"The ever increasing relevance of European law which involves replacement or supplementation of and interaction with national law not only affects the states in Europe but also, and foremost, the citizens: The rights of the citizens in Europe are protected by the European Fundamental Rights and Freedoms. The aim of this textbook is to grasp and illustrate the meaning of these rights and to integrate it into a coherent system. For this purpose the book not only deals with the pertinent law of the European Union and the European Community, but also with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms which, too, is becoming more and more important."--BOOK JACKET.

In his introduction, Philip Bryden says that Canadians can be proud of their commitment to the protection of rights and liberties in the Charter. Canada, he believes, is a better place to live then it would be otherwise. Nevertheless, as the essays in this book reveal, the case in favour of the Charter is not simple or one-sided.

Canadas Charter of Rights and Freedoms has transformed Canadian life since it was adopted as part of the Canadian constitution in 1982. The Charter requires judges to make decisions on a wide range of issues that affect all Canadians. In doing so, the courts play a major role in citizens lives. Because of the Charter: - The law against prostitution was struck down. - The Harper government"s treatment of child soldier Omar Khadr was found to violate his rights. - Vancouvers Insite safe injection site was kept open, overriding a federal government decision requiring it to shut down. Ian Greene is a political scientist, and his focus in this book is to highlight the many significant ways the Charter shapes Canadian life. After providing background on the creation and implementation of the Charter, he describes its impact on a wide range of issues aboriginal affairs, voting rights, freedom of religion, the right to strike, and language rights, among others. Greene describes key decisions in these areas and comments on the often-conflicting views of the judges deciding them. Even though the Charter is a legal document, debated by lawyers and decided by judges, Greene approaches his subject with an eye on the political impact the Charter has on governments and ordinary citizens. Public discussion of the Charter is often framed around the question of who should make these important decisions elected politicians or unelected judges. This book provides a clear understanding of how the Charter works and how ordinary citizens have succeeded or failed to win change from the courts. It offers information that people on every side of public discussion can use regarding the role of the Charter in Canadian life.

Examines the Bill of Rights and the first ten amendments to the Bill of Rights.

This book examines the risks to freedom of expression, particularly in relation to the internet, as a result of regulation introduced in response to terrorist threats. The work explores the challenges of maintaining security in the fight against traditional terrorism while protecting fundamental freedoms, particularly online freedom of expression. The topics discussed include the clash between freedom of speech and national security; the multijurisdictional nature of the internet and the implications for national sovereignty and transnational legal structures; how to determine legitimate and illegitimate association online; and the implications for privacy and data protection. The book presents a theoretical analysis combined with empirical research to demonstrate the difficulty of combatting internet use by terror organizations or individuals and the range of remedies that might be drawn from national and international law. The work will be essential reading for students, researchers and policy makers in the areas of Constitutional law; Criminal Law, European and International law, Information and Technology law and Security Studies.

This title was first published in 2000. This text presents a two-volume collection of theoretical articles on the topic of freedom of speech. The articles have all been written since the early 1970s. The first volume begins with an encyclopaedia entry, functioning as an overview of the topic, and further articles deal with justificatory theories of freedom of speech, the scope of the First Amendment, the value of free speech, communication control in law and society, and what kinds of acts raise freedom of speech concerns. The second volume turns to doctrinal theories, examining insults, incitements and governmental subsidies. Areas addressed include distinctions between content regulations, Robert Post's concepts of the public forum and public discourse and their bearing on free speech doctrine, and the significant arena for free speech controversies in the future.

Speak Up is a new resource from the Evangelical Alliance and the Lawyers' Christian Fellowship to equip and inspire Christians with confidence and knowledge of the current legal freedoms we have to share our faith.

This book discusses the revolutionary broadening of concepts of freedom of press and freedom of speech in Great Britain and in America in the late eighteenth century, in the period that produced state declarations of rights and then the First Amendment and Fox's Libel Act. The conventional view of the history of freedoms of press and speech is that the common law since antiquity defined those freedoms narrowly, and that Sir William Blackstone in 1769, and Lord Chief Justice Mansfield in 1770, faithfully summarized the common law in giving a very narrow definition of those freedoms as mere liberty from prior restraint and not liberty from punishment after something was printed or spoken. This book proposes, to the contrary, that Blackstone carefully selected the narrowest definition that had been suggested in popular essays in the prior seventy years, in order to oppose the growing claims for much broader protections of press and speech. Blackstone misdescribed his summary as an accepted common law definition, which in fact did not exist. A year later, Mansfield inserted a similar definition into the common law for the first time, also misdescribing it as a long-accepted definition, and soon misdescribed the unique rules for prosecuting sedition as having an equally ancient pedigree. Blackstone and Mansfield were not declaring the law as it had long been, but were leading a counter-revolution about the breadth of freedoms of press and speech, and cloaking it as a summary of a narrow common law doctrine that in fact was nonexistent. That conflict of revolutionary view and counter-revolutionary view continues today. For over a century, a neo-Blackstonian view has been dominant, or at least very influential, among historians. Contrary to those narrow claims, this book concludes that the broad understanding of freedoms of press and speech was the dominant context of the First Amendment and of Fox's Libel Act, and that it enjoyed greater historical support.