Freedom of speech and expression pdf writer
File Name: dom of speech and expression writer.zip
- Bill of Rights (1791)
- Constitution of India-Freedom of speech and expression
- The First Amendment Encyclopedia
General Comment 34 emphasises that freedom of expression and opinion are the foundation stone for a free and democratic society and a necessary condition for the promotion and protection of human rights. This General Comment addresses in detail:. General Comment No. The Human Rights Committee has stated that:. Citizens also take part in the conduct of public affairs by exerting influence through public debate and dialogue with their representatives or through their capacity to organize themselves.
Bill of Rights (1791)
The philosophy behind this Article lies in the Preamble of the Constitution, where a solemn resolve is made to secure to all its citizen, liberty of thought and expression. This right is available only to a citizen of India and not to foreign nationals. This right is, however, not absolute and it allows Government to frame laws to impose reasonable restrictions in the interest of sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the state, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency and morality and contempt of court, defamation and incitement to an offence.
This restriction on the freedom of speech of any citizen may be imposed as much by an action of the State as by its inaction. Thus, failure on the part of the State to guarantee to all its citizens the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression would also constitute a violation of Article 19 1 a.
Freedom of Press- Democracy can thrive through vigilant eye of Legislature but also care and guidance of public opinion and press par excellence. Romesh Thappar v. Patanjali Sastri, J. In the case of Indian Express v.
Union of India , 1 SCC ,it has been held that the Press plays a very significant role in the democratic machinery. The courts have duty to uphold the freedom of press and invalidate all laws and administrative actions that abridge that freedom. Freedom of Press includes freedom of publication, freedom of circulation and freedom against pre-censorship. In Sakal Papers Ltd. State of Delhi AIR SC , the validity of order imposing pre-censorship on an English Weekly of Delhi, which directed the editor and publisher of a newspaper to submit for scrutiny, in duplicate, before the publication, all communal matters, all the matters and news and views about Pakistan, including photographs, and cartoons, on the ground that it was a restriction on the liberty of the press, was struck down by court.
In Tata Press Ltd. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. Supreme Court held that advertising, which is no more than a commercial transaction, is nonetheless dissemination of information regarding the product-advertised.
Public at large are benefited by the information made available through the advertisements. In a democratic economy, free flow of commercial information is indispensable. The concept speech and expression has evolved with the progress of technology and include all available means of expression and communication. This would include the electronic and the broadcast media. In Odyssey Communications P Ltd. The petition was dismissed as the petitioner failed to show evidence of prejudice to the public.
The freedom of 'speech and expression' comprises not only the right to express, publish and propagate information, it circulation but also to receive information. This was held by the Supreme Court in a series of judgements which have discussed the right to information in varied contexts from advertisements enabling the citizens to get vital information about life-saving drugs, to the right of sports lovers to watch cricket and the right of voters to know the antecedents of electoral candidates.
The Supreme Court observed in Union of India v. Freedom of speech and expression includes right to impart and receive information which includes freedom to hold opinions". Rangarajan v. Jagjivan Ram , everyone has a fundamental right to form his opinion on any issues of general concern.
Open criticism of government policies and operations is not a ground for restricting expression. Intolerance is as much dangerous to democracy as to the person himself. In democracy, it is not necessary that everyone should sing the same song. In Maneka Gandhi vs Union of India , the Supreme Court considered whether Article 19 1 a of Indian Constitution was confined to Indian territory and held that the freedom of speech and expression is not confined to National boundaries.
Clause 2 of Article 19 of the Indian constitution imposes certain restrictions on free speech under following heads: I. Reasonable restrictions can be imposed on the freedom of speech and expression, in the interest of the security of the State.
The term security of state has to be distinguished from public order. Union of India. If any of these two conditions are not present, the government has no right to exercise its power under the said section. Telephone tapping, therefore, violates Article 19 1 a unless it comes within the grounds of reasonable restrictions under Article 19 2. This ground was added by the Constitution First Amendment Act of The State can impose reasonable restrictions on the freedom of speech and expression, if it hampers the friendly relations of India with other State or States.
State of West Bengal ]. The expression 'public order' connotes the sense of public peace, safety and tranquillity. Anything that disturbs public peace disturbs public order [ Om Prakash v. Emperor , AIR Nag, ]. But mere criticism of the government does not necessarily disturb public order. A law, which punishes the deliberate utterances hurting the religious feelings of any class has been held to be valid and reasonable restriction aimed to maintaining the public order.
Decency and morality section to of the Indian Penal Code provide instances of restrictions on the freedom of speech and expression on the grounds of decency and morality, it prohibits the sale or distribution or exhibition of obscene words.
The standard of morality changes with changing times. Supreme Court in RanjitD. Udeshi v. The constitutional right to freedom of speech would not allow a person to contempt the courts. The term contempt of court refers to civil contempt or criminal contempt under the Act.
Namboodripad v. Namboodripad guilty of contempt of court. Parashar v. But the Court dismissed the petition for want of proof. The clause 2 of Article 19 prevents any person from making any statement that defames the reputation of another.
Defamation is a crime in India inserted into Section and of the I. Right to free speech is not absolute. The Constitution also prohibits a person from making any statement that incites people to commit offense.
Sovereignty and integrity of India: This ground was added subsequently by the Constitution Sixteenth Amendment Act, This is aimed to prohibit anyone from making the statements that challenge the integrity and sovereignty of India. To conclude, right to freedom of speech and expression, is an important fundamental right, scope of which, has been widened to include freedom of press, right to information including commercial information, right to silence and right to criticize.
The said right is however, subjective to reasonable restrictions under Article 19 2. Origin of Writ In common law, Writ is a formal written order issued by a body with administrati The supreme court, and High courts have power to issue writs in the nature of habeas corpus , quo Toggle navigation.
Home Explore. The main elements of right to freedom of speech and expression are as under- 1. Right to Broadcast The concept speech and expression has evolved with the progress of technology and include all available means of expression and communication.
Right to information The freedom of 'speech and expression' comprises not only the right to express, publish and propagate information, it circulation but also to receive information. Right to criticize In S. In democracy, it is not necessary that everyone should sing the same song f. Right to expression beyond national boundaries In Maneka Gandhi vs Union of India , the Supreme Court considered whether Article 19 1 a of Indian Constitution was confined to Indian territory and held that the freedom of speech and expression is not confined to National boundaries.
Right not to speak or Right to silence is also included in the Right to speech and expression. In the case of National Anthem, three students were expelled from the school for refusal to sing the national anthem. However, the children stood up in respect when the national anthem was playing.
The validity of the expulsion of the students was challenged before the Kerala High Court and they upheld the expulsion of the students on the ground that it was their fundamental duty to sing the national anthem.
However, on an appeal being filed against the order of the Kerala High Court before the Supreme Court, it was held by the Supreme Court that the students did not commit any offence under the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, Also, there was no law under which their fundamental right under Article 19 1 a could be curtailed.
Bijoe Emmanuel v. Security of the State: Reasonable restrictions can be imposed on the freedom of speech and expression, in the interest of the security of the State.
Contempt of court: The constitutional right to freedom of speech would not allow a person to contempt the courts. Defamation: The clause 2 of Article 19 prevents any person from making any statement that defames the reputation of another.
Please Drop Your Comments. Ask A Lawyers. Cut, Copy And Paste Technol Passive Personality Princip Definitions of Law and its Worlds Largest Democracy Do Laws to curb the increased Legal Principles Surroundin Online Copyright Registration. Copyright: An important element of Intel Types of Writs In Indian Constitution The supreme court, and High courts have power to issue writs in the nature of habeas corpus , quo
Constitution of India-Freedom of speech and expression
Connect around topics like civics, public policy, economics and more. The most effective way to secure a freer America with more opportunity for all is through engaging, educating, and empowering our youth. And the most effective way to achieve that is through investing in The Bill of Rights Institute. We contribute to teachers and students by providing valuable resources, tools, and experiences that promote civic engagement through a historical framework. You can be a part of this exciting work by making a donation to The Bill of Rights Institute today! Make your investment into the leaders of tomorrow through the Bill of Rights Institute today! Learn more about the different ways you can partner with the Bill of Rights Institute.
The First Amendment Encyclopedia
Freedom of speech  is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship , or legal sanction from the government. The term freedom of expression is usually used synonymously but, in legal sense, includes any activity of seeking, receiving, and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used. Article 19 of the UDHR states that "everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice".
Debate in the House is unenlightening with regard to the meaning the Members ascribed to the speech and press clause, and there is no record of debate in the Senate. I venture to say, that if we confine ourselves to an enumeration of simple, acknowledged principles, the ratification will meet with but little difficulty. Insofar as there is likely to have been a consensus, it was no doubt the common law view as expressed by Blackstone.
Four Belgian journalists were targeted by the police in a huge search and seizure operation aimed at identifying the source of leaked government information. The Strasbourg court ruled that the operation had been unjustified and disproportionate. The case influenced new legislation to improve protections for journalists and their sources. Read more. Brigitte Heinisch was a geriatric nurse.