Freedom Of Political Expression Research Articles

The impact of geopolitical risks on foreign exchange markets: Evidence from the Russia–Ukraine war

We examine the relationship between geopolitical risks and foreign exchange markets using the Russia–Ukraine conflict as a natural experiment. Our main findings indicate that, due to intensified geopolitical risks, the conflict had a negative effect on foreign exchange rates. This adverse effect of geopolitical risks is more pronounced in countries with high reliance on Russian energy, countries with a high level of economic policy uncertainty, countries with geographic proximity to Russia and Ukraine, and countries where the degree of political rights, and freedom of political expression is elevated. Our additional analyses suggest that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has also negatively affected the return and volatility of the global equity markets.

선거의 공정성과 언론의 역할

Considering the importance and influence of the media in elections, the request to ensure fairness in elections can also be applied to the media. Accordingly, the election reporting deliberation system was prepared to protect the fairness of election reporting. According to the Public Official Election Act, the Election Broadcasting Deliberation Committee, the Election Articles Deliberation Committee, and the Internet Election Reporting Deliberation Committee review the fairness of election reporting and decide to take proper measures. However, the scope of the Internet media outlets to which the deliberation of Internet election report should be applied is not clear, and the scope could be broadened according to the decision of the Deliberation Committee. In addition, there is a problem that the freedom of political expression may be excessively reduced in cases where the area of freedom of speech is not clearly distinguished with the area of election reporting. There are also problems that fairness standards are not clear, there is a limit to specificity, and it is not easy to judge in applying to actual cases. Moreover, internet media and new media have characteristics such as openness, easy access, non-exclusiveness, interactivity. Therefore, it may not be appropriate to apply the same regulations to the internet media as those for existed media. As the influence of internet media grows in the election process, it is required to ensure fairness. However, it is necessary to consider the characteristics of new media different from the existed media. For online expression in the election process, the diversity and openness of the media should be utilized rather than approached from a regulatory point of view. Through this, it is possible to seek to protect fairness in election.

Freedom of expression of political views: socio-political and administrative-legal dimensions

The article is devoted to the study of socio-political and administrative-legal dimensions of freedom of expression of political views. It is substantiated that the socio-political processes taking place in Ukraine in recent years contribute to the establishment of our state as a legal democracy, one of the key features of which is the effective implementation of the human right to freedom of political expression. The article formulates the definition of "freedom of expression of political views", which is proposed to be interpreted as a natural right of every person to freely express their political views, assess historical events of a political nature and modern political processes and phenomena. The socio-political and administrative-legal dimensions of this concept are considered and it is concluded that the right to freedom of expression of political views is interrelated with other constitutional human rights and freedoms; provides for legislative consolidation and appropriate implementation mechanism; acts as a voluntary act of human activity, which forms him as an active citizen and promotes involvement in the political life of the state. It has been found that freedom of expression of political views is a natural right of every person to freely express his or her political views, to evaluate historical events of a political nature and modern political processes and phenomena in the manner prescribed by law. Finally, considering this concept in the interaction of socio-political and administrative-legal dimensions allows to bring society closer as an association of people with the state as an organization of political power of society, thus helping to consolidate in the legal consciousness of the vast majority of citizens a positive image.

Genocide denial and freedom of political expression in the Ingabire case

ABSTRACT: Despite the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda having convicted numerous genocidaires, some genocide sympathisers still deny the genocide. Such a corruption of scholarship inflicts secondary victimisation on Tutsi ethnic minorities. In Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza v Rwanda the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights rejected an opposition leader’s conviction and sentence for her ‘double genocide’ statement, finding that the state could have adopted less restrictive measures to attain legitimate national security purposes. To evaluate Rwanda’s genocide minimisation laws criminalising public incitement to divisionism, this article applies Waldron’s argument endorsing hate speech regulations in liberal democratic societies. Comparisons are made with the ‘Auschwitz lie’ laws in European continental jurisdictions and common law countries. Provided that the dignity of affected persons is eroded by discrimination and defamation, even the European Court of Human Rights upholds genocide denial laws. The US Constitution does not do so. Instead, critics of hate speech regulation encourage civic dialogue to retain the issue of genocide in public memory. Counterfactually, Cohen praises the minority who refuse to deny the pain and suffering of others. Because theory matters, I use the Millian principles to analyse the African Court’s interpretation of the Rwandan Supreme Court’s Ingabire decision, in relation to the state’s expressive freedom obligation in article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
 
 TITRE ET RÉSUMÉ EN FRANCAIS: Négation du génocide et liberté d’expression politique dans l’affaire Ingabire
 RÉSUMÉ: Certains partisans du génocide continuent de nier le génocide bien que le Tribunal pénal international pour le Rwanda ait condamné de nombreux génocidaires. Une telle corruption dans la littérature inflige une seconde victimisation aux minorités ethniques tutsi. Dans l’affaire Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza c. Rwanda, la Cour africaine des droits de l’homme et des peuples a rejeté l’inculpation et la condamnation d’un leader de l’opposition pour propos qualifiés de « double génocide » en estimant que l’État aurait pu adopter des mesures moins restrictives pour atteindre des objectifs légitimes de sécurité nationale. Pour évaluer les lois rwandaises relatives à la minimisation des crimes de génocide et qui criminalisent l’incitation publique au divisionnisme, cet article applique l’argument de Waldron adoptant les règles relatives au discours de haine dans les démocraties libérales. Des comparaisons sont faites avec les lois de « Auschwitz » dans les juridictions continentales européennes et les pays de la tradition common law. Pour autant que la dignité des personnes affectées est érodée par la discrimination et la diffamation, même la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme retient la légalité des lois sur la négation du génocide. Il n’en n’est pas ainsi de la Constitution américaine. Au contraire, les détracteurs de la réglementation du discours de haine encouragent le dialogue civique à maintenir la question du génocide dans la mémoire publique. A l’inverse, Cohen loue la minorité qui refuse de nier la douleur et la souffrance des autres. Parce que la théorie compte, j’utilise les principes de Mills pour analyser l’interprétation donnée par la Cour africaine de la décision rendue par la Cour suprême du Rwanda dans l’affaire Ingabire, en ce qui concerne l’obligation de liberté expressive de l’Etat énoncée à l’article 9 de la Charte africaine des droits de l’homme et des peuples.

Household and Community Gardens Surge in the Philippines and Senegal during COVID-19

Household and Community Gardens Surge in the Philippines and Senegal during COVID-19

Politics and the Academic Social Scientist; The Record of Talcott Parsons

The decline of interest among sociologists in the works of Talcott Parsons over the last several decades has been driven in substantial respects by a belief that he was personally conservative in his political views and that his theoretical formulations were rigidly tied to a conservative view of social order. The present paper reviews Parsons’ major political involvements through the course of his career from his student days through the last decade of his life. The review demonstrates that Parsons was a typical academic liberal of his time and that his liberalism was expressed especially in several major applied essays. In the 1930s, he was an early and active opponent of Nazism. During World War II, he taught professionals to administer occupied territories and nations effectively. After the war, he advocated for government support of the social sciences, citing the important contributions they had made to the war effort. In the 1950s, he wrote a famous critical analysis of the Joseph McCarthy movement in American politics. In the 1960s, he contributed supportive essays to the Civil Rights movement. Later in the decade and in the 1970s, he contributed to the protection of academic freedoms while also proposing accommodations to the demands of the student movement for more “relevant” teaching and greater participation in university governance. Throughout his career, he taught and worked closely with students of various political views and sought to protect their rights of freedom of political expression.

The role of power-addiction and maladaptive denial in the US federal COVID-19 response

PurposeGiven the substantial resources of the United States, the failure of the American federal response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been both tragic and avoidable. The authors frame this response as an artifact of power-addiction among administration officials and examine the US federal response to the COVID-19 pandemic through the lens of maladaptive denial by government officials, including President Trump.Design/methodology/approachThe authors use qualitative research methods for this study by analyzing key events, public statements by administration officials from multiple credible media reports and US federal government websites. The authors analyzed these data using Weidner and Purohit's (2009) model describing maladaptive denial in organizations and power-addiction among leaders.FindingsThe authors' analysis identifies maladaptive denial – and the concomitant power-addiction – as significantly contributing to the Trump administration's failed response to COVID-19. Maladaptive denial and power-addiction characterized Trump as a candidate and for the three years of his presidency preceding the COVID-19 crisis. Whatever normative “guardrails” or checks and balances existed in the American system to restrict the administration's behavior before the crisis were ill-equipped to significantly prevent or alter the failed federal response to the pandemic.Originality/valueThe article applies the model of maladaptive denial in organizations (Weidner and Purohit, 2009) to the public sector, and explores the lengths to which power-addicted leaders and regimes can violate the public's trust in institutions in a crisis, even in the US, a liberal democracy characterized by freedom of political expression. While organizations and change initiatives may fail for a variety of reasons, this case revealed the extent to which maladaptive denial can permeate a government – or any organization – and its response to a crisis.

Cartoon controversies: law student views about free speech and Zapiro’s satirisation of South Africa’s president

Although the Constitutional Court has been a protector of freedom of expression, major controversies about speech illustrate deep divisions among South Africans. This article explores attitudes of law students at the University of the Witwatersrand to freedom of expression. The authors take the realist view that these students are future legal interpreters of the Constitution and their attitudes may well have an impact on future jurisprudence. They follow-up previous research which measured attitudes to political freedom of expression by asking students about their responses to a sample of Zapiro cartoons depicting President Zuma. After exploring the role of cartoons in a democracy, the article looks at new data obtained by questioning final year students about the same cartoons four years after the initial study. The new data substantially confirms earlier results which indicate that Wits students would not robustly support Zapiro’s right to create his more controversial caricatures. This result reinforces the view that supporters of freedom of expression in South Africa may not be able to call upon consistent or robust elite and popular support in resisting banning or criminalisation of speech.

“Execute Not Pardon”: The Pussy Riot Case, Political Speech, and Blasphemy in Russian Law

In February 2012, in the full swing of the then-current presidential campaign in Russia, a short video of the “Pussy Riot” feminist band, beseeching the Virgin Mary to “drive Putin away” while performing a wild dance in front of the altar of Russia's major Orthodox Cathedral, was uploaded to YouTube. The performance was followed by the rapid arrest of three band members and a trial in a criminal court that sentenced them to two years in a penal colony on charges of “hooliganism motivated by religious hatred” and transformed the case into a symbol of the infringement on freedom of political expression in Putin's Russia. Through a legal analysis of the trial materials, this article examines the reasoning used by Russian law to authorize limitations on freedom of religiously contextualized speech and discusses the case's implications for expanding the “forbidden ground” excluded from legitimate public debate in contemporary Russia.

Law Students and Freedom of Expression: An Empirical Case Study

Against a background of rhetorical and potential legal assaults on freedom of information and media freedom in South Africa, the authors set out to investigate levels of support for freedom of expression amongst law students at the University of the Witwatersrand. The findings were mixed, with evidence that students strongly support generic pro-freedom of expression statements but that their support buckles when confronted with hard cases, such as satirical Zapiro cartoons. While students give weak support to political freedom of expression directed at the government, they are outrightly hostile to citizen-on-citizen offensive speech, many being willing to contemplate bans. Final-year students show up as somewhat more supportive of political freedom of expression than first-year students, while white students across both years are somewhat more supportive of freedom of expression than black students. There is however considerable diversity of views amongst black students and some evidence that racial differences in support for freedom of expression are influenced by attitudes to the current government. The results add to other evidence suggesting that supporters of freedom of expression in South Africa may not be able to call upon consistent or robust elite and popular support in resisting repressive government moves.

Regulating political contributions: another view from across the Tasman

This article compares the Australian and New Zealand electoral finance regimes, with a particular focus on political contributions. Three specific areas are examined: disclosure of contributions; limits on contributions; and regulating the sale of access and influence. This examination is underpinned by what I see as the key purposes of democratic political finance regimes (Tham, 2010, ch.1): protecting the integrity of representative government, an aim which encompasses the prevention of corruption; promoting fairness in politics, especially in elections; supporting parties to discharge their functions; respecting political freedoms, in particular freedom of political expression and freedom of political association.

Civil Servant’s Political Freedom of Expression and Restraints

Civil Servant’s Political Freedom of Expression and Restraints

Pro‐poor politics and the new political economy of stabilisation

Pro‐poor politics and the new political economy of stabilisation

‘A Monstrous and Unjustifiable Infringement’?: Political Expression and the Broadcasting Ban on Advocacy Advertising

This paper considers the legality of the broadcasting prohibition on ‘advocacy advertising’– the use of advertising space to communicate social, political and moral arguments to a wider public – in the light of the growing jurisprudence on the freedom of political expression. The prohibition is currently found in the Broadcasting Act 1990, and the Government has proposed its reiteration in the forthcoming Communications Bill to fall within the regulatory ambit of OFCOM. The paper begins by introducing and illustrating advocacy advertising and the restrictions upon it. It proceeds to review the relevant jurisprudence on political expression, to analyse the familiar arguments in favour of retention of the prohibition, and to weigh the counter‐arguments. The paper concludes that the purported justifications sit ill against existing legal rulings, and evidence a poor understanding of the critical sophistication of the public as a broadcasting audience. It suggests that a continuation of the prohibition would be unlawful.

Taking the Constitution Out of the Common Law: Political Libels and Freedom of Communication in Australia

This paper argues that English courts should adopt a recent Australian innitiative in the area of political libels. It is suggested that English law is at present too accommodating to defamed politicians and insufficiently sensitive to the need to foster freedom of political expression. The paper contends that Australian law, unlike similar rules found in American constitutional law, offer our courts an unproblematic way to re-order this aspect of our common law in a fashion that better serves the political values of transparency and accountability within the government process.

Government Pressures Against Arabs in the United States

The rise of the Palestinian fedayeen groups and the internationalization of Middle Eastern-oriented violence during the late 1960s prompted the beginning of a long series of organized campaigns directed against Arab and Arab-Americans living in the United States by a number of agencies of the federal government. Motivated by alleged security concerns, the government has engaged in a host of legal and illegal exercises designed to determine the amount of support, if any, given by domestic Arabs to Arab political organizations abroad and to take appropriate steps against those found to be politically undesirable. US government campaigns against persons of a specific ethnicity are not unknown in America's history. The internment of Japanese-Americans during the Second World War remains perhaps the most dramatic, if infamous, example. But aside from the obvious trauma to members of the specific community involved, the larger issues surrounding such operations present a sinister challenge to rights afforded by the US constitution to all who reside within the borders of the United States. The constitution carefully outlines the rights to which residents are entitled, among them the right to privacy, freedom from illegal search & seizure, freedom of speech and movement, freedom of political expression, and freedom from discrimination and persecution on the basis of religion, race, or national origin. Yet like the oppression from which many of them fled, persons of Arab descent in the United States have found these rights consistently denied by