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

.

13 April 2011

Penis Purification Plan in Adelaide !


Comment:


Nut head! to the justice system and the (Indian) wife... So the wife suffered years of hardship under the husband, so that gives her the rights to 'burn him (or his penis)’ in exchange for the years of hardship (due to her stupidity in the first place)?!


HOW would the court react IF the husband was the one that burnt the private parts of the wife or set her on fire?! … I know, the court system has a ‘double standard’ one for the woman, and the other for the man! CRAB!


Note: The woman should be smart and brave enough to voice out her discontent years back, before it accumulated and got worst… Ignorance of the law (or one's right) has never been a good defence these days! (Least you a woman ?!)


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------




SOUTH AUSTRALIA (SA) - HUSBAND Burner Gets Suspended Sentence !

By Liza Kappelle, AAP April 13, 2011, 12:59 pm


An Adelaide woman who killed her cheating husband by setting him on fire has walked from court with a suspended sentence. Rajini Narayan, 46, ONLY PLANNED to burn her husband's penis a little, to bind him to her by leaving a red mark like the one on her forehead. She was distressed and muddled after suffering more than two decades of physical and psychological abuse only to discover that Satish, 47, was having an affair and might leave her. She told him of her illogical penis purifying plan and showed him a cup of petrol and a candle.


BUT he turned his back on her saying: "No, you won't. You bitch." (Note: Oh yes, the husband suppose to say, 'Ok, yes, quickly burn my penis!' ... What a load of crab!) Narayan told her Supreme Court murder trial, which found her guilty of the lesser charge of manslaughter, she had snapped and thrown the candle and petrol on his back. Her husband later died of the burns.


Justice John Sulan sentenced Narayan on Wednesday to six years in jail. He set a non-parole period of three years and took the unusual step of suspending the sentence, saying Narayan had suffered already and sending her to jail may punish others more. "For the first time in your life you had confronted your husband, had found the courage to be assertive to the person who had mistreated you for 20 years," he said. "His response was to treat you with disdain, dismiss you."


Her husband's family had called for the maximum punishment for the death of the man they described as talented and loving. But his children told the court that while they grieved for their abusive father, the atmosphere at home was no longer angry and hostile. "It is clear from your children's evidence that you are the linchpin of the family," Justice Sulan said.



Posted by at