mentioned supra 30 of the right to freedom of expression must be guaranteed simultaneously. One cannot legitimately rely on the right of a society to be honestly informed in order to put in place a regime of prior censorship for the alleged purpose of eliminating information deemed to be untrue in the eyes of the censor.
It is equally true that the right to impart information and ideas cannot be invoked to justify the establishment of private or public monopolies of the communications media designed to mold public opinion by giving expression to only one point of view. If freedom of expression requires, in principle, that the communication media are potentially open to all without discrimination or, more precisely, that there be no individuals or groups that are excluded from access to such media, it must be recognized also that such media should, in practice, be true instruments of that freedom and not vehicles for its restriction.
It is the mass media that make the exercise of freedom of expression a reality. This means that the conditions of its use must conform to the requirements of this freedom, with the result that there must be, inter alia, a plurality of means of communication, the barring of all monopolies thereof, in whatever form, and guarantees for the protection of the freedom and independence of journalists.
Freedom of expression is a cornerstone upon which the very existence of a democratic society rests. It is indispensable for the formation of public opinion. It is also a condition sine qua non for the development of political parties, trade unions, scientific and cultural societies and, in general, those who wish to influence the public.
However, it also said that that wasn't enough reason to continue the newspaper publication ban once the book had been published, because the information was no longer confidential anyway.
We have published a guide that explains the legal framework which protects freedom of expression and where that freedom may be restricted in order to prevent violence, abuse or discrimination. Article Freedom of expression. Pages in this section T The Human Rights Act Article 2: Right to life Article 3: Freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment Article 4: Freedom from slavery and forced labour Article 5: Right to liberty and security Article 6: Right to a fair trial Article 7: No punishment without law Article 8: Respect for your private and family life Article 9: Freedom of thought, belief and religion Article Freedom of expression Article Freedom of assembly and association Article Right to marry Article Protection from discrimination Article 1 of the First Protocol: Protection of property Article 2 of the First Protocol: Right to education Article 3 of the First Protocol: Right to free elections Article 1 of the Thirteenth Protocol: Abolition of the death penalty.
Article 10 protects your right to hold your own opinions. This includes the right to express your views aloud for example through public protest and demonstrations or through: published articles, books or leaflets television or radio broadcasting works of art the internet and social media The law also protects your freedom to receive information from other people by, for example, being part of an audience or reading a magazine.
Are there any restrictions to this right? The Pentagon Papers, a voluminous secret history and analysis of the country's involvement in Vietnam, was leaked to the press. When the Times ignored the government's demand that it cease publication, the stage was set for a Supreme Court decision. In the landmark U. New York Times case, the Court ruled that the government could not, through "prior restraint," block publication of any material unless it could prove that it would "surely" result in "direct, immediate, and irreparable" harm to the nation.
This the government failed to prove, and the public was given access to vital information about an issue of enormous importance. The public's First Amendment "right to know" is essential to its ability to fully participate in democratic decision-making. As the Pentagon Papers case demonstrates, the government's claims of "national security" must always be closely scrutinized to make sure they are valid. In the Miller v. California decision, the Court established three conditions that must be present if a work is to be deemed "legally obscene.
Attempts to apply the "Miller test" have demonstrated the impossibility of formulating a precise definition of obscenity. Justice Potter Stewart once delivered a famous one-liner on the subject: "I know it when I see it. It's the foundation of self-fulfillment. The right to express one's thoughts and to communicate freely with others affirms the dignity and worth of each and every member of society, and allows each individual to realize his or her full human potential. Thus, freedom of expression is an end in itself -- and as such, deserves society's greatest protection.
It's vital to the attainment and advancement of knowledge, and the search for the truth. The eminent 19th-century writer and civil libertarian, John Stuart Mill, contended that enlightened judgment is possible only if one considers all facts and ideas, from whatever source, and tests one's own conclusions against opposing views.
Therefore, all points of view -- even those that are "bad" or socially harmful -- should be represented in society's "marketplace of ideas. It's necessary to our system of self-government and gives the American people a "checking function" against government excess and corruption. If the American people are to be the masters of their fate and of their elected government, they must be well-informed and have access to all information, ideas and points of view.
Mass ignorance is a breeding ground for oppression and tyranny. Supreme Court, and remains absolutely committed to the preservation of each and every individual's freedom of expression. During the s, we defended the right of artists and entertainers to perform and produce works of art free of government and private censorship. During the s, the organization fought to protect free speech in cyberspace when state and federal government attempted to impose content-based regulations on the Internet.
In addition, the ACLU offers several books on the subject of freedom of expression:. Freedom of Expression. In Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire , the Court held that so-called "fighting words This decision was based on the fact that fighting words are of "slight social value as a step to truth.
Sullivan , the Court held that defamatory falsehoods about public officials can be punished -- only if the offended official can prove the falsehoods were published with "actual malice," i.
0コメント