- User contributions [en]

Privacy Rights/History/Country sources/Uruguay

2024-08-01T15:31:33Z

ThbigO:

{{Right section
|right=Privacy Rights
|section=History
|question=Country sources
|questionHeading=What is the oldest written source in this country that mentions this right?
|breakout=Uruguay
|pageLevel=Breakout
|contents=The [[Probable year:: 1966]] constitution was the first translated into English to mention privacy rights. It is protected in Articles 10, 11, and 28. Article 10 grants individuals’ privacy, Article 11 makes the home private, and Article 28 protects communications (Constitute Project, "Uruguay [[Probable year:: 1966]], reinst. [[Probable year:: 1985]], rev. [[Probable year:: 2004]]" ). Uruguay has based their data privacy and protection law off the European Union’s rules under the GDPR and has independently passed legislation to enact the provisions of the GDPR in Uruguay (Nougrères, 2024).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Uruguay_[[Probable year:: 2004]]? lang=en

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). “General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – Legal Text,” 2016. https://gdpr-info.eu/.

Nougrères, Ana Brian. “Uruguay - Data Protection Overview.” DataGuidance, 2024. https://www.dataguidance.com/notes/uruguay-data-protection-overview.
}}

Privacy Rights/History/Country sources/United States

2024-08-01T15:27:09Z

ThbigO:

{{Right section
|right=Privacy Rights
|section=History
|question=Country sources
|questionHeading=What is the oldest written source in this country that mentions this right?
|breakout=United States
|pageLevel=Breakout
|contents=The United States Constitution does not explicitly grant the right to privacy. The closest one might find in the Constitution is the Fourth Amendment, which protects “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” (The Bill of Rights). Instead, the right to privacy has been inferred by the Supreme Court. In Griswold v. Connecticut, the Court held that the right to privacy is inferred in the Bill of Rights. Justice Douglas wrote the majority opinion and argued that many of the amendments in the Bill of Rights, such as the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination, infers the right to privacy from the state and thus a right that the Constitution protects (Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479). The Supreme Court would uphold the right to privacy in other cases as well. In Eisenstadt v. Baird, the Court extended the ability to purchase contraceptives to unmarried individuals and found that “the constitutionally protected right of privacy inheres in the individual, not the martial couple.” (Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438). In Roe v. Wade, the court determined that the right to privacy, derived from the Fourteenth Amendment, encompasses a woman’s decision on whether to have an abortion (Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113). However, this is no longer the case, as Roe v. Wade has since been overturned. In Lawrence v. Texas, the Court again derived the right to privacy from the Fourteenth Amendment and gave the right to privacy to persons of the same sex who choose to engage in sexual conduct. The Court held “The petitioners are entitled to respect for their private lives. The State cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime. Their right to liberty under the Due Process Clause gives them the full right to engage in their conduct without intervention of the government.” (Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558). The US has multiple acts for the protection of private data. The Privacy Act of 1974 regulates the data that is collected, used, and disseminated by federal agencies; the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requires financial institutions to protect their consumers data and explain how to the customer; the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) gives data privacy and security for medical information (Murray 2023). Theres are a multitude of different acts that protect the privacy of communications, children, government records and more. In addition to these federal acts, many states are passing or have passed consumer data privacy laws, such as the California Consumer Privacy Act, which applies to how businesses collect personal information from consumers (Murray 2023). In all, privacy rights in the United States are based off the Courts and legislative acts.

References:

Justia Law. “Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438,” 1972. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/405/438/.

Justia Law. “Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479,” 1965. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/381/479/.

Justia Law. “Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558,” 2003. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/539/558/.

Justia Law. “Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113,” 1973. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113/.

Murray, Conor. “U.S. Data Privacy Protection Laws: A Comprehensive Guide.” Forbes, 2023. https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/04/21/us-data-privacy-protection-laws-a-comprehensive-guide/.

National Archives. “The Bill of Rights: A Transcription,” November 4, 2015. https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript.
}}

Privacy Rights/History/Country sources/United Kingdom

2024-08-01T15:24:23Z

ThbigO:

{{Right section
|right=Privacy Rights
|section=History
|question=Country sources
|questionHeading=What is the oldest written source in this country that mentions this right?
|breakout=United Kingdom
|pageLevel=Breakout
|contents=The Human Rights Act of 1998 outlines the rights everyone in the UK is entitled to. It is based on the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and is the UK’s way of making the rights outlined in the convention applicable to their laws. Article 8 of the Human Rights Act of 1998 and the ECHR is titled “Right to respect for private and family life”. It reads “Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.” (Human Rights Act of 1998). The Human Rights Act of 1998 refers to “convention rights” when it outlines how the UK government and courts will uphold those rights (Human Rights Act of 1998). Regarding data protection and privacy, the UK passed the Data Protection Act in 2018, which regulates how companies, organizations, and the government can use personal data. It establishes stronger legal protection for sensitive personal information like race, ethnicity, political opinions, religious beliefs, trade union membership, genetics, biometrics, health, and sex life or orientation (Data Protection Act 2018)

References:

ECHR. “European Convention on Human Rights.” Accessed July 19, 2024. https://echr.coe.int/european-convention-on-human-rights.

Human Rights Act 1998. “Part 1: The Convention.” HeinOnline, 1998. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzgb0026&id=20&men_tab=srchresults.
}}

Privacy Rights/History/Country sources/Tunisia

2024-08-01T15:08:22Z

ThbigO:

{{Right section
|right=Privacy Rights
|section=History
|question=Country sources
|questionHeading=What is the oldest written source in this country that mentions this right?
|breakout=Tunisia
|pageLevel=Breakout
|contents=Article 24 of the 2014 Tunisian Constitution states “The state protects the right to privacy and the inviolability of the home, and the confidentiality of correspondence, communications, and personal information.” (Constitution of the Republic of Tunisia, 2014). However, in 2022, President Kais Saied proposed a constitutional referendum, which passed. The 2022 Tunisian Constitution states in Article 30 “The state protects the private life, the inviolability of the domicile and the secrecy or correspondence, of communications and of personal data.” (Constitution of the Republic of Tunisia, 2022). The new constitution consolidates much of the governments power within the president, including the ability for the president to impose restrictions on the rights of Tunisian citizens under certain circumstances like national defense, public security, public health, protection of the rights of others, or protection of public morals. What this means for the right to privacy in Tunisia is that, while it is still listed as protected in the constitution, the new power of the president means that this right could be usurped if the president deemed it necessary.

References:

Constitution of the Republic of Tunisia. “Chapter II: Of the Rights and Freedoms.” HeinOnline, 2022. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zztn0121&id=6&collection=cow&index=.

Venice Commission. “Constitution of the Republic of Tunisia.” HeinOnline, 2014. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/cowdocs?state=&tfile=tn_2014_venicecomm_eng.pdf.
}}

Privacy Rights/History/Country sources/Switzerland

2024-08-01T15:05:26Z

ThbigO:

Privacy Rights/History/Country sources/Sweden

2024-08-01T15:00:28Z

ThbigO:

{{Right section
|right=Privacy Rights
|section=History
|question=Country sources
|questionHeading=What is the oldest written source in this country that mentions this right?
|breakout=Sweden
|pageLevel=Breakout
|contents=When the Swedish Kingdom created their constitution, it contains very few reference to the rights of Swedish citizens. It states, “Sweden shall be governed by a king and shall be a hereditary monarchy with the order of succession established by the law of succession.” (Constitution of Sweden, 1809). Sweden’s Constitution today contains multiple separate documents that outline different areas of government. In Chapter 2, Article 6 of the Instrument of Government, it establishes protections against unwarranted searches or the body, house, and communications. It also states “In addition to what is laid down in paragraph one, everyone shall be protected in his or her relations with the public institutions against significant invasions of personal privacy, if these occur without his or her consent and involve the surveillance or systematic monitoring of the individual’s personal circumstances.” (Instrument of Government, 1974). Also included in Sweden’s fundamental laws is the Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression. This documents outlines the freedom of expression rights in Sweden and includes privacy considerations in Article 20. It bans the publication of personal data which reveals personal information like ethnicity, skin color, political opinions, religious views, memberships, health, sex life, sexual orientation, genetic data, and biometric data (Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression, 1991). These provisions apply if “1. the personal data are included in a data collection that has been arranged in such a way that it is possible to search for or compile the data; and 2. with regard to the nature of the activities and the forms under which the data collection is made available, there is a particular risk of improper violation of the individuals personal privacy.” (Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression). This law also grants the right of anonymity in expression, unless it involves liability/damages due to publication. Sweden is a member of the EU and thus follows the GDPR.

References:

Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression. “Chapter 1: Freedom of Expression According to This Fundamental Law.” HeinOnline, 1991. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzse0090&id=1&collection=cow&index=.

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). “General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – Legal Text,” 2016. https://gdpr-info.eu/.

Instrument of Government. “Chapter 2: Fundamental Rights and Freedoms.” HeinOnline, 1974. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzse0092&id=3&men_tab=srchresults
}}

Freedom of Religion/History/Country sources/Spain

2024-08-01T14:57:35Z

ThbigO:

{{Right section
|right=Privacy Rights
|section=History
|question=Country sources
|questionHeading=What is the oldest written source in this country that mentions this right?
|breakout=Spain
|pageLevel=Breakout
|contents=Spain drafted a democratic constitution in 1869. This constitution gives specific privacy rights to Spaniards. In Article 5, it states “No [person] may enter the domicile of a Spaniard, or foreign resident of Spain, without their consent, except in urgent cases of fire, flooding or other analogous danger, or of illegitimate aggression proceeding from within, or to assist a person who is requesting help” (Constitution of 1869). It goes on to list more circumstances where authorities may enter the domicile and the process of obtaining a warrant to search. Article 7 states “In no case may the correspondence confided to the mail be intercepted [detenerse] or opened by the governmental authority, nor may telegraphs be intercepted” (Constitution of 1869). Similarly, it goes on to outline how judges must obtain warrants to read a person’s mail or telegraphs. Spains current Constitution lays out the right to privacy in Article 18 of its constitution, which includes 4 clauses. “1. The right to honour, to personal and family privacy and to the own image is guaranteed. 2. The home is inviolable. No entry or search may be made without the consent of the householder or a legal warrant, except in cases of flagrante delicto. 3. Secrecy of communications is guaranteed, particularly regarding postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications, except in the event of a court order. 4. The law shall restrict the use of data processing in order to guarantee the honour and personal and family privacy of citizens and the full exercise of their rights.” (The Spanish Constitution, 1978). Spain is also a member of the EU, meaning the GDPR is applicable to them. The Spanish Constitution already contains a clause about data protection, and the right to privacy in communications.

References:

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). “General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – Legal Text,” 2016. https://gdpr-info.eu/.

The Spanish Constitution. “Chapter II: Rights and Liberties.” HeinOnline, 2011. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzes0098&id=9&men_tab=srchresults.
}}

Freedom of Religion/History/Country sources/Serbia

2024-08-01T14:51:33Z

ThbigO:

Freedom of Religion/History/Country sources/Romania

2024-08-01T14:50:39Z

ThbigO:

{{Right section
|right=Privacy Rights
|section=History
|question=Country sources
|questionHeading=What is the oldest written source in this country that mentions this right?
|breakout=Romania
|pageLevel=Breakout
|contents=The first constitution of Romania was enacted in 1866 and contains two references to privacy rights. Article 15 states “The domicile is inviolable. No domiciliary visit can be made except in the cases expressly provide for by the law and in the form which is prescribes. Article 25 states “The privacy of letters and of telegraphic dispatches is inviolable. A law shall determine the responsibility of the agents of the government for the violation of this privacy of letters and dispatches entrusted to the post and to the telegraph.” (Wright, 1919). Article 26 of the current Romanian Constitution outlines personal and family privacy rights in Romania. It states, “The public authorities shall respect and protect the intimate, family, and private life” (Constitution of Romania). The Romanian Constitution goes on to extend privacy rights to domiciles, which is outlined in Article 27. “The domicile and the residence are inviolable. No one shall enter or remain in the domicile or residence of a person without his consent.” (Constitution of Romania). Romania is a member of the European Union, which passed the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in 2016. This regulation establishes rules for the protection of peoples data and establishes that citizens have the right to data protection. “This Regulation protects fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons and in particular their right to the protection of personal data.” (General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679). Romania, as well as every EU member state, follows these regulations and it allows all EU member countries to have synchronized data protection/privacy regulations.

References:

Constitution of Romania. “Chapter II: Fundamental Rights and Freedoms.” HeinOnline, 1991. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzro0001&id=6&collection=cow&index=#.

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). “General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – Legal Text,” 2016. https://gdpr-info.eu/.
}}

Freedom of Religion/History/Country sources/Serbia

2024-08-01T14:49:25Z

ThbigO: Undo revision 22243 by ThbigO (talk)

{{Right section
|right=Freedom of Religion
|section=History
|question=Country sources
|questionHeading=What is the oldest written source in this country that mentions this right?
|breakout=Serbia
|pageLevel=Breakout
|contents=The Constitution of the Republic of Serbia was ratified November 8, 2006. Article 5, 21, 39, 43, 44, 45, 48, 49, 57, 79, and 81 grant extensive religious freedom, equality, and prohibit religious discrimination. Article 11 declares Serbia a secular state and creates a separation of church and state. The National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia. “CALLING A REPUBLIC REFERENDUM TO ENDORSE THE NEW CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA.” Government of the Republic of Serbia . Last modified 2006. Accessed June 28, 2022. http://www.parlament.gov.rs/upload/documents/Constitution_%20of_Serbia_pdf.pdf.
}}

Freedom of Religion/History/Country sources/Romania

2024-08-01T14:49:07Z

ThbigO: Undo revision 22242 by ThbigO (talk)

Freedom of Religion/History/Country sources/Serbia

2024-08-01T14:43:48Z

ThbigO:

Freedom of Religion/History/Country sources/Romania

2024-08-01T14:41:56Z

ThbigO:

{{Right section
|right=Freedom of Religion
|section=History
|question=Country sources
|questionHeading=What is the oldest written source in this country that mentions this right?
|breakout=Romania
|pageLevel=Breakout
|contents=The first constitution of Romania was enacted in 1866 and contains two references to privacy rights. Article 15 states “The domicile is inviolable. No domiciliary visit can be made except in the cases expressly provide for by the law and in the form which is prescribes. Article 25 states “The privacy of letters and of telegraphic dispatches is inviolable. A law shall determine the responsibility of the agents of the government for the violation of this privacy of letters and dispatches entrusted to the post and to the telegraph.” (Wright, 1919). Article 26 of the current Romanian Constitution outlines personal and family privacy rights in Romania. It states, “The public authorities shall respect and protect the intimate, family, and private life” (Constitution of Romania). The Romanian Constitution goes on to extend privacy rights to domiciles, which is outlined in Article 27. “The domicile and the residence are inviolable. No one shall enter or remain in the domicile or residence of a person without his consent.” (Constitution of Romania). Romania is a member of the European Union, which passed the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in 2016. This regulation establishes rules for the protection of peoples data and establishes that citizens have the right to data protection. “This Regulation protects fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons and in particular their right to the protection of personal data.” (General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679). Romania, as well as every EU member state, follows these regulations and it allows all EU member countries to have synchronized data protection/privacy regulations.

References:

Constitution of Romania. “Chapter II: Fundamental Rights and Freedoms.” HeinOnline, 1991. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzro0001&id=6&collection=cow&index=#.

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). “General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – Legal Text,” 2016. https://gdpr-info.eu/.
}}

Freedom of Expression/Traditions

2024-08-01T14:37:28Z

ThbigO: Created page with "{{Right section |right=Freedom of Expression |section=Philosophical Origins |question=Traditions |questionHeading=Are there any philosophical or moral traditions that dispute the classification of this right as a fundamental right? |pageLevel=Question |contents=Freedom of expression is recognized in many philosophical and moral traditions as a fundamental right. Communitarianism is described as “…the idea that human identities are largely shaped by different kinds of..."

{{Right section
|right=Freedom of Expression
|section=Philosophical Origins
|question=Traditions
|questionHeading=Are there any philosophical or moral traditions that dispute the classification of this right as a fundamental right?
|pageLevel=Question
|contents=Freedom of expression is recognized in many philosophical and moral traditions as a fundamental right. Communitarianism is described as “…the idea that human identities are largely shaped by different kinds of constitutive communities (or social relations) and that this conception of human nature should inform our moral and political judgments as well as policies and institutions.” (Bell 2024). The core idea argues that communities shape our judgements and that humans have an obligation to support the communities that shaped their judgements. Since the core idea of communitarianism is that the community comes before all else, this means that basic freedoms, including freedom of expression, must be balanced against the needs and values of the community. Community cohesion is paramount to communitarianism, and in certain communities, freedom of expression could undermine social order. Some forms of expression could prove harmful to the community, so this philosophy argues that those expressions should be censored (Bell 2024).

Freedom of expression was not recognized for much of history. Freedom of expression was seen in ancient Athens, but there were philosophers that disputed it. Plato wrote in Republic against freedom of expression. Republic is a theory for a perfect city, and Plato believed that some form of censorship would be needed. Plato doesn’t disagree with freedom of expression; he believes it is a valuable tool to be used by philosophers and just men.

References:

Bell, Daniel. “Communitarianism.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta and Uri Nodelman, Summer 2024. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, 2024. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2024/entries/communitarianism/.

Glaun, Dan. “Germany’s Laws on Antisemitic Hate Speech and Holocaust Denial.”. FRONTLINE (2021). https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/germanys-laws-antisemitic-hate-speech-nazi-propaganda-holocaust-denial/.
}}

Freedom of Expression/History/Source

2024-08-01T14:36:09Z

ThbigO:

{{Right section
|right=Freedom of Expression
|section=History
|question=Source
|questionHeading=What is the oldest source in any country that mentions this right?
|pageLevel=Question
|contents=The ancient Greeks within the Athenian Democracy, using the words “parrhesia” and “isegoria” (dating back to the fifth century BCE) were the first to emphasize the freedom to speak candidly and to "say what one pleased" a subset of freedom of the future declaration of freedom of expression (Bejan 2019, 97). From the ancient Greeks, “Parrhesia” specifically describes the freedom to say whatever one pleased, and a similar idea describing freedom of expression, “isegoria,” describes the right of citizens to publicly address and debate against the democratic assembly (Lu 2017, 4). “Isegoria” is derived from the root word “agora” which translates to marketplace, and thus the meaning of this version of freedom of expression addresses that of public speech. This right to “isegoria” was more heavily based in the ideas of equality of all men to have access to the government than for the principles of freedom (Bejan 2019, 99). On the other hand, “parrhesia” held a broader meaning. This idea is more about the right to speak freely or frankly. This word implies a willingness of the speaker to be open, honest, and courageous in dealing with the consequences of the sometimes controversial truth which he spoke while those who listened had to tolerate any offense taken from the speaker.

During meetings of the dêmos, a term used to describe the populace of Athens, the herald of the assembly would call “who wishes to speak?” (Wallace 2004). In this venue, the populace could voice their opinions and concerns to be heard by the assembly. Parrhesia extended beyond the dêmos; it was present in Athenian humor and was capitalized on by philosophers like Plato and Socrates (Wallace 2004). What the Athenians lacked was “a conception of precisely those inalienable rights which have been the foundation of the modern libertarian doctrine: freedom of speech, of religion and so on.” (Finley 1983). What this meant was that since there was no conception of these laws, such as a constitution, the Athenian government could censor certain persons or ideas as they saw fit. Parrhesia might not have been absolute, or last in Athens after the fall of democracy in Greece, but its memory was preserved by scholars and served as inspiration for future generations.

The origins of freedom of expression can be traced as far back as the 16th century. During this time, the Protestant Reformation occurred. Before the Reformation, the Church would put down any attempts at reform, typically in brutal fashion. “The birth of [freedom of expression] is credited to the Protestants – those who, as their name indicates, dared to protest and reclaimed the right to dissidence” (Zoller 2009). The Protestant Reformation showed that it was possible to gain freedom of expression and was one of the key sources of inspiration of the Enlightenment, which was one of the most important sources of inspiration for Americas founding fathers (Bristow 2010).
Shortly after the Declaration of Independence, the Virginia Colonial Legislature adopted The Declaration of Rights, which included freedom of the press (Lewis 2007). During the period between the Declaration of Independence and the adoption of the First Amendment, “nine of the original thirteen states had such provisions in their constitutions or other basic documents.” (Lewis 2007). When the Constitution was drafted in 1787, it was the creators and supporters of these state rights that insisted they be included in the federal Constitution. The First Amendment in the Bill of Rights establishes the specifics of the freedom to express, including freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the right to peacefully assemble, and the right to petition the government. At the same time, the French Revolution was in progress and the new National Assembly created the Declaration of the Rights of Man in 1789. Within this declaration, it states “The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law.” (Declaration of the Rights of Man 1789). Both France and the United States were establishing new governments in the wake of a revolution from a monarch. The censorship employed by these monarchs was one of the key reasons why both countries explicitly outlined the freedom to citizens to express themselves in their new constitutions.

To summarize, when was the oldest source that mentions freedom of expression? While it was not specifically mentioned, it can be seen in the 16th century during the Protestant Reformation. It was specifically mentioned and recognized in England’s 1689 Bill of Rights, but this did not extend to the citizens. Freedom of expression was not given explicitly to the citizens until France and the United States did so in 1789 with the Declaration of the Rights of Man, and the U.S. Constitution.

References:
“Avalon Project - Declaration of the Rights of Man - 1789.” Accessed June 6, 2024. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/rightsof.asp

Becker, Sascha O., Steven Pfaff, and Jared Rubin. “Causes and Consequences of the Protestant Reformation.” Explorations in Economic History 62 (October 1, 2016): 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eeh.2016.07.007

Bristow, William. “Enlightenment,” August 20, 2010. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/enlightenment/?ref=artshelp.com

Burch, Kerry. “Parrhesia as a Principle of Democratic Pedagogy.” Philosophical Studies in Education 40 (2009): 71–82. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ864311.

Finley, Moses I. Politics in the Ancient World. Cambridge University Press, 1983.

National Archives. “Bill of Rights (1791),” May 18, 2021.
https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/bill-of-rights

On Misconceptions Generated By Translating Parrhesia and Isegoria as “Freedom of Speech,” Chin-Yu Ginny Lu, 4, The University of Arizona, 2017 Tucson.

Two Concept of Freedom (Of Speech), Teressa M. Bejan, 97-99, Oxford University, 2019 Oxford.

Wallace, Robert W. “THE POWER TO SPEAK —AND NOT TO LISTEN— IN ANCIENT ATHENS.” In Free Speech in Classical Antiquity, 221–32. Brill, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047405689_011

What is Freedom of Expression, Freedom Forum Institute Editors, Freedom Forum Institute, 2020 Washington D.C.

Zoller, E. “Foreword: Freedom of Expression: ‘Precious Right’ in Europe, ‘Sacred Right’ in the United States?” Indiana Law Journal, 2009. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Foreword%3A-Freedom-of-Expression%3A-%22Precious-Right%22-Zoller/a06d65926e0118f6353c2d09b3638038d266ceed.
}}

Freedom of Religion/History/Country sources/Scottish Enlightenment

2024-07-29T15:57:32Z

ThbigO:

{{Right section
|right=Freedom of Religion
|section=Philosophical Origins
|question=Tradition contributions
|questionHeading=What have religious and philosophical traditions contributed to our understanding of this right?
|breakout=Scottish Enlightenment
|pageLevel=Breakout
|contents=Adam Smith, one of the leading thinkers of the Scottish Enlightenment, was personally very critical of religion. “He was deeply critical of Christianity and Judaism, both because of the discriminatory views of his era, and because of his own observation of hypocrisy within Protestantism.” (Ward 43, 2004). He did however have a background of mentors who dabbled with theology. Professor Gershom Carmichael had a rational and empirical approach to religion, he was not a part of the “enthusiastic” movements that were popular in Scotland at the time. Professor Carmichael was a professor of moral philosophy at the University of Glasgow and was the mentor of Francis Hutcheson, who became the mentor of Adam Smith (Ward 49, 2004). Francis Hutcheson argued that the reality of God could be discovered through natural theology and led an educational reform in Scotland. He taught courses in English rather than Latin , he led the University of Glasgow away from Calvinism and instead used a scientific approach to study religion, God, and morality (Ward 49, 2004). Adam Smith would eventually inherit Hutcheson’s post at the University of Glasgow and was expected to lecture on theology. While this sounds like a great place to learn about what Smith thought about theology, “at the time of his death, Smith ordered the destruction of any of his writings that, he felt, failed to offer a unique contribution to human knowledge and understanding. The fact that there is no trace of his materials on natural theology would seem to suggest that, for Smith, they were without great significance. (Ward 50, 2004). Adam Smith’s personal religious views are left to interpretation; his approach to religion is approached very scientifically.

Smith was not the only Scottish Enlightenment figure will this approach to religion; “figures such as David Hume, Francis Hutcheson, and Smith seem to have resisted all established religion. They were fascinated by the scientific insights of figures such as Issac Newton and Kepler.” (Ward 49, 2004). Adam Smith’s personal relationship with religion doesn’t mean that he avoided discussing it in his published works. In The Wealth of Nations, Smith critiques state-supported religious monopolies, especially those that must use force to enforce their monopoly. (Griswold 396, 1997). “When the authorized teachers of religion propagate through the great body of the people, doctrines subversive of the authority of the sovereign, it is by violence only, or by the force of a standing army, that he can maintain his authority.” (Smith 651, 1776). So, to avoid this violence, states should refrain from forcing their religious monopolies on the people. “Smith has argued that the causes of violence in connection with religion are (i) the perception by the dominant religion that assistance from the state (in the form of police powers) is available to increase the size of its flock, with all the corresponding temporal benefits; and (ii) the feelings of resentment on the part of the persecuted religions” (Griswold 409, 1997). Following this, he believes that “such a clergy, when attacked by a set of popular and bold, though perhaps stupid and ignorant enthusiasts, feel themselves as perfectly defenseless as the indolent, effeminate, and full fed nations of the southern parts of Asia, when they were invaded by the active, hardy, and hungry Tartars of the north. Such a clergy, upon such an emergency, have commonly no other resource than to call upon the civil magistrate to persecute, destroy, or drive out their adversaries, as disturbers of the public peace.” (Smith 643, 1776). The Wealth of Nations is about, well, how nations should build their wealth. His analysis of religion in this book should be taken as his advice on how to achieve a civil society. Smith goes on to suggest that states should focus their education on science rather than religion so that people would be “less tempted to explain puzzling natural phenomena in religious terms.” (Griswold 411, 1997).

Adam Smith’s view is that the state should embrace free markets, an idea analyzed in detail in The Wealth of Nations. This leads to his general goal of creating a stable government and economy (Ward 45, 2009). While he himself doesn’t advocate religion and instead advocates science , he recognizes some areas of freedom of religion that he incorporates into Theory of Moral Sentiments and The Wealth of Nations. He supports separation of church and state, allowing liberty of religious belief, and creating a free market of religions (Griswold 411, 1997). In The Wealth of Nations, Smith argues “In a country where the law favored the teachers of no one religion more than those of another, it would not be necessary that any of them should have any particular or immediate dependency upon the sovereign or executive power; or that he should have anything to do either in appointing or in dismissing them from their offices.” (Smith 650, 1776). Here, Smith is arguing for separation of church and state; he further argues that by allowing freedom of religion and creating a large market of religions, it will reduce the competition between different religions and improve their relationships with the state. “The teachers of each sect, seeing themselves surrounded on all sides with more adversaries than friends, would be obliged to learn that candour and moderation which are so seldom to be found among the teachers of those great sects, whose tenets, being supported by the civil magistrate, are held in veneration by almost all the inhabitants of extensive kingdoms and empires, and who, therefore, see nothing round them but followers, disciples, and humble admirers. The teachers of each little sect, finding themselves almost alone, would be obliged to respect those of almost every other sect; and the concession which they would mutually find in both convenient and agreeable to make one to another, might in time, probably reduce the doctrine of the greater part of them to that pure and rational religion, free from every mixture of absurdity, imposture, or fanaticism, such as wise men have, in all ages of the world, wished to see established…” (Smith 647, 1776). He did, however, not believe that these ideals could be achieved on their own. Smith argued that a liberal education in science was required to support these ideals. (Griswold 411, 1997). “Science is the great antidote to the poison of enthusiasm and superstition; and where all the superior ranks of people were secured from it, the inferior ranks could not be much exposed to it” (Smith 650, 1779)

Adam Smith is not the only Scottish Enlightenment figure to speak about religion; David Hume had his own opinions on religion. In his essay Of Superstition and Enthusiasm, he argues “that superstition is an enemy to civil liberty, and enthusiasm a friend to it. As superstition groans under the dominion of priests, and enthusiasm is destructive of all ecclesiastical power, this sufficiently accounts for the present observation.” (Hume 1758). He explains that in England’s civil wars, the whigs were friends to toleration, and it was their tolerating spirit that helped to reconcile the differences between the competing Roman Catholics and other Christians. The “tolerating spirit” Hume is referring to here, can be interpreted as religious freedom.

As stated earlier, Scottish Enlightenment figures tend to be highly critical of religion and tend to speak to religion in the context of creating a more civil society (Ward 49, 2004). With this context, I can hypothesize that Adam Smith supported the ideals of freedom of religion. Separation of church and state, liberty of religious belief, and a free market of religions sounds very similar to the freedom of religion in the United States. Adam Smith’s works were very influential on the founding fathers when it came to designing our government (Smith 2004). “The Wealth of Nations was also read and discussed by those in America seeking to form a new government based on preserving “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” and an economic system that could assure America of prosperity and self-sufficiency” (Smith 9, 2004). After reading through many sections of The Wealth of Nations, it is evident that the founding fathers took some examples from it about how to build and maintain a free-market economy. Knowing that they were already taking advice from Adam Smith and other Scottish Enlightenment figures about the economy and governance, it is within reason that the founding fathers took the advice of the Scottish Enlightenment figures about the relationship between church and state to ensure a civil society. By allowing freedom of religion, it should reduce competition between religions and frees the government from being stuck supporting the state-supported religion. Smith himself said that wise men wished to see these ideals established in governments, and the brand new government of the United States gave the founding fathers the opportunity to test these ideals.

References:

Griswold, Charles L. “Religion and Community: Adam Smith on the Virtues of Liberty.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 35, no. 3 (1997): 395–419. https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/1/article/225729.

Hume, David. Essays Moral, Political, Literary. Edited by Eugene F. Miller. 1758. Reprint, Liberty Fund Inc., 1987. https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/hume-essays-moral-political-literary-lf-ed.

Smith, Adam. AN INQUIRY INTO THE NATURE AND CAUSES OF THE WEALTH OF NATIONS. Edited by Jim Manis. Penn State Electronic Classics Series. 1776. Reprint, The Pennsylvania State University, 2005. https://www.rrojasdatabank.info/Wealth-Nations.pdf.

Smith, Roy C. Adam Smith and the Origins of American Enterprise: How the Founding Fathers Turned to a Great Economist’s Writings and Created the American Economy. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Griffin, 2004. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Adam_Smith_and_the_Origins_of_American_E/-CIHI4m578sC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=adam+smith+and+the+founding+fathers&pg=PR9&printsec=frontcover.

Ward, Thomas J. “Adam Smith’s Views on Religion and Social Justice.” International Journal on World Peace 21, no. 2 (2004): 43–62. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20753440.
}}

Freedom of Religion/History/Country sources/Scottish Enlightenment

2024-07-29T15:56:48Z

ThbigO:

{{Right section
|right=Freedom of Religion
|section=Philosophical Origins
|question=Tradition contributions
|questionHeading=What have religious and philosophical traditions contributed to our understanding of this right?
|breakout=Scottish Enlightenment
|pageLevel=Breakout
|contents=Adam Smith, one of the leading thinkers of the Scottish Enlightenment, was personally very critical of religion. “He was deeply critical of Christianity and Judaism, both because of the discriminatory views of his era, and because of his own observation of hypocrisy within Protestantism.” (Ward 43, 2004). He did however have a background of mentors who dabbled with theology. Professor Gershom Carmichael had a rational and empirical approach to religion, he was not a part of the “enthusiastic” movements that were popular in Scotland at the time. Professor Carmichael was a professor of moral philosophy at the University of Glasgow and was the mentor of Francis Hutcheson, who became the mentor of Adam Smith (Ward 49, 2004). Francis Hutcheson argued that the reality of God could be discovered through natural theology and led an educational reform in Scotland. He taught courses in English rather than Latin , he led the University of Glasgow away from Calvinism and instead used a scientific approach to study religion, God, and morality (Ward 49, 2004). Adam Smith would eventually inherit Hutcheson’s post at the University of Glasgow and was expected to lecture on theology. While this sounds like a great place to learn about what Smith thought about theology, “at the time of his death, Smith ordered the destruction of any of his writings that, he felt, failed to offer a unique contribution to human knowledge and understanding. The fact that there is no trace of his materials on natural theology would seem to suggest that, for Smith, they were without great significance. (Ward 50, 2004). Adam Smith’s personal religious views are left to interpretation; his approach to religion is approached very scientifically.

Smith was not the only Scottish Enlightenment figure will this approach to religion; “figures such as David Hume, Francis Hutcheson, and Smith seem to have resisted all established religion. They were fascinated by the scientific insights of figures such as Issac Newton and Kepler.” (Ward 49, 2004). Adam Smith’s personal relationship with religion doesn’t mean that he avoided discussing it in his published works. In The Wealth of Nations, Smith critiques state-supported religious monopolies, especially those that must use force to enforce their monopoly. (Griswold 396, 1997). “When the authorized teachers of religion propagate through the great body of the people, doctrines subversive of the authority of the sovereign, it is by violence only, or by the force of a standing army, that he can maintain his authority.” (Smith 651, 1776). So, to avoid this violence, states should refrain from forcing their religious monopolies on the people. “Smith has argued that the causes of violence in connection with religion are (i) the perception by the dominant religion that assistance from the state (in the form of police powers) is available to increase the size of its flock, with all the corresponding temporal benefits; and (ii) the feelings of resentment on the part of the persecuted religions” (Griswold 409, 1997). Following this, he believes that “such a clergy, when attacked by a set of popular and bold, though perhaps stupid and ignorant enthusiasts, feel themselves as perfectly defenseless as the indolent, effeminate, and full fed nations of the southern parts of Asia, when they were invaded by the active, hardy, and hungry Tartars of the north. Such a clergy, upon such an emergency, have commonly no other resource than to call upon the civil magistrate to persecute, destroy, or drive out their adversaries, as disturbers of the public peace.” (Smith 643, 1776). The Wealth of Nations is about, well, how nations should build their wealth. His analysis of religion in this book should be taken as his advice on how to achieve a civil society. Smith goes on to suggest that states should focus their education on science rather than religion so that people would be “less tempted to explain puzzling natural phenomena in religious terms.” (Griswold 411, 1997).

Adam Smith’s view is that the state should embrace free markets, an idea analyzed in detail in The Wealth of Nations. This leads to his general goal of creating a stable government and economy (Ward 45, 2009). While he himself doesn’t advocate religion and instead advocates science , he recognizes some areas of freedom of religion that he incorporates into Theory of Moral Sentiments and The Wealth of Nations. He supports separation of church and state, allowing liberty of religious belief, and creating a free market of religions (Griswold 411, 1997). In The Wealth of Nations, Smith argues “In a country where the law favored the teachers of no one religion more than those of another, it would not be necessary that any of them should have any particular or immediate dependency upon the sovereign or executive power; or that he should have anything to do either in appointing or in dismissing them from their offices.” (Smith 650, 1776). Here, Smith is arguing for separation of church and state; he further argues that by allowing freedom of religion and creating a large market of religions, it will reduce the competition between different religions and improve their relationships with the state. “The teachers of each sect, seeing themselves surrounded on all sides with more adversaries than friends, would be obliged to learn that candour and moderation which are so seldom to be found among the teachers of those great sects, whose tenets, being supported by the civil magistrate, are held in veneration by almost all the inhabitants of extensive kingdoms and empires, and who, therefore, see nothing round them but followers, disciples, and humble admirers. The teachers of each little sect, finding themselves almost alone, would be obliged to respect those of almost every other sect; and the concession which they would mutually find in both convenient and agreeable to make one to another, might in time, probably reduce the doctrine of the greater part of them to that pure and rational religion, free from every mixture of absurdity, imposture, or fanaticism, such as wise men have, in all ages of the world, wished to see established…” (Smith 647, 1776). He did, however, not believe that these ideals could be achieved on their own. Smith argued that a liberal education in science was required to support these ideals. (Griswold 411, 1997). “Science is the great antidote to the poison of enthusiasm and superstition; and where all the superior ranks of people were secured from it, the inferior ranks could not be much exposed to it” (Smith 650, 1779)

Adam Smith is not the only Scottish Enlightenment figure to speak about religion; David Hume had his own opinions on religion. In his essay Of Superstition and Enthusiasm, he argues “that superstition is an enemy to civil liberty, and enthusiasm a friend to it. As superstition groans under the dominion of priests, and enthusiasm is destructive of all ecclesiastical power, this sufficiently accounts for the present observation.” (Hume 1758). He explains that in England’s civil wars, the whigs were friends to toleration, and it was their tolerating spirit that helped to reconcile the differences between the competing Roman Catholics and other Christians. The “tolerating spirit” Hume is referring to here, can be interpreted as religious freedom.

As stated earlier, Scottish Enlightenment figures tend to be highly critical of religion and tend to speak to religion in the context of creating a more civil society (Ward 49, 2004). With this context, I can hypothesize that Adam Smith supported the ideals of freedom of religion. Separation of church and state, liberty of religious belief, and a free market of religions sounds very similar to the freedom of religion in the United States. Adam Smith’s works were very influential on the founding fathers when it came to designing our government (Smith 2004). “The Wealth of Nations was also read and discussed by those in America seeking to form a new government based on preserving “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” and an economic system that could assure America of prosperity and self-sufficiency” (Smith 9, 2004). After reading through many sections of The Wealth of Nations, it is evident that the founding fathers took some examples from it about how to build and maintain a free-market economy. Knowing that they were already taking advice from Adam Smith and other Scottish Enlightenment figures about the economy and governance, it is within reason that the founding fathers took the advice of the Scottish Enlightenment figures about the relationship between church and state to ensure a civil society. By allowing freedom of religion, it should reduce competition between religions and frees the government from being stuck supporting the state-supported religion. Smith himself said that wise men wished to see these ideals established in governments, and the brand new government of the United States gave the founding fathers the opportunity to test these ideals.

Griswold, Charles L. “Religion and Community: Adam Smith on the Virtues of Liberty.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 35, no. 3 (1997): 395–419. https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/1/article/225729.

Hume, David. Essays Moral, Political, Literary. Edited by Eugene F. Miller. 1758. Reprint, Liberty Fund Inc., 1987. https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/hume-essays-moral-political-literary-lf-ed.

Smith, Adam. AN INQUIRY INTO THE NATURE AND CAUSES OF THE WEALTH OF NATIONS. Edited by Jim Manis. Penn State Electronic Classics Series. 1776. Reprint, The Pennsylvania State University, 2005. https://www.rrojasdatabank.info/Wealth-Nations.pdf.

Smith, Roy C. Adam Smith and the Origins of American Enterprise: How the Founding Fathers Turned to a Great Economist’s Writings and Created the American Economy. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Griffin, 2004. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Adam_Smith_and_the_Origins_of_American_E/-CIHI4m578sC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=adam+smith+and+the+founding+fathers&pg=PR9&printsec=frontcover.

Ward, Thomas J. “Adam Smith’s Views on Religion and Social Justice.” International Journal on World Peace 21, no. 2 (2004): 43–62. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20753440.
}}

Freedom of the Press/Most countries

2024-07-26T17:14:10Z

ThbigO:

{{Right section
|right=Freedom of the Press
|section=Legal Codification
|question=Most countries
|questionHeading=Is this right protected in the Constitutions of most countries today?
|pageLevel=Question
|contents=Freedom of the press, and the extent to which it is present, varies widely around the globe. Reporters without Borders is an international non-profit and NGO that maintains a yearly Press Freedom Index that gives some clues on where on the globe freedom of the press is most and least prevalent. This index is the largest of its kind and is frequently used to gauge levels of press freedoms across different countries. The index is based on multiple indicators, including a country’s Constitutional protections, legal precedents, treatment of journalists, and media landscape. The official definition of press freedom used by RWB is “Press freedom is defined as the ability of journalists as individuals and collectives to select, produce, and disseminate news in the public interest independent of political, economic, legal, and social interference and in the absence of threats to their physical and mental safety.” (Reporters without Borders). Europe and the European Union maintain the best freedom of the press found worldwide according to RWB. Norway has topped the Press Freedom Index for the past 2 years for a few reasons. Article 100 of Norway’s constitution allows freedom of expression in Norway (Constitution of the Kingdom of Norway). This was updated in 2006 from the old language which stated, “There shall be freedom of print” to “there shall be freedom of expression” (Rolland, 2010). 200 years ago, when Norway was drafting their Constitution, freedom of the press was essentially freedom of the print, as that was the chief media technology in 1814 (Rolland, 2010). This means that when the technology of the press evolved, they didn’t have the same constitutional protections. This modernization of Norway’s constitution ensures that all forms of the press are protected by Norway’s constitution (Rolland, 2010). The other reasons Norway ranks highly is due to their strong media market with both public and private outlets, and Norway’s leaders safeguarding press freedoms.

The other countries highly rated in the Press Freedom Index include Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands, Finland, Estonia, Portugal, Ireland, Switzerland and Germany. The non-European countries that are highly rated include Canada, New Zealand, Timor-Leste, Samoa, and Jamaica. To give some examples, Denmark’s constitution states “Any person shall be entitled to publish his thoughts in printing, in writing, and in speech, provided that he may be held answerable in a court of justice. Censorship and other preventative measures shall never again be introduced.” (The Constitutional Act of Denmark §77). Sweden’s constitution contains The Freedom of the Press Act, which states “Freedom of the press means the freedom for everyone to express their thoughts, opinions and sentiments in print, and to publish official documents and in general communicate information on any subject whatsoever” (The Freedom of the Press Act (1949:105)). The Freedom of the Press Act was originally passed in 1766, making it the world’s first law protecting freedom of the press (Weibull, 2014). It was created after decades of censorship by Swedish monarchs and has been amended in 1810 and 1812 to abolish censorship of academic and theological publications and to affirm the principles of editorial responsibility. (Weibull, 2014). The Canadian constitution contains the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which allows for “freedom of the press and other media of communication” (Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms).

Countries that have high levels of press freedom have many features in common that make them secure for journalists. The Press Freedom Index analyzes five contextual indicators that are used to gauge press freedom. First off, countries with high levels of press freedom have a solid legal framework protecting freedom of the press. This includes constitutions, as well as the ability of the press to access information without discrimination. The next category is political context, which is a states current level of acceptance of journalism, a states support of journalism, and the role of the press in keeping accountability in government. To use Norway as an example, Norwegian politicians are supportive of the country’s media landscape, rather than the United States, where many politicians call the media into doubt. Economic context is also considered, which is mainly the economic constraints a state may place on the press. Sociocultural contexts can impede the press’s ability to report information on issues like gender and religion. Lastly, the safety of the press is questioned. This includes safety from physical harm, psychological harm, and professional harm (such as a journalist having their equipment confiscated). This gives an idea about what freedom of the press looks like in the countries that do their best to uphold it. Journalists are protected by the law and can investigate and scrutinize the state. The politicians in charge of the country uphold press freedom and do not interfere unjustly. The state doesn’t impose unjust economic constraints on media outlets, and journalists are safe in their line of work.

This brings me to the original question, “Is [freedom of the press] protected in the constitutions of most countries today?”. I must answer that yes, it is technically protected in the constitutions of most countries today. With the exception of Eritrea and Afghanistan, which both don’t have a constitution in effect, every other country ranked lowest in the Press Freedom Index had freedom of expression/press given to the citizens in their constitution. The countries ranked highest in the Press Freedom Index have freedom of expression/press given to the citizens in their constitution or supporting constitutional documents, like the U.S. Bill of Rights and Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This leads me to believe that it must be up to a country’s leadership to protect the laws these countries have written. Syria and North Korea both give their citizens freedom of the press and freedom of expression, but the regimes in power there penalize those who try to use that right. This is an interesting paradox that exists in the constitutions of both democratic and autocratic nations.

“Chapter V: Fundamental Rights and Duties of Citizens,” Socialist Constitution of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, 2019. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzkp0009&collection=cow

Justice Laws Website. “Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” Canada, 1982. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-12.html.

National Archives. “The Bill of Rights: A Transcription,” November 4, 2015. https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript.

“Part 1: Rights and Freedoms.” English Translation of the Syrian Constitution Modifications, 2012. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzsy0011&collection=cow

Reporters without Borders. “Press Freedom Index,” 2024. https://rsf.org/en/index.

Reporters without Borders. “Methodology used for compiling the World Press Freedom Index 2024,” 2024 https://rsf.org/en/methodology-used-compiling-world-press-freedom-index-2024?year=2024&data_type=general

Rolland, Asle. “Modernising Freedom of Speech: The Case of Article 100 of the Norwegian Constitution.” Policy Studies 31, no. 3 (May 2010): 331–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442871003616008.

“Section E: Human Rights,” Constitution of the Kingdom of Norway, 2023. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzno0102&collection=cow

“The Constitution,” April 3, 2023. https://www.riksdagen.se/en/how-the-riksdag-works/democracy/the-constitution/.

The Danish Parliament. “The Constitutional Act,” February 19, 2024. https://www.thedanishparliament.dk/en/democracy/the-constitutional-act.

United States Department of State. “2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices.” https://www.state.gov/reports/2023-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/.

Weibull, Lennart. “Freedom of the Press Act of 1766.” Britannica, 2014. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Freedom-of-the-Press-Act-of-1766.
}}

Freedom of the Press/Most countries

2024-07-26T17:10:49Z

ThbigO: Created page with "{{Right section |right=Freedom of the Press |section=Legal Codification |question=Most countries |questionHeading=Is this right protected in the Constitutions of most countries today? |pageLevel=Question |contents=Freedom of the press, and the extent to which it is present, varies widely around the globe. Reporters without Borders is an international non-profit and NGO that maintains a yearly Press Freedom Index that gives some clues on where on the globe freedom of the..."

{{Right section
|right=Freedom of the Press
|section=Legal Codification
|question=Most countries
|questionHeading=Is this right protected in the Constitutions of most countries today?
|pageLevel=Question
|contents=Freedom of the press, and the extent to which it is present, varies widely around the globe. Reporters without Borders is an international non-profit and NGO that maintains a yearly Press Freedom Index that gives some clues on where on the globe freedom of the press is most and least prevalent. This index is the largest of its kind and is frequently used to gauge levels of press freedoms across different countries. The index is based on multiple indicators, including a country’s Constitutional protections, legal precedents, treatment of journalists, and media landscape. The official definition of press freedom used by RWB is “Press freedom is defined as the ability of journalists as individuals and collectives to select, produce, and disseminate news in the public interest independent of political, economic, legal, and social interference and in the absence of threats to their physical and mental safety.” (Reporters without Borders). Europe and the European Union maintain the best freedom of the press found worldwide according to RWB. Norway has topped the Press Freedom Index for the past 2 years for a few reasons. Article 100 of Norway’s constitution allows freedom of expression in Norway (Constitution of the Kingdom of Norway). This was updated in 2006 from the old language which stated, “There shall be freedom of print” to “there shall be freedom of expression” (Rolland, 2010). 200 years ago, when Norway was drafting their Constitution, freedom of the press was essentially freedom of the print, as that was the chief media technology in 1814 (Rolland, 2010). This means that when the technology of the press evolved, they didn’t have the same constitutional protections. This modernization of Norway’s constitution ensures that all forms of the press are protected by Norway’s constitution (Rolland, 2010). The other reasons Norway ranks highly is due to their strong media market with both public and private outlets, and Norway’s leaders safeguarding press freedoms.
The other countries highly rated in the Press Freedom Index include Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands, Finland, Estonia, Portugal, Ireland, Switzerland and Germany. The non-European countries that are highly rated include Canada, New Zealand, Timor-Leste, Samoa, and Jamaica. To give some examples, Denmark’s constitution states “Any person shall be entitled to publish his thoughts in printing, in writing, and in speech, provided that he may be held answerable in a court of justice. Censorship and other preventative measures shall never again be introduced.” (The Constitutional Act of Denmark §77). Sweden’s constitution contains The Freedom of the Press Act, which states “Freedom of the press means the freedom for everyone to express their thoughts, opinions and sentiments in print, and to publish official documents and in general communicate information on any subject whatsoever” (The Freedom of the Press Act (1949:105)). The Freedom of the Press Act was originally passed in 1766, making it the world’s first law protecting freedom of the press (Weibull, 2014). It was created after decades of censorship by Swedish monarchs and has been amended in 1810 and 1812 to abolish censorship of academic and theological publications and to affirm the principles of editorial responsibility. (Weibull, 2014). The Canadian constitution contains the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which allows for “freedom of the press and other media of communication” (Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms).
Countries that have high levels of press freedom have many features in common that make them secure for journalists. The Press Freedom Index analyzes five contextual indicators that are used to gauge press freedom. First off, countries with high levels of press freedom have a solid legal framework protecting freedom of the press. This includes constitutions, as well as the ability of the press to access information without discrimination. The next category is political context, which is a states current level of acceptance of journalism, a states support of journalism, and the role of the press in keeping accountability in government. To use Norway as an example, Norwegian politicians are supportive of the country’s media landscape, rather than the United States, where many politicians call the media into doubt. Economic context is also considered, which is mainly the economic constraints a state may place on the press. Sociocultural contexts can impede the press’s ability to report information on issues like gender and religion. Lastly, the safety of the press is questioned. This includes safety from physical harm, psychological harm, and professional harm (such as a journalist having their equipment confiscated). This gives an idea about what freedom of the press looks like in the countries that do their best to uphold it. Journalists are protected by the law and can investigate and scrutinize the state. The politicians in charge of the country uphold press freedom and do not interfere unjustly. The state doesn’t impose unjust economic constraints on media outlets, and journalists are safe in their line of work.
This brings me to the original question, “Is [freedom of the press] protected in the constitutions of most countries today?”. I must answer that yes, it is technically protected in the constitutions of most countries today. With the exception of Eritrea and Afghanistan, which both don’t have a constitution in effect, every other country ranked lowest in the Press Freedom Index had freedom of expression/press given to the citizens in their constitution. The countries ranked highest in the Press Freedom Index have freedom of expression/press given to the citizens in their constitution or supporting constitutional documents, like the U.S. Bill of Rights and Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This leads me to believe that it must be up to a country’s leadership to protect the laws these countries have written. Syria and North Korea both give their citizens freedom of the press and freedom of expression, but the regimes in power there penalize those who try to use that right. This is an interesting paradox that exists in the constitutions of both democratic and autocratic nations.

“Chapter V: Fundamental Rights and Duties of Citizens,” Socialist Constitution of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, 2019. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzkp0009&collection=cow

Justice Laws Website. “Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” Canada, 1982. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-12.html.

National Archives. “The Bill of Rights: A Transcription,” November 4, 2015. https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript.

“Part 1: Rights and Freedoms.” English Translation of the Syrian Constitution Modifications, 2012. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzsy0011&collection=cow

Reporters without Borders. “Press Freedom Index,” 2024. https://rsf.org/en/index.

Reporters without Borders. “Methodology used for compiling the World Press Freedom Index 2024,” 2024 https://rsf.org/en/methodology-used-compiling-world-press-freedom-index-2024?year=2024&data_type=general

Rolland, Asle. “Modernising Freedom of Speech: The Case of Article 100 of the Norwegian Constitution.” Policy Studies 31, no. 3 (May 2010): 331–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442871003616008.

“Section E: Human Rights,” Constitution of the Kingdom of Norway, 2023. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzno0102&collection=cow

“The Constitution,” April 3, 2023. https://www.riksdagen.se/en/how-the-riksdag-works/democracy/the-constitution/.

The Danish Parliament. “The Constitutional Act,” February 19, 2024. https://www.thedanishparliament.dk/en/democracy/the-constitutional-act.

United States Department of State. “2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices.” https://www.state.gov/reports/2023-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/.

Weibull, Lennart. “Freedom of the Press Act of 1766.” Britannica, 2014. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Freedom-of-the-Press-Act-of-1766.
}}