Articles for tag: MonarchyPolizeiRedefreiheitRepublicanismVersammlungsfreiheit

Giving Offence is no Offence

The death of Queen Elizabeth II last week, and thus the accession to the throne of King Charles III is an opportunity for reflection. However, what some have found here in the UK is that expressing republican sentiment in public has been met with a policing intervention – arrest or warning. This post considers the legality of expressing such views, and thus of the police response too, as well as some wider issues about the policing of protest, dissent and free speech.

Challenging Censorship

India’s online censorship laws have, since they were framed, been entirely lacking in transparency, and have consequently shielded the Indian government from any and all form of accountability. A writ petition by Twitter in an Indian High Court hopes to change that. Depending on which way the Courts rule, the fundamental rights of free expression, of due process and of access to the internet of millions of Indians are going to be decided by the end of this case.

Governing the Memory of the Present

Putin’s Russia is a global champion of memory laws that fabricate the state’s perennial innocence and glory and make it a criminal offense to diverge from the state-sanctioned historical narratives. The state’s propaganda has also promoted symbols that convey support for or condoning of the Russia’s war, such as the “Z”, “V”, and St. George's ribbon. The emergence of these symbols in the public sphere has put militant democracy provisions existing in many European legal orders into the spotlight, but also propelled lawmakers in some states to adopt new provisions prohibiting the use of such symbols. We discuss the reaction mechanism in Lithuania, Germany, and Poland.

Elon Musk Wants to Buy Twitter to Create a Free Speech Utopia: Now What?

The enigmatic Tesla founder Elon Musk has made a public offer to buy 100% of Twitter’s shares at approximately 138% of each share’s value. In his letter of intention submitted to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Musk describes that free speech is necessary in a democratic society, and he wishes to unlock its full potential by bringing Twitter under (his) private ownership. Constitutionally this raises an interesting point: if indeed a billionaire wants to change the rules of speech on the ‘new public squares’ by acquiring a social media platform, can he – and should he be able to?

Shareholder Power as a Constitutionalising Force: Elon Musk’s Bid to Buy Twitter

On 14 April 2022, billionaire Elon Musk came with one of his extravagant ideas: he offered to buy Twitter. According to Musk, who is already majority shareholder, the bid was motivated by his will to fully “unlock” the online platform’s potential as a space for free speech across the globe. This episode calls for a reflection on the future of online platforms as digital spaces for the flourishing of public debate and democracy.

Terrorist content online and threats to freedom of expression

Many states have used these general stipulations contained in international law to introduce in their counterterrorism legislation specific provisions criminalizing the dissemination of ideas or opinions that might incite, endorse, or stimulate the commission of terrorist acts. With social media platforms, a new set of actors have begun setting the thresholds of what speech they will host, complicating governance.

Military Justice, Journalism and Free Speech in Brazil

On 17 June, 2021, the Attorney-General of the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court affirmed that, in the government's view, the Military Justice has competence to try civilians accused of criminal offences against the honor of military institutions. He proposed that crimes related to the freedom of speech should be tried by a special military branch of the judiciary. The attacks on free speech by the government through the Attorney-General is another sign of the democratic erosion process.