Freedom of Speech: A Comparative Law Perspective offers a wide-ranging review of free speech law in Europe, the U.S., Canada and Australia, with a special focus on hate speech and on artistic and scientific speech. It provides a great deal of information on these topics, in a single volume, which presents a considerable value to anyone who wants to study the subject. prof. Christopher Wolfe, University of Dallas The book is disturbing. It encourages to pose serious questions, in particular about the phenomenon of the persecution for expressing traditional views, which ceased to be accepted by certain political and intellectual elites. It presents the context which allows us to realize how difficult it is to address such issues. Nevertheless, searching for the answers seems absolutely necessary. The analyses of the US law could be considered a universal parable about the awareness of free speech. The analyses of the law in other countries warn us how fragile the protection of freedom of expression is. prof. Franciszek Longchamps de Bérier, Jagiellonian University in Kraków The volume focuses on an important and complex theoretical question of practical value which is inscribed in the debate on the limits of freedom of speech. It is a collection of independent studies with a clearly presented central idea. Written by the authors representing not only different academic institutions and countries but even different legal cultures. Such a choice of authors offers a variety of presented evaluations, which testifies to the richness of content included in the book and is an invitation to further studies and analyses. prof. Wojciech Lis, John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin

Freedom of Religion. A Comparative Law Perspective consists of five chapters, looking at freedom of religion, particularly the display of religious symbols, in Poland, Italy, Hungary, and the United States. It provides a concise and very insightful look into the legal regimes of four nations, allowing reader to get a solid comparative view of public religious displays in these countries. Each chapter has sufficient depth and overall this edited volume will be a useful resource to scholars and jurists in this area. Dr. James C. Phillips, Stanford University’s Constitutional Law Center The presented volume leads to an in-depth reflection on the issue of the display of religious symbols in the public sphere, which is widely discussed today. Most of the articles prove that secularism of the contemporary state ruled by law targets Christian symbolism (cross, cradle, the Decalogue). Christian religious symbols shall always be inscribed in the temporal order, otherwise they have no chance to be displayed in the public sphere. In this way, the rights of Catholic believers, as one of the dominant religious groups, are restricted in the name of the protection of religious and areligious minorities. As a result, the aim is to bring about the actual equality of all religions and – ultimately – the final removal of the Christian tradition from Western culture. Against this background, Polish (as well as Hungarian and Italian) judicial decisions present a different approach, which – as the authors of the volume prove – presents a position in favour of the presence of religious symbolism in the public sphere. The multifaceted evaluation of the inconsistency, casuistry and nuance of the jurisprudence of the US Supreme Court is extremely creative and interesting. It allows to conclude that the jurisprudence of the US Supreme Court, which usually limits the presence of religious symbols in the public forum, has not yet become universally binding. The pluralism of philosophical and religious attitudes still constitutes the axiological core of American democracy. Prof. dr hab. Andrzej Dziadzio, Jagiellonian University in Kraków

Freedom of Speech in International Law charts the minimum protections for speech enshrined in international human rights law. It not only addresses the problems facing free speech today but offers recommendations to give effect to the international-law obligation to protect freedom of expression.

In terms of the South African Constitution of 1996 there is a general need for an introduction to comparative law and one that covers what is technically known as applied comparative law; more particularly applied comparative law that involves a study of the bills of rights in other countries.

The First Amendment—and its guarantee of free speech for all Americans—has been at the center of scholarly and public debate since the birth of the Constitution, and the fervor in which intellectuals, politicians, and ordinary citizens approach the topic shows no sign of abating as the legal boundaries and definitions of free speech are continually evolving and facing new challenges. Such discussions have generally remained within the boundaries of the U.S. Constitution and its American context, but consideration of free speech in other industrial democracies can offer valuable insights into the relationship between free speech and democracy on a larger and more global scale, thereby shedding new light on some unexamined (and untested) assumptions that underlie U.S. free speech doctrine. Ronald J. Krotoszynski, Jr., compares the First Amendment with free speech law in Japan, Canada, Germany, and the United Kingdom—countries that are all considered modern democracies but have radically different understandings of what constitutes free speech. Challenging the popular—and largely American—assertion that free speech is inherently necessary for democracy to thrive, Krotoszynski contends that it is very difficult to speak of free speech in universalist terms when the concept is examined from a framework of comparative law that takes cultural difference into full account.

This book considers the issue of free speech in transitional democracies focusing on the socio-legal developments in the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland. In showing how these Central and Eastern European countries have engaged with free speech models imported from the Council of Europe / EU and the USA, the book offers valuable insights into the ways States have responded to challenges associated with transformation from communism to Western democracy. The book first explores freedom of expression in European and American law looking particularly at hate speech, historical revisionism, and pornography. It subsequently enquires into the role and perspectives of those European (mandatory) and US-American (persuasive) models for the constitutional debate in Central and Eastern Europe. The study offers an original interpretation of the "European" model of freedom of expression, beyond the mechanisms of the Council of Europe. It encompasses the relevant aspects of EU law (judgments of the Court of Justice and the harmonised EU instruments) as mandatory standards for courts and legislators, including those in transitional countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The book argues for de-criminalisation of historical revisionism and pornography, and illuminates topics such as genocide denial, the rise of Prague and Budapest as Europe’s porno-capitals, anti-Semitism and anti-Gypsyism, religious obscurantism and homophobia, virulent Islamophobia, and the glorification of terrorism. The research methodology in this study combines a descriptive case law assessment (comparative constitutional, public international, and EU law) with a normative critique stemming from post-structuralist scrutiny, rhetoric, postmodern legal movements, legal history, history of ideas, and art criticism. This book will be of interest to students and scholars of, comparative constitutional law, law and society, human rights and European law as well as political philosophers.

Addresses challenges to the implementation of international human rights law from institutional, normative and practical perspectives.

Islam and International Law explores the multi-faceted relationship of Islam and international law. Current debates on Sharia, Islam and the “West” often suffer from prejudice and platitudes. The book seeks to engage such self-centrism by providing a plurality of perspectives, both in terms of interdisciplinary research and geographic backgrounds.

Since the Second World War, the international community has sought to prevent the repetition of destructive far-right forces by establishing institutions such as the United Nations and by adopting documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Jurisprudence and conventions directly prohibit far-right speech and expression. Nevertheless, recently, violent far-right entities, such as Golden Dawn of Greece, have received unprecedented electoral support, xenophobic parties have done spectacularly well in elections; and countries such as Hungary and Poland are being led by right-wing populists who are bringing constitutional upheaval and violating basic elements of doctrines such as the rule of law. In light of this current reality, this book critically assesses the international and European tools available for States to regulate the far-right. It conducts the analysis through a militant democracy lens. This doctrine has been considered in several arenas as a concept more generally; in the sphere of the European Convention on Human Rights; in relation to particular freedoms, such as that of association; and as a tool for challenging the far-right movement through the spectrum of political science. However, this doctrine has not yet been applied within a legal assessment of challenging the far-right as a single entity. After analysing the aims, objectives, scope and possibility of shortcomings in international and European law, the book looks at what state obligations arise from these laws. It then assesses how freedom of opinion and expression, freedom of association and freedom of assembly are provided for in international and European law and explores what limitation grounds exist which are directly relevant to the regulation of the far-right. The issue of the far-right is a pressing one on the agenda of politicians, academics, civil society and other groups in Europe and beyond. As such, this book will appeal to those with an interest in International, European or Human rights Law and political science.

This book critically analyzes the criminalization of incitement to terrorism under the fundamental principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality with the aim of striking a fair balance between security and liberty on this complicated issue. The criminalization of incitement to terrorism has gained momentum, but no exact or generally accepted definition of this offense exists at the international level. What’s more, given that the criminalization of incitement to terrorism results in restrictions on the exercise of citizens’ freedom of expression, there should be certain limitations on those criminal measures to avoid unnecessary or disproportionate infringement of this fundamental human right. Nevertheless, there has not been a precise standard by which to determine how to draw the line between anti-terrorism and the protection of freedom of expression. Hence, it could be concluded that the criminalization of incitement to terrorism concerns how to balance security and liberty, and the safeguarding principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality should be fully observed in considering this issue. This book studies definitions of “incitement”, “terrorism”, and “incitement to terrorism” under the relevant international and national legislation, and points out the existing absence, ambiguousness, or substantive divergence in defining actus reus and mens rea regarding incitement to terrorism. It carefully considers the current need for and essential limitations on criminal measures against incitement to terrorism in accordance with the principles of necessity and proportionality, and particularly focuses on how to balance the protection of freedom of expression with the criminalization of incitement to terrorism. In considering how to draw a line between the two, the book formulates precise requirements for objective and subjective elements of this offense in accordance with the principle of legality. Given its scope, it will be of interest not only to academics, human rights lawyers and practitioners, but also to policymakers, as it offers an extensive evaluation of the effects and counter-effects of existing criminal measures.