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

.

17 May 2013

Stephen Hawking Snub Israel Invitation !


Source: https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/05/17/272532/

Snub = coldly, and rudely paying no attention.

That is what worldclass scholar with integrity should do! Snub the Israel for the cruelty done to humanity !!
And that's just the first step, the second step is of course to boycott Israel's products and goods, and the third step is to vote for embargo-sanction for Israel export goods to other countries, and the fourth step is to get into Israel and stop the oppression and shooting of innocents altogether!! Or ALL steps can be done stimutaneously.

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


Brave of Stephen Hawking to snub Israel

May 17, 2013

LETTER: From S Param, via e-mail
Scientists generally avoid getting embroiled in politics although they are staunch believers of the spirit of free speech and liberty. The recent news of world famous scientist Stephen Hawking’s abrupt withdrawal from attending Israel presidential conference scheduled to be held in a University in Jerusalem in mid June has taken the world scientific community by surprise.
The conference is expected to be attended by 5,000 people from around the world, including business leaders, academics, artists and former heads of state. This move by Hawking has been described by some scientist as a political endosement and it does not reflect well on an eminent scientist like Stephen Hawking 
[Comment: Don't tell me that scientists are ONLY supposed to sit in labs and be crazy with their tools and books - and ignore the world social NEWS and cruelty that occurs?! ]. 
The internet is abuzz with Stephen Hawking’s decision to turn down Israel’s invitation to the conference. It has been reported that the organiser of the conference is extremely embarrassed and hopping mad to learn that a world famous scientist has declined the invitation to endorse the justice of the Palestinian cause.
According to a poll conducted by the Guardian (UK newspaper) following the announcement of Stephen Hawkins’ decision not to attend the conference shows that public opinion has turned against Israel’s relentless land grabbing and oppression. Going by the fierce debates, comments and opinions posted in the internet social cites, it appears that more and more scientists are gradually beginning to regard Israel as a pariah state.
Israel took much pride in science and science is said to have been the key driving force for its economy, prestige and military strength. When Stephen Hawking a British boycotted the conference in support of the Palestinians it must have offended Israel.
As a member of the local scientific community, I applaud the boycott decision taken by Professor Stephen Hawking and for his stance against the illegal Israel occupation and  oppression of the Palestinian people.
Some of us may argue that Stephen Hawking’s boycott is a politically motivated one and it has nothing to do with science. Hawking’s neutral stance cannot be so easily disputed or attacked for he is an intellectual who commands international respect. Hawking may have breached the international code (statute 5 of the International Council for Science) that governs the conduct of scientists.
However, scientists are not robots they too have conscience. As a man of conscience Stephen Hawking has done his part (boycott) to draw the attention of the world especially the international scientific community to the plight of the Palestinians.
Stephen Hawking has taken an honourable and principled stand on this issue in not endorsing the legitimisation of the apartheid based policies of the Israeli government. The people of Palestine should realise that there are many hundreds of principled centered scientists around the world who are prepared to stand in solidarity with them.

In welcoming Stephen Hawking’s stance on the Palestinian issue I wish to point out that atrocities are also been committed probably on a larger scale to people in countries like Myanmar, Sri Langka, etc. We should also voice out and boycott these countries.




.