State interference in the right to free speech. A legal perspective related to the ECHR jurisprudence
State interference in the right to free speech. A legal perspective related to the ECHR jurisprudence

Summary/Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to show that in many cases, the State abusively restricts individuals' freedom of expression, amid confusion between exercising their right to free expression and the issue of value judgments. The State sanction applied to individuals for exercising their right to free speech is not always aimed at a legitimate purpose (the protection of rights and freedom of others) and conviction does not correspond to a pressing social need, as it should happen. ECHR jurisprudence reveals that a State interference in the right to free speech is not necessary in a democratic society more so when there is no proportionality between the sanction of state or conviction and the aim sought by the Authority. The way a person exercises his right to say what he thinks, makes it almost impossible to separate a value judgment of its abusive exercise of freedom of expression to it. In such a context, it remains to be seen whether the value judgment is an exception to the limits of free speech or if freedom of expression is the sum of value judgments.

• Details
• Contents