Articles for category: AAA General

On Tables, Markets, and Free Speech

On the surface level, we see private actors exercising more and more power over speech; on a deeper level though, we might be returning to a far older discussion about the interplay of private and public power, and the fate of an individual who lives in the crash zone between them. Given that the result of this clash largely comes down to choosing a proper regulatory policy, this contribution argues that when regulating market-situated speech particular caution should be exercised.

Regulating the Discursive Power of Big Tech Companies

Big Tech companies have power. One element of this power is discursive power, including in the public sphere, a cornerstone of democratic societies. In the current digitalized society, the public sphere has a significant online component. Discursive power may continue to grow, fuelled by AI developments, unless checked. To shape a possible legal response – we focus on European competition law – requires understanding the complexity of this power. Though competition law is focused on market power, we argue that it can and should have a role to play in curbing discursive power too, despite some inherent limitations.

›Democracies Die in Silence‹

What is ‘media’ in a digitalized society where boundaries between news, commercial and social content are increasingly blurred? What do we really mean by ‘media pluralism’? These are all key questions liberal democracies in Europe and beyond need answers to, given both political challenges and the rise of market power and Big Tech companies whose actions affect media markets. While the law will not solve all of the problems associated with these developments, it can help in imposing limits on the way in which political and market power is used. This necessitates a sustained and informed debate as to what the existing legal framework offers and what additional legal responses are necessary.

»Displacement due to environmental factors is one of the great tragedies of our time«

In a recent judgment, the Colombian Constitutional Court has ruled that displacement due to environmental factors can be legally considered as forced displacement triggering specific obligations of the State. The judgment (T-123 of 2024) highlights the deficit of constitutional protection for victims of environmental displacement, urging the state to develop specific strategies to address this issue. In this interview, Natalia Ángel-Cabo, a Judge at the Colombian Constitutional Court, explains the implications of the ruling and the concept of displacement due to environmental factors.

The »Hong Kong 47« Verdict

Recently, the first court verdicts in the trial surrounding the “Hong Kong 47” were handed down. The trial is one of several political trials that are underway in Hong Kong (HK), a Special Administrative Region (SAR) of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). These trials are political partly because the accused are political figures involved in the 2019 civil unrest, partly because the accused are being tried under the National Security Law (NSL) introduced into HK by the PRC Central Authorities, and partly because they have been didactic spectacles revealing the actions and consequences sought by the accused. This blog post explains the background of the “Hong Kong 47” case and shows why it raises questions that are of interest outside of Hong Kong as well.

Hate Speech on and off the Field

During the EURO 2024 in Germany, the UEFA has imposed a series of sanctions on fans and two players for inappropriate comments and gestures. Albania's player Mirlind Daku was suspended by UEFA's Control, Ethics and Disciplinary Body (CEDB) for two UEFA representative team competition matches after chanting nationalist slogans. Turkey's Merih Demiral was suspended for two matches for celebrating his second goal against Austria with a "wolf salute". These sanctions can be considered justified under the standards of the European Convention on Human Rights ("ECHR"). However, in order to have an effective preventive effect, they should be accompanied by criminal investigations under national law.

Prison for Fake News

In Cyprus, a new legislative proposal introduces a prison sentence of up to one year and/or a fine of up to EUR 3,000. I argue that criminally punishing fake news is absolutely horrifying for free speech, for media pluralism, and for democracy. Criminalizing fake news has a “chilling effect” and it causes a self-censorship by media, civil society organizations, and average citizens. Moreover, the concept of fake news is highly ambiguous and its criminalization is counterproductive as it is not reducing the problematic content but “often draws more attention to it.”

Online Speech at the US Supreme Court in Moody v. Netchoice

The First Amendment of the US Constitution raises some of the most difficult legal hurdles for regulating the global digital public sphere today. In Moody v. Netchoice, the US Supreme Court heard appeals from two judgments, an appeal from a decision of the Fifth Circuit declaring that Texas’ social media law H.B. 20 did not violate the First Amendment, and an appeal from a decision of the Eleventh Circuit finding Florida’s social media law S.B. 7072, instead, unconstitutional. These laws are similar in that they both attempt to impose must-carry and non-discrimination obligations on social media platforms, which in practice amounts to requiring them not to discriminate against conservative users’ posts. The compatibility of these two laws with the First Amendment cuts across a plethora of crucial issues on the future of social media regulation which the court could, but didn’t fully, address.