Index relies entirely on the support of donors and readers to do its work.
Help us keep amplifying censored voices today.
INDEX EVENTS
18 July New World (Dis)Order: What do Turkey, Russia and Brazil tell us about freedom and rights?
Index, in partnership with the European Council on Foreign Relations, is holding a timely debate on the shifting world order and its impact on rights and freedoms. The event will also launch the latest issue of Index on Censorship magazine, including a special report on the multipolar world.
(More information)
FROM INDEX ON CENSORSHIP MAGAZINE
Global view: Who has freedom of expression?
Freedom of expression is a universal, fundamental human right. But who actually has access to free expression? Index CEO Kirsty Hughes looks at the evidence.
(Index on Censorship)
Global view: Who has freedom of expression?
Freedom of expression is a universal, fundamental human right. But who actually has access to free expression? Index CEO Kirsty Hughes looks at the evidence.
(Index on Censorship)
The multipolar challenge to free expression
As emerging markets command influence on the international stage, Saul Estrin and Kirsty Hughes look at the impact on economics, politics and human rights.
(Index on Censorship)
News in monochrome: Journalism in India
The media’s infatuation with a single narrative is drowning out the country’s diversity, giving way to sensationalist reporting and “paid for” news. But, says Bharat Bhushan, moves towards regulation could have a chilling effect too
(Index on Censorship)
Censorship: The problem child of Burma’s dictatorship
Writer and artist Htoo Lyin Myo gives his personal account of working under government censorship in Burma
(Index on Censorship)
BURMA
Burma’s Press Council Threatens Resignation Over Media Rules
Members of Burma’s interim Press Council say they will resign if the newly minted Printing and Publishing Enterprise Bill is passed into law in its current guise.
(The Irrawaddy)
CHINA
State of the artist in China
“What can they do to me?” asks Ai Weiwei. “Who is afraid of Ai Weiwei?” sprays a young woman on city buildings in Hong Kong. You can hate him or love him but you can’t ignore Ai Weiwei.
(The Hindu)
GLOBAL
All the ways Google is asked to censor the web, in one handy chart
Google recently released statistics on all the legal requests it gets to censor the Web via its many services, from Search to YouTube. Now Sebastian Sadowski has created some handy visualizations of all the ways information is being censored — perhaps without you even realizing it.
(io9)
INDIA
To free the press or not to: the Indira govt debate?
The Indira Gandhi government feared Emergency and its various aspects, including the controversial family planning programme, would see the government “severely criticised” if press censorship was lifted in the run-up to the March 1977 Lok Sabha elections.
(Indian Express)
‘India has a strong culture for cinema’
Cinema is a movement that lets you enter the personal space of subjects without disturbing them and the art lies in then knitting a story around them, acclaimed French filmmaker Claire Denis said on Monday while addressing a news conference at the Film and Television Institute of India (FTII).
(Times of India)
IRAN
Iran’s Rouhani Set to Revamp Censorship?
Iranian President-elect Hassan Rouhani may be set to revamp the country’s censorship, according to a speech he delivered in Tehran.
(Israel National News)
MOROCCO
Free speech sidelined in Morocco
Despite promising reform and introducing a new constitution in 2011, Morocco’s treatment of dissidents indicates the changes were just window dressing, Samia Errazzouki writes
(Index on Censorship)
NEW ZEALAND
Critic claims censorship on Collins Wiki
Justice Minister Judith Collins’ office has become embroiled in a Wikipedia war with ministry critic Roger Brooking. Brooking is an outspoken critic of Collins and the Justice Ministry and was a prolific Wikipedia editor – now banned – under the username Offender9000.
(Southland Times)
RUSSIA
Guest Post: International solidarity with Russian civil society is crucial
Global action is needed to counter Putin’s crackdown on civil society, says Yuri Dzhibladze, president of the Center for the Development of Democracy and Human Rights
(Index on Censorship)
Russia to Develop ‘Code of Ethics’ for Film Industry
Veteran Russian directors Karen Shakhnazarov and Marlen Khutsiyev have been included in a working group charged with developing a code of ethics for the Russian film industry, an idea originally suggested by President Vladimir Putin.
(The Hollywood Reporter)
SINGAPORE
US ‘deeply concerned’ by Singapore Internet rules
The United States said Monday it was “deeply concerned” by what it called a “new restrictive” law in Singapore for licensing online news websites.
(Inquirer)
TUNISIA
Hollande’s Tunisia Visit Upsets
Some Civil Society Advocates
While many observers expected the visit of French President Francois Hollande to Tunisia to be postponed, others believed that its timing was counterproductive in the sense that it signaled indirect support for the ruling troika.
(Al Monitor)
UNITED STATES
Top Attorney Floyd Abrams Has Defended Free Speech For Over 40 Years
Floyd Abrams is an ardent defender of free speech and a passionate proponent of the First Amendment. Except for the time that his 12-year-old daughter, now a federal judge, told her dad that she and some friends were going to an R-rated movie.
(NY1)
Coalition calls for veto of NJ media violence ‘disinformation bill’
The National Coalition Against Censorship, American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression and the Center for Democracy and Technology sent a letter to New Jersey Governor Chris Christie today asking him to veto Senate Bill 2715, which would require the state’s Department of Education “to prepare and distribute informational pamphlets on how parents can limit a child’s exposure to media violence,” which includes video games, according to the text of the bill.
(Polygon)
Previous Free Expression in the News posts
July 8 | July 5 | July 4 | July 3 | July 2 | July 1 | June 28 | June 27 | June 26 | June 25
INDEX MAGAZINE
Index magazine: The Multipolar Challenge to Free Expression
Coming up in the next issue of Index on Censorship magazine, out Monday, is a special report on the shifting world power balance and the implications for freedom of expression.
(Index on Censorship)
AUSTRALIA
Police Monitor Vagina Art Exhibition, Make Censorship Suggestions
Police in Sydney, Australia, repeatedly turned up at an art exhibition titled “101 Vagina” to make censorship suggestions to photographer Philip Werner.
(Opposing Views)
BAHRAIN
The cost of tweeting in Bahrain
A Bahraini teenager has been given jail time for a tweet. Sara Yasin looks at how the country has pursued users of the popular social networking site
(Index on Censorship)
BRAZIL
Protesters give president a tenuous truce, as she says their voices are being heard
Cristiano Gulias took a deep drag from his mini-cigar and did the unthinkable — he started a political discussion in a coffee shop the morning after Brazil’s national soccer team won a major championship, rather than a debate on the team’s performance.
(Washington Post)
GHANA
Three Persons Has Been Cited For Contempt Over Scandalizing Supreme Court
Well, taking on the Supreme Court of Ghana has landed some disgruntled political pugilists in the dock. In something of a legal novelty, these persons have been cited for contempt by “scandalizing the Court after publicly criticizing and bringing into disrepute the Supreme Court Judges and their decisions”.
(Vibe Ghana)
Free Speech, Cheap Or Can Be Expensive?
Freedom of speech is said to be political freedom or right to express one’s thought or opinion. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Right and International Human Right Law recognise this right.
(Spy Ghana)
GREECE
Far-right publishing in Greece: Stories that ‘teach’ people a lesson
Taking their cue from the neo-nazi Golden Dawn, Greece’s far-right newspapers have recently been targeting alternative opinions. While hardly breaking news, the language and symbolism of the campaign is of vital importance because it represents just the tip of the iceberg, Christos Syllas writes
(Index on Censorship)
IRAN
Iran’s president signals softer line on web censorship and Islamic dress code
Newly elected Hassan Rouhani, an opponent of segregation by gender, says Iranians’ freedoms and rights have been ignored
(The Guardian)
PHILIPPINES
Solons to de-criminalize libel in cybercrime law
Two senators are moving to delete certain provisions of the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, which was signed into law by President Aquino in September last year but its implementation was deferred by the Supreme Court on the strength of a temporary restraining order.
(Manila Standard Today)
TUNISIA
Rapper Weld El 15 walks free
Tunisian rapper Weld El 15 (real name Alaa Yaacoubi) walked free from Tunis’s Court of Appeal today after his jail sentence for “insulting” police was reduced from two years to a six month suspended sentence, Padraig Reidy writes
(Index on Censorship)
UNITED KINGDOM
Stormont must give us a libel law fit for modern age
MLAs will today be told that reform of Northern Ireland’s outdated law is needed or else the province will lose out on investment, writes Mike Harris
(Belfast Telegraph)
Defamation Reform – New Law For A New Era?
The Defamation Act 2013 (“the Act”) received Royal Assent last month – it has not yet come into force, but is expected to do so soon. The Act has been long in the making and provoked much debate among practitioners, but in essence it is designed to modernise the law of defamation and also make it fit for purpose in the digital age. We shall examine how this is to happen by describing some of the major changes the Act will introduce.
(Mondaq)
Are Islam and Islamists taking over Britain?
Lee Rigby was a British soldier who was attacked, murdered, butchered and beheaded in broad daylight on a busy street near his barracks in London last month. He was attacked, murdered, butchered and beheaded by Islamists acting in the name of Islam.
(American Thinker)
UNITED STATES
Tennessee to appeal Occupy Nashville free speech ruling
Since when is free speech controversial? In the article “Director of Jihad Watch blog stirs controversy” (June 30) the largely one-sided article distorts a reality that is pretty clear to everyone not infected by an increasingly corrupt press.
(Times Free Press)
Free speech at stake as scandals break
Over the course of the past few months there has been cause for growing concern as we have learned about the Administration apparently violating law abiding citizens’ right to free speech and assembly.
(Chillicothe Gazette)
Daily Mail’s Martosko Cleared of Libel Claim
In mid-March, Mother Jones jabbed then-Daily Caller‘s Executive Editor and current Daily Mail U.S. Political Editor David Martosko with news of a libel lawsuit. Well, today the good folks over at MJ can read the following ruling and weep as the case has been dismissed by a unanimous 5-0 ruling in New York.
(Fishbowl DC)
North Carolina’s Anti-Sharia Bill is Now Also Anti-Abortion
The North Carolina Senate is not only considering an anti-Sharia (or Islamic law) bill passed in the state’s House earlier this year, they’ve tricked it out with a whole new issue. House Bill 695, which began as a cookie-cutter ban on the use of foreign law in family law and custody cases, now would implement several restrictions on abortion services in the state.
(The Atlantic)
Previous Free Expression in the News posts
July 2 | July 1 | June 28 | July 1 | June 28 | June 27 | June 26 | June 25 | June 24 | June 21 | June 20 | June 19
The EU needs to develop a coherent and comprehensive digital freedom strategy. Brian Pellot writes
Recent revelations from the US National Security Agency have shown that our fundamental rights to privacy and freedom of expression are being compromised on a global scale. This is true despite false assurances to the contrary and the US government’s consistent rhetoric celebrating digital freedom. Unfortunately, the US is far from alone in peddling such hypocrisy. The EU as a whole and its individual member states also promote digital freedom in press conferences yet often undermine positive words with contradictory policies at home and abroad.
As the European Commission opens a consultation on its planned freedom of expression guidelines, Index on Censorship is publishing a public note setting out what it sees as the key principles that must underpin such guidelines.
The EU plans to use these guidelines to assess, in its varied relationships with other countries, if freedom of expression is being respected online and off. While the EU has considerable experience in setting standards for freedom of expression offline, it has been less clear until now how it plans to defend free speech online. We hope these guidelines and other initiatives set out in the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy represent effective steps in the right direction.
These guidelines are a crucial opportunity for the EU to encourage free expression. It is vital that different groups from across civil society input and argue for a full clear defence of free speech online and off.
How the European Union can protect freedom of expression (PDF)
The European Union and its member states have always been committed in theory at least to democratic principles and fundamental human rights. The EU aims to promote human rights both internally and externally, using EU influence in its external policies to push for greater human rights compliance, notably in its enlargement processes, and to a varying degree in other areas (such as neighbourhood policy (to some extent), trade policy (little) and aid policy (to some extent). All member states are signatories to the EU, the European Convention on Human Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which protect freedom of expression; the EU’s own Charter of Fundamental Rights is now part of the EU’s Lisbon Treaty. However, the range of cases at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg tells us that the EU member states need to look at their own rights performance as well as to push for human rights internationally.
The EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy published in June 2012 calls for the EU to develop new public guidelines on freedom of expression online and off. This paper outlines key global issues and principles on free expression that Index believes the EU should consider as essential when it drafts these guidelines.
(1) Protecting freedom of expression in a digital age[1]
There are a number of key issues the EU must consider to ensure the protection and promotion of digital freedom of expression in its foreign policies.
1.1 Internet governance
Establishing a global body exercising top-down control of the internet would risk increased suppression of speech, severely erode openness and inhibit innovation and creativity. Index believes the European Union should defend a bottom-up, multi-stakeholder approach to internet governance to ensure an open and free internet is defended, and we welcome recent calls in the European Parliament for the Union to defend this freedom.
1.2 State censorship
Authoritarian states continue to be active in online censorship, from China’s Great Firewall to Iran’s plans for a “halal internet”. States should not institute network-wide filters or firewalls that create national intranets. The excessive and inappropriate use of takedown requests by governments can also have a negative impact on online debate, on social media, comment threads and beyond. Index believes that, in parallel with free speech offline, any limits made on online speech must be necessary, limited, transparent and proportionate, and takedown requests should always be backed with a court order.
1.3 Corporate censorship
Private companies face the challenge of expanding internationally while obeying national laws and respecting fundamental human rights. Meanwhile, companies such as Facebook, Twitter and Google are playing a greater role in delineating the boundaries of ‘acceptable’ speech through their own terms of service. National-level libel and privacy laws often make internet intermediaries, who are not the authors or publishers of content, judge and jury over censoring content. Index believes intermediaries should not be liable for content they have not authored. In addition, national laws must not disproportionately impact upon freedom of expression, and private companies should fully respect their human rights obligations in their operations around the world.
1.4 Criminalising online speech
Increased capability to share content online means that messages some groups might find offensive can spread quickly to large audiences. Online speech deemed “offensive” is increasingly being criminalised, especially on social media platforms. This trend must be reversed. Efforts to restrict speech based on perceived offense must be narrow and limited, as outlined in the UDHR. Public prosecutors should not criminalise content based solely on real or perceived offense.
1.5 Net neutrality
Net neutrality – the principle that all data should be treated equally on networks – is an essential prerequisite for a free and open internet. Net neutrality should be written into statute. The European Parliament’s Draft Report on a Digital Freedom Strategy in EU Foreign Policy called on both the Commission and Council to codify the principle of net neutrality in appropriate regulation, “so as to strengthen its credibility in terms of promoting and defending digital freedoms around the world.” Index echoes this call.
1.6 Surveillance and privacy
Mass monitoring, surveillance and the unnecessary storage (with state access) of citizens’ use of digital communications are unacceptable breaches of fundamental human rights. The right to privacy and freedom of expression are closely linked: if individuals’ communications are monitored, that will directly chill their free expression and encourage self-censorship. Governments should not store unnecessary amounts of their citizens’ communications data. Government access to data should be limited in scope with as few bodies able to access the data as strictly necessary; transparent, subject to judicial oversight and legally defined.
A related threat is the role western technology companies are playing in producing and exporting surveillance equipment that allows governments to retain data and spy on citizens. Index welcomes the European Parliament’s recent endorsement of stricter European export controls of such “digital arms”, as proposed by Marietje Schaake, and urges the EU to follow this lead.
1.7 Copyright
Attempts to enforce traditional copyright models in the digital world risk criminalising and censoring individual users. Copyright laws should not be used to block individuals’ access to the internet. There is a need for an open debate that looks at new business models that work for both creators and users.
1.8 Access to free expression online
The latest statistics suggest 63 per cent of Europe’s population is online. As the digital world becomes an increasingly key part of social, economic and political life, access to digital communications is fundamental. The digital divide needs to be further overcome in the EU and around the world. Online censorship should not close down these spaces, and nor should other obstacles to free expression online be allowed to persist, including illiteracy, marginalisation and poverty, or discrimination by gender or by ethnicity.
1.9 Support for human rights defenders and citizen journalists
The technological innovations that have transformed the work of activists have also facilitated attacks on bloggers who push back against established networks of control. Index contends that online and citizen journalists must be given the same protection as mainstream and offline media organisations.
(2) Protecting free expression offline
2.1 Media freedom
In any democracy, citizens must be free to challenge authority. Restrictive legislation, over-regulation and a lack of plurality diminishes the media’s ability to act as a public watchdog holding power to account. Media freedom in recent years has been restricted by anti-terrorism laws, classified government documents, secrecy laws and corporate bullying of the media. Restrictions on laws that govern the press must be transparent, limited and proportionate; anti-terrorism legislation must not reduce the fundamental principle of confidentially of sources, which makes investigative journalism possible; state secrecy laws should contain a public interest defence; and commercial privacy should be limited when corporate malfeasance needs exposing in the public interest.
2.2 Media regulation
Statutory regulation of print media is inappropriate bringing politicians too close to interference in newspapers’ editorial freedom. Independent or self-regulatory regulatory bodies are the appropriate routed alongside high media standards and ethics. Where there is limited media capacity (such as terrestrial television and radio), state licensing can be justified as long as it is not used to silence critical voices. States should encourage media plurality and not limit competition but intervene to prevent media monopolies.
2.3 Libel
Archaic libel laws chill freedom of expression in too many countries around the world. The most significant chill comes from the use of criminal defamation to imprison those who criticise government officials or politicians. The use of criminal defamation laws is unjust and disproportionate, and countries should decriminalise libel in line with the recommendations of the UN special rapporteur on freedom of expression.
Civil defamation laws can also chill freedom of expression. Civil defamation laws must not give rise to excessive costs or damages and have adequate defences to protect the public interest, truth and fair comment.
2.4 Balancing privacy and freedom of expression
Freedom of expression and privacy are often complementary as human rights. Free speech can be chilled if individuals fear speaking out on controversial issues because they are being watched or listened too. Privacy and anonymity are important in protecting free expression in many circumstances. At the same time, the right to privacy and the right to free expression can sometimes come into conflict: investigative journalism exposing corruption, wrong-doing, abuse of power etc, must have accessible public interest defences that allows in such circumstances some invasion of privacy that would otherwise be deemed inappropriate.
2.5 Hate speech, offence and religious freedom
Hate speech and incitement to violence are increasingly confused with offence and blasphemy. There should be a very high threshold for prosecuting hate speech. Open debate can be an effective response to intolerance.
Blasphemy laws should be repealed, in particular criminal blasphemy laws that have a significant impact on religious minorities. With the expansion of the internet, content that some religious believers find blasphemous is increasingly available. Blasphemous or offensive content is neither an incitement to violence nor a reason to respond with violence. Demands to censor offensive material also present major challenges to online hosts of user-generated content, such as YouTube, Facebook and others. Offensive speech is a subjective concept – one person’s interesting idea is another’s offensive comment – and there is no right not to be offended. Moderated sites can create their own rules as to acceptable content – just as clubs or newspapers or broadcasters do, as editorial choices – but free speech means tolerating views you do not like or find offensive.
2.6 Freedom of information
Freedom of information law is an essential component of the right to freedom of expression. Countries should have freedom of information laws that prevent the over-classification of information, reduce secrecy, have a right to appeal where governments refuse information and are low-cost for citizens to use.
2.7 Freedom of assembly
Increasingly governments have introduced fines to prevent legitimate protest without licenses or permits (that are often refused). It has become a method to reduce visible, public freedom of expression. Freedom of assembly is a human right that should only be restricted in very limited circumstances for instance the protection of other human rights.
[1] A fuller version on protecting online freedom of expression can be found in the note, Standing up to threats to digital freedom
Please let us know what you think are the greatest global challenges to free speech — and let the EU know too — by leaving a comment below.