Abstract
The article is dedicated to the analysis of one element of the constitutional identity of the Latvian State – freedom of speech – during the initial democratic period in the State’s existence. The author analyses the rules on the protection of honour and supervision of the press as limits to freedom of speech. It is concluded in the article that the boundaries between one person’s freedom of speech and another person’s honour in the Republic of Latvia changed little compared to the previous period in the history of law and that honour as a legal benefit was prized more highly. The framework of freedom of the press, in turn, was constantly expanded. However, the creation of the lists of prohibited books and third-rate and obscene literature proves that the State did not rely on individuals exercising freedom of speech properly. Paternalistic treatment of its citizens was not unknown to the new democratic republic.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
