Abstract
This article attempts to explore the unresolved debate on conflicting relationship between the right to free expression and defamation law that primarily intended to protect right to reputation. It also shows how far defamation law has been used to suppress expression and limit access to information in most countries in general and in Ethiopia in particular. To this end, the article examines the prevailing trend of manipulating strict defamation law as a method to make media deliberately inefficient and weak so that silence and intimidate journalists under the guise of protecting reputation. Above all, the central theme of this article is to assess whether or not the existing defamation law of Ethiopia comply with the international principle that urges decriminalization of defamation law. Toward this, provisions which govern acts of defamation under Ethiopian Constitution and other laws to the effect will be scrutinized. Furthermore, this article suggests how International human right principles should be contextually adopted to Ethiopia to limit abuse of defamation law. Finally, after a thorough examination of conflicting interest and the necessary balance between the right to reputation and freedom of expression under Ethiopian law context, the right way to deal with defamation law would be suggested.
Highlights
It is very essential to understand the literal essence of defamation itself first to have a clear picture about defamation law
After a thorough examination of conflicting interest and the necessary balance between the right to reputation and freedom of expression under Ethiopian law context, the right way to deal with defamation law would be suggested
Canada is well known for its defamation law that solely intended to safeguard the right to reputation regardless to freedom of expression
Summary
It is very essential to understand the literal essence of defamation itself first to have a clear picture about defamation law. Unlike the United States, which provides incredibly broad protection for the right to freedom of expression through its codification in the First Amendment, Canadian courts have traditionally affords robust protection to reputation In this regard, it is worth noting the case of Hill Vs. Church of Scientology of Toronto whereby the Supreme Court of Canada decided that the mere act of publishing defamatory material is sufficient to favor liability in defamation without requiring any additional proof (Brouillet, 2005/2006) and (Reid, 2013). Church of Scientology of Toronto whereby the Supreme Court of Canada decided that the mere act of publishing defamatory material is sufficient to favor liability in defamation without requiring any additional proof (Brouillet, 2005/2006) and (Reid, 2013) From this time on wards the application of defamation law in Canada has begun to consider the freedom of expression along with protecting reputation. Currently at least defamation law of developed country is designed in such a way that it enable to effectively intermediate the interplay between reputation and freedom of expression
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have