FREEDOM OF SPEECH / FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION


FREEDOM OF SPEECH / FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Freedom of speech is the freedom to speak without censorship and/or limitation. The synonymous term freedom of expression is sometimes used to indicate not only freedom of verbal speech but any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used [United Nations, 1966, 1976]. The right to freedom of speech is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR recognizes the right to freedom of speech as "the right to hold opinions without interference. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression". Furthermore freedom of speech is recognized in European, inter-American and African regional human rights law [United Nations, 1966, 1967]. Freedom of speech, or the freedom of expression, is recognized in international and regional human rights law. The right is enshrined in Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights [Andrew Puddephatt & Hodder Arnold, 2005; Kumar, Ambika, 2006].

In Islamic ethics freedom of speech was first declared in the Rashidun period by the caliph Umar in the 7th century. In the Abbasid Caliphate period, freedom of speech was also declared by al-Hashimi (a cousin of Caliph al-Ma'mun) in a letter to one of the religious opponents he was attempting to convert through reason.

According to George Makdisi and Hugh Goddard, "the idea of academic freedom" in universities was "modelled on Islamic custom" as practiced in the medieval Madrasah system from the 9th century. Islamic influence was "certainly discernible in the foundation of the first deliberately-planned university" in Europe [Boisard, Marcel A., 1980].

* Selected REFERENCES / Sources:

Amnesty International: Annual Reports: URLhttp://www.amnesty.org/ailib/aireport/index.html Andrew Puddephatt & Hodder Arnold. (2005). Freedom of Expression: The Essentials of Human Rights. United Publishers. Boisard, Marcel A. (July 1980), "On the Probable Influence of Islam on Western Public and International Law", International Journal of Middle East Studies 11 (4): 429–50. Goddard, Hugh. (2000). A History of Christian-Muslim Relations. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Kumar, Ambika. (2006). ‘Using Courts to Enforce the Free Speech Provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.’ Published by Chicago Journal of International Law. Summer 2006. URLhttp://www.allbusiness.com/corporate-governance/4082846-1.html United Nations: ‘International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.’ Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16th December 1966: Entry into force 23 March 1976, in accordance with Article 49. URLhttp://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm (United Nations) Wikipedia. (2010). ‘Freedom of Speech.’ Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. URLhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_expression

.

22 January 2010

Australia: Gender Bias /Prejudice

Comment:

This is a clear case of gender bias (prejudice)... Is the judge (and possibly the public) says that its ok for a mum to swing the knife around the house (kitchen), and threathen her husband, and then accidently stabbed her child is OK??! (Because she recieves years of abuse from her husband?!).

Imagine IF the husband swing the 20 cm knife around the house, he would immediately be charged (in the court of law) for reckless behaviour, that could result in endangering the wife, and his children)... And IF he stabbed his child, he would immediately be 'locked up in the cell' (and the Australian public would clap their hands).... What a gender BIAS !!


URLhttp://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/newshome/6709376/woman-who-stabbed-her-daughter-to-death-walks-free/ (22nd January 2010)

Woman who stabbed her daughter to death walks free
CHRISTIANA JONES, The West Austrailan January 22, 2010, 10:46 am

A young mother who unintentionally stabbed and killed her 15-month-old daughter during a domestic dispute will walk free after a judge today imposed a suspended jail term. Nicole Frances Bryan, 23, broke down and sobbed as the sentence was read out in the Supreme Court today and had to be led away from the dock.

Justice Stephen Hall said in sentencing Bryan it was: "One of the worst things imaginable" for a child to die at the hands of a parent. But Justice Hall said Bryan never intended to harm her child.
Note: What IF the accident is reverse, says for example, what IF the husband accidently stabbed his child (daughter), and says he NEVER intended to hurt his child, but accidently killed her?? What would the judge says??

Details of the terrible incident were aired in court this week when it was revealed Bryan had been subject to years of domestic abuse. During a heated argument at their Dawesville home on March 7, 2009, Ms Bryan thrust a 20cm knife at her partner.
Note: Come on domestic abuse happens everyday and everywhere, but in Western society, people just divorce for small matters, I heard some even divorce because the wife/husband got bore of seeing the same face everyday (this cases happen everyday in Western countries).

But Bryan was not aware her defacto was holding toddler Chenelle at the time. As her partner turned to face her, Bryan struck Chenelle with the knife with a fatal blow. She pleaded guilty to manslaughter.
Note: Come on, you should look before you swing the 20 cm knife around ??! What reckless behaviour... and this can be tolerated (in the court of law/ the general public)??

Justice Hall said he had taken it into consideration that Bryan never intended for her child to be harmed. He said she was a devoted mother who had experienced years of domstic violence. Justice Hall detailed a string of domestic disputes that had seen police called to her and her partner's home in the years leading up to the tragedy.

But police were powerless to do anything after Bryan repeatedly refused to make an offical complaint against her partner.
Note: Don't know about this one... Its her life... her choice!

The judge said this came as a result of Bryan's desire to keep the family unit together for the sake of her children but in the days before the tragedy she had become emotionally fragile and unable to cope. The judge said the violent act was dangerous but out of character and she had reacted out of desperation and anger over the abuse.

He noted she had the unconditional love and support of her family and the seperation from her two remaining daughters had made her time behind bars more difficult. Bryan was accompanied by a large group of family and supporters as she walked free from the Supreme Court into a waiting car with other family members.

Justice Hall suspended her jail term on the condition that she attend programs to help her rehabilitation.



.
Posted by at