Программа дисциплины Свобода слова, независимость и ответственность сми (Free Expression and Hate Speech) для направления 030200. 68 «Политология» icon

Программа дисциплины Свобода слова, независимость и ответственность сми (Free Expression and Hate Speech) для направления 030200. 68 «Политология»



НазваниеПрограмма дисциплины Свобода слова, независимость и ответственность сми (Free Expression and Hate Speech) для направления 030200. 68 «Политология»
страница1/2
Дата конвертации14.04.2013
Размер167.68 Kb.
ТипПояснительная записка
скачать >>>
  1   2


Правительство Российской Федерации


Государственное образовательное бюджетное учреждение

высшего профессионального образования


«Государственный университет - Высшая школа экономики»


Факультет прикладной политологии


Программа дисциплины


Свобода слова, независимость и ответственность СМИ

(Free Expression and Hate Speech)

для направления 030200.68 «Политология»

подготовки магистра

Автор: к.филолог.н., доцент Соболева А.К.



Рекомендована секцией УМС

«Политология»

«_____» ___________ 2009 г.

Председатель Касамара В.А.

__________________

Одобрена на заседании кафедры

«Публичная политика»

« » 2009 г.

Зав. кафедрой Беляева Н.Ю.

___________________



Утверждена УС факультета

Прикладной политологии

« ____» ______________2009 г.

Ученый секретарь Орлов И.Б.

__________________


Москва

2009



Пояснительная записка

Требования к студентам:

Данный курс предназначен для чтения на 1 курсе магистратуры. Курс читается на английском языке. Предполагается, что студенты владеют языком в достаточной степени для того, чтобы понимать и анализировать английские тексты. Кроме того, студенты должны знать базовые концепции по правам человека и иметь начальное представление о функционировании международных институтов, НКО, других акторов, которые могут влиять на ситуацию с правами человека. Студенты должны иметь начальное представление о различных структурах власти и управления в разных странах, а также политическом контексте в них.


^ Цель курса - познакомить будущих ключевых акторов (политологов, политиков, юристов, социологов) с современными тенденциями в области понимания свободы выражения и ее значимости для демократического процесса, объяснить роль коммуникации как обмена идеями и информацией в развитии и продвижении демократии, показать важность политической дискуссии, критики и обмена мнениями для развития общества,  изучить национальные и международные подходы к решению проблем, возникающих в связи с реализацией гражданами права на свободу слова и свободу выражения,  определить рамки правового поля для реализации данного права, проанализировать современные технологии и способы незаконного ограничения свободы слова и пути преодоления препятствий для свободы слова и свободы выражения с использованием внутригосударственных и международных правовых механизмов.


^ В результате изучения дисциплины студент должен приобрести:

Понимание современных проблем, связанных с использованием слова и иных способов выражения в политической и общественной жизни; умение анализировать спорные ситуации в сфере свободы слова и оценивать их с точки зрения соответствия законодательству РФ и международно-правовых стандартов; умение анализировать публикации, высказывания, изображения в свете критериев, разработанных КПЧ ООН и ЕСПЧ; умение анализировать и критически оценивать судебные решения и акты лингвистической и психологической экспертиз по делам о защите чести и достоинства, о разжигании вражды и розни; умение проводить баланс между свободой слова и другими охраняемыми законом конституционно значимыми правами и ценностями; 
умение составлять текст исковых заявлений в российские суды и жалоб в ЕСПЧ;
умение писать  экспертные заключения; владение навыком аналитической и исследовательской работы в сфере правового регулирования СМИ


^ Освоение данного учебного материала необходимо для практической работы:

- активистов по правам человека,

- сотрудников международных организаций, неправительственных организаций,

- работников государственных учреждений и институтов;

- журналистов, работников СМИ

- юристов.


Introduction


Course prerequisites:

For enrollment to this course the students must have knowledge in the following areas:

  • Basic concepts of fundamental rights and freedoms

  • Russian constitutional law

  • Comparative analysis of political systems

  • Political philosophy



Summary of the course: The program includes analysis of doctrines of free speech, free expression, freedom of information and basic approaches to regulation of these freedoms in different legal systems in correlation with commonly accepted restrictions, which may be imposed on them for the protection of public security, health, morals or rights and dignity of third persons. Freedom of expression doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights is reconstructed from case-study and exemplified by recent cases, including those against Russian Federation. However, the main emphasis will be made on possible solutions of the conflict between free expression and necessity to combat religious, ethnic, national hatred and prevent violent hate crimes. The problem is considered in legal, political, historic, social context with examples from different countries and jurisdictions, including UN, Council of Europe and OSCE approaches to its regulation. The most sensitive types of speech, which may provoke disagreement in public opinion or prosecution in criminal or civil procedure, are analyzed in more detail, namely blasphemy, academic freedoms, artistic freedom, government criticism, reputation of political leaders, electoral speech, obscene and insulting speech, speech in the classroom, public demonstration of Nazi signs and symbols, incitement to hatred in Internet etc.

^ The objectives of the course are to provide future key actors - political scientists, politicians, lawyers, social scientists – with information on contemporary trends in the freedom of expression, to explain the role of communication in a democratic society, to show the importance of political speech and free exchange of views on matters of public concern for the promotion of democracy, to present national and international solutions to the problems of freedom of expression and to describe some of the contemporary attempts to protect or to undermine freedom of expression by employing legal techniques and ways to overcome obstacles for freedom of expression by using national and international legal instruments.


Learning outcomes

Upon completion of the course the students must have:

Knowledge of:

  • basic political and legal doctrines of free speech, free expression and freedom of the press

  • interrelation between notions of free speech, freedom of expression, freedom of the press in different legal cultures

  • approaches to regulation of free expression in different legal systems and on international level

  • commonly excepted restrictions on free expression and their application in practice in conformity with international standards

  • tests and standards developed by the European Court of Human Rights in case law on freedom of expression (art. 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights)

  • possible solutions of the conflicts between free expression and other constitutionally protected values

  • legal regulation of freedom of information and freedom of speech in the Russian legal and political system in historical, comparative and contemporary perspective



Competence:

The students must be able to analyze disputes and conflicts in the area of free speech and freedom of expression, to be able to draw a balance between freedom of expression and other fundamental values, to distinguish between obscenity, personal attacks and criticism, to tell facts from value-judgments and opinion, to use linguistic expertise in legal and political analysis of the cases, to analyze types of ‘forbidden’ speech, to evaluate certain types of speech as containing extremist appeals, to distinguish between extremist speech and critical or unpopular views on sensitive issues.


Skills:

  • to analyze basic concepts of freedom of expression and related freedoms from political and legal perspective

  • to analyze cases with freedom of expression problems from the Russian political life and propose solutions, based on Russian and international legal standards

  • to provide expert review of legislation that may affect media freedoms and other forms of freedom of expression

  • to distinguish between different categories of speech and define the level of their protection depending on the goal, content and form of speech

  • to draw a line between hate speech, incitement to hatred and non-violent types of speech and be capable of providing reasoning in expert evaluation

  • to identify obstacles for free expression in administrative, legislative, judicial practice and suggest solutions


The course is intended for professionals in the following areas:

  • Human rights activists, NGO workers, media professionals and journalists, public servants


Availability of Resources:

  • Articles and court decisions marked in the program by (*) are available in the Reader. Books, marked by (*), are available for reading at the Chair of Public Policy. Books, marked by (**), are available in the Legal Resource Center of the Russian State Library for Foreign Literature (VGBIL).



^ Requirements for written assignments:

Written assignments consist of legal and political analysis of the potential cases in accordance with the scheme presented by the teacher during lectures. Analysis of each case must be about 2 pages, single-spaced. The grade for the analysis depends on the number and quality of arguments presented, and for awareness of the author in legal standards and political doctrines, which govern considerations of similar cases in different jurisdictions and international bodies.


^ Examination format and requirements:


The assignment for the final exam includes 2 theoretical questions and a case for analysis. Students are allowed to use their notes, a Reader and a textbook, but are not allowed to use Internet or notes made by their classmates. All those who present identical works receive “fail” for the exam.


Course Requirements

Gourse Grade will be comprised of the sum of grades for class participation, active discussion of cases and written analysis of the hypothetic cases (1 interim written assignment – legal brief with case analysis, 1 open-book final written exam in class)


All forms of the grades are estimated by 10-grade scale. For an estimation of relative importance of separate kinds of the interim and final control tests their weights are entered (Wi). So that - Wi=1 (weight of class participation and case-study = each of 0,1; weight of interim legal brief = 0,2; weight of a final exam = 0,5).

It is taken into account: an estimation for participation in discussion Х1; estimation for case-study – Х2 and X3; legal brief – Х4, estimation for examination - Y.

There is an average weighted estimation of the separate forms of the interim and final control: Х=W1*X1+W2*X2+W2*X3+W3*X4, which is approximated up to whole units.

Final estimation: МАХ [X:Y]


Course Contents






Topic



Hours /Total



Contact hours

Class work

Self-study



Lectures

Seminars

1

Philosophical Foundations of Freedom of Speech. Historical Origins of the Speech and Press Clauses in Different Legal and Political Systems.

8

2

-

6

2

Freedom of Expression as an Uncontested Value Against Other Values in Liberal Democracies: International Standards

12

4

2

6

3

Freedom of Expression in the American Political and Legal system



12

2

2

8

4

Freedom of Expression According to the European Court of Human Rights: General Tests

16

4

2

10

5


Freedom of Speech in England

8

2

-

6

6

Free Speech in France: Political and Legal Context

6

2

-

4

7

Freedom of Expression in Germany

12

2

2

8

8

Constitutional Standards, Legal and Political Context for Freedom of Expression in Russia

16

4

2

10

9

Political Speech and Political Views

14

2

2

10

10

Hate Speech and Advocacy of Crime: Legal Regulation in Comparative Perspective

16

4

2

10

11

Religion and Free Speech

10

4

-

6

12

General Problems of Access to Information. Press Privileges. Broadcasting Law

14

2

2

10

13

State and Commercial Secrets

4

2

-

2

14

Freedom of the Press and Administration of Justice

10

2

2

6

15

Civil Service and Free Expression

2

2

-

-

16

Pornography, Obscenity and Other Kinds of Speech Not Within the Freedom of Speech (Unprotected Speech)

2

2

-

-




Total

162

42

18

102



Textbooks & Readers


Reader (handouts for HSE students)

Barendt, E. Media law. 2000

Пределы правового пространства свободы прессы: российские споры с участием СМИ в контексте мировой практики. Под ред. А.К.Соболевой. М., Новая юстиция, 2008. Сс. 18-39, 57-80, 127-196. www.jurix.ru


Article XIX. Freedom of Expression Handbook. London: Article 19, International Center Against Censorship, 1993. http://www.article19.org/pdfs/publications/1993-handbook.pdf


^ ARTICLE XIX. http://www.article19.org/publications/global-issues/censorship.html, http://www.article19.org/publications/global-issues/hate-speech.html, http://www.article19.org/publications/global-issues/defamation.html

http://www.article19.org/publications/global-issues/security-agendas.html

http://www.article19.org/publications/global-issues/freedom-of-information.html


Part I. Free speech and free expression: basic concepts and international standards


  1. Philosophical Foundations of Freedom of Speech. Historical Origins of the Speech and Press Clauses in different legal and political systems.


The theory of free speech. The “search for truth in the marketplace of ideas”, “self-expression/individual autonomy”, “self-governance”, “restrictions on the state” doctrines and other justifications. “Freedom of speech” and “freedom of expression”: understanding in the American and European legal and political doctrines. Political and legal context of freedom of expression. The struggle for freedom of the press as the struggle against censorship and licensing, secular and religious oppression. Notion of “censorship” as prior restraint or the authorization to publish. Prior restraint systems v. subsequent systems of free speech regulation (=restraining measures after publication). New understanding of censorship in contemporary context.


Required readings:

Reader // Andras Sajo. Freedom of expression. Warsaw, 2004, pp. 13-25

Reader // Alexander Meiklejohn. Political Freedom. The Constitutional Power of People. New York: Harper, 1960, pp. 24-28.

Barendt, E. Media law. 2000, pp. 1-3, 15-23.

Reader // Thomas I. Emerson. Toward a General Theory of the First Amendment // 72 Yale Law Journal, 1963, pp. 877-887.


Optional readings:

Thomas Scalnon. A Theory of Freedom of Expression // Philosophy & Public Affairs, 1974, vol. 1, pp. 204-226.

Frederick Schauer. Free Speech: A Philosophical Enquiry. Cambridge University Press, 1982.

Wojciech Sadurski. Freedom of Speech and its Limits. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999.

Alexander Meiklejohn. Free Speech and its Relation to Self-Government. 1948.

Eric Barendt. Freedom of Speech. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1987.

Eric Barendt. Broadcasting Law: A Comparative Study. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1993.

Mark W.Janis, Richard S.Kay, and Anthony W.Bradley. Europen Human Rights Law. Oxfrod University Press, 1995 (Russian edition: Марк Дженис, Ричард Кэй, Энтони Брэдли. Европейское право в области прав человека: практика и комментарии. Москва – Будапешт, 1997, сс. 179-256).

John Bagnell Bury. A History of Freedom of Thought. 1913.

James Paterson. The Liberty of the Press, Speech and Public Worship. 1880.

R.H.Coase. The Market for Goods and the Market for Ideas // 64 American Economic Review, 1974, pp. 384-390.

R.Kent Greenawalt. Free Speech Justifications // 89 Colum. Law Review 119, 1989.

Gerald Gunther. Learned Hand and the Origins of Modern First Amendment Doctrine: Some Fragments of History // 27 Stanford Law Review, 1975, pp. 719-761.

Jozef Raz. Free Expression and Personal Identification // 11 Oxford J.Leg.Stud. 303, 1991.

Judith Lichtenberg, ed. Democracy and the Mass Media. 1990.

Phina Lahav. Holmes and Brandeis: Libertarian and Republican Justifications for Free Speech // 4 Journal of Law & Politics 451, 1988.

Jones, T. D. Human Rights: Group Defamation, Freedom of Expression and the Law of Nations. 1998

Price, D. Defamation: law, procedure & practice. 2001


  1. Freedom of expression as an uncontested value against other values in liberal democracies: international standards


Freedom of expression and its limits in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (art.19), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (art. 19), the European Convention on human rights and fundamental freedoms (art. 10). Main conflicts between free speech and other fundamental values in liberal democracies. Differences among constitutional free speech systems in relation to the level of respect required by government, the respect for other rights and the sensitivity of the people. Legitimate restrictions and illegal obstacles for free expression in a democratic society.


Required readings:

Reader // Andras Sajo. Freedom of expression. Warsaw, 2004, pp. 13-25.

Barendt, E. Media law. 2000, pp. 3-7, 163-196.

Reader // Martin H.Redish. The Value of Free Speech // University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 1982


Optional readings:

Mark W.Janis, Richard S.Kay, and Anthony W.Bradley. Europen Human Rights Law. Oxfrod University Press, 1995 (Russian edition: Марк Дженис, Ричард Кэй, Энтони Брэдли. Европейское право в области прав человека: практика и комментарии. Москва – Будапешт, 1997, сс. 179-256).

*Правовое пространство свободы прессы. Под ред А.К.Соболевой. М.: Новая юстиция, 2008.

Michele de Salvia. Precedents of the European Court of Human Rights: leading proncip[les of Judicial Practice Relevant to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Juficial Practice from 1960 to 2002. (Russian edition: Микеле де Сальвиа. Прецеденты Европейского Суда по правам человека. Руководящие принципы судебной практики, относящейся к Европейской Конвенции о защите прав человека и основных свобод. Судебная практика с 1960 по 2002 г. Научное редактирование Ю.Ю.Берестнева. – Сс. 619-688).

*Прецедентные дела Комитета по правам человека. Сост. Pайя Хански и Мартин Шейнин. Ун-т Або Академи (Турку), 2004. – СС. 279-331.

Y.K. Tyagi. The law and Practice of the UN Human Rights Committee. Dordrecht:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1993.

Kirsten Young. The Law and Process of the U.N. Human Rights Committee. Ardsley, NY: Transnational Publishers. 2002.



  1. Freedom of expression in the American political and legal system


First Amendment. The Sedition Act of 1798. Libel law, political criticism and the reputation of politicians: the New York Times v. Sullivan rule. Prohibition of content regulation. The “clear and present danger” test. Whitney v. California, Dennis v. United States, Brandenburg v. Ohio. . Categories of protected and unprotected speech. Balancing process in defamation cases. Symbolic speech. United States v. O’Brien. Time, place, or manner restrictions (the TMP doctrine). Procedural components of free speech protection: overbreadth, vagueness, prior restraint. Privacy concerns and free speech. Hate speech. Broadcasting: absence of government-sponsored broadcasting, importance of mass-media in politics, licensing, personal attacks in press, political editorials. Red Lion Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission. Unprotected speech. Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire.


Cases for analysis in class:

Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964)

R.A.V. (a minor) v. City of St.Paul, Minnesota, 505 U.S. 377, 1992.

Red Lion Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, 395 U.S. 367; 1969.


Required readings:

Reader //Andras Sajo. Freedom of expression. Warsaw, 2004, pp. 26-41.

Reader // Hans A.Linde. “Clear and Present Danger” Reexanined: Dissonance in the Brandenburg Concerto // 22 Stan. Law Review, 1970, pp. 11163-1179.

Reader // Susan H.Williams. Content Discrimination and the First Amendment // 139 U.Pa.L.Rev. 1991, pp. 636-654.


Optional readings:

Wood, J. R. The struggle for free speech in the United States, 1872-1915. 2008, pp. 15-37.

*Geoffrey R. Stone, Louis M.Seidman, Cass R. Sunstein, Mark V. Tushnet. Constitutional law. Sec. ed., Little, Brown and Company, Boston-Toronto-London,1991, pp. 1011-1455.

**Free Expression in America: A documentary History. Ed. By Shalld Suess Kennedy. Greenwood press, 1999.

John H.Garvey & Frederick Schauer. The First Amendment: A Reader. West Publishing Co., 1992.

Zechariah Chafee. Free Speech in the United States. 1942.

E.Hudon. Freedom of Speech and Press in America. 1963

Leonard Levy. Emergence of a Free Press. 1985, pp. 183-186, 198-205, 262-267.

Leonard Levy. Legacy and Suppression: Freedom of Speech and Press in Early American History. 1960

Walter Burns. The First Amendment and the Future of American Democracy. Basic Books Inc. 1977.

Lee C.Bollinger. The Tolerant Society: Freedom of Speech and Extremist Speech in America. Oxford University Press, 1986.

C.Edwin Baker. Scope of the First Amendment Freedom of Speech. UCLA Law Review 964 (1978).

John Hart Ely. Flag Desecration: A Case Study in the Roles of Categorization and Balancing in First Amendment Analysis // 88 Harvard Law Review, 1975, pp. 1482-1502.

Robert C.Post. The Constitutional Concept of Public Discourse: Outrageous Opinion, Democratic Deliberation and Hustler Magazine v. Falwell // Harvard Law Review, 1990

Robert C. Post. The Social Foundations of Defamation Law: Reputation and the Constitution // California Law Review, vol. 74 No. 3 (May 1986), pp. 691-742.

Frederick Shauer. Slippery Slopes // Harvard Law Review, 1985

Geoffrey R.Stone. Content Regulation and the First Amendment // Northwestern University Law Review, vol. 81, issue 1 (1986), pp. 168-172.

William Mayton. Seditious Libel and the Lost Guarantee of a Freedom of Expression // 84 Column. Law Review 91 (1984).

Edward F.White. The Debt of Constitutional Law to Jehovah’s Witnesses // 28 Minn. Law Review, 209 (1944).

^ 4. Freedom of Expression According to the European Court of Human Rights: general tests

The meaning of ‘expression’ according to the European Court of Human Rights. Construction of art. 10 of the ECHR: provisional grounds for restriction and their interpretation by the Court, ‘duties and responsibilities’ clause, ‘necessity in a democratic society’ clause. Court’s approach to legal analysis of free speech cases: concepts of ‘interference’, ‘pressing social need’, ‘margin of appreciation’. Handyside v. United Kingdom. The test applied: restriction prescribed by law, legitimate aims of restriction and its limits, necessity in a democratic society. Press and political criticism. Public figure. Public servants. Authority and impartiality of judiciary. Censorship. Protection of reputation. Facts and opinions. Private and family life. Public morals. Hate speech. Broadcasting: licensing, specificity of audio- and videomaterials. Artistic freedoms. Muller and Others v. Switzerland.


Cases for analysis in class:

Lingens v. Austria. Decision of 8 July 1986 (№ 103), E.H.R.R. 103

Castells v. Spain. Judgment of 23 April, 1992.

De Haes and Gijsels v. Belgium. Judgment of 24 February 1997.

Handyside v. United Kingdom. Judgment of 7 December 1976 (№ 24), 1 E.H.R.R. 737

Muller and Others v. Switzerland. Judgment of 24 May 1988 (№ 130), 13 E.H.H.R, 212

Oberschlick v. Austria,. Judgment of 23 May 1991.


Required readings:

Reader // Andras Sajo. Freedom of expression. Warsaw, 2004, pp. 72-114.

Barendt, E. Media law. 2000, pp. 319-335.


Optional Readings:

R. St. McDonald, J. The Margin of Appreciation in the Jurisprudence of the European Court

of Human Rights // International Law at the Times of its Codification.: Essays in Honor of Roberto Ago. 1987, pp. 187-207.

Mark W.Janis, Richard S.Kay, and Anthony W.Bradley. Europen Human Rights Law. Oxfrod University Press, 1995 (Russian edition: Марк Дженис, Ричард Кэй, Энтони Брэдли. Европейское право в области прав человека: практика и комментарии. Москва – Будапешт, 1997, сс. 179-256).

Michele de Salvia. Precedents of the European Court of Human Rights: leading proncip[les of Judicial Practice Relevant to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Judicial Practice from 1960 to 2002. (Russian edition: Микеле де Сальвиа. Прецеденты Европейского Суда по правам человека. Руководящие принципы судебной практики, относящейся к Европейской Конвенции о защите прав человека и основных свобод. Судебная практика с 1960 по 2002 г. Научное редактирование Ю.Ю.Берестнева. – Сс. 619-688).


  1. ^ Freedom of Speech in England


The nature of the right to free expression in English law. Prior restraint. Protection of reputation: defamation. The history of the law of defamation. The common law crime of seditious libel. Libel, slander and defamation: definitions. Malice. Definition of “publication”. Special protection of political speech. Media regulation and censorship. Open discussion on issues of public concern. Parliamentary speech privilege. Privacy. Comment on court proceedings: contempt of court. Freedom of expression and the criminal law. Expression and government secrecy. Press rights. Fair comments as defense. Prohibition of group libel claims. Absence of legal standing for government bodies in defamation claims. Derbyshire County Council v. Times Newspapers Ltd. (1993) .Private life of public figures and the press. Obscenity and indecency. The impact of Community law and the law under the European Convention on regulation of free speech in England.


Cases for analysis in class:

Observer and Guardian v. United Kingdom (Spycatcher’s Case). Judgment of 26 November 1991 (№ 216), 14 E.H.R.R. 153 http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?skin=hudoc-en

Tolstoy-Miloslavsky v. United Kingdom. Judgment of 13 July 1995, ECHR, series A No 323. http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?skin=hudoc-en


Required Readings:

Barendt, E. Media law. 2000, pp. 7-9, 28-162.


Optional Readings:

David Feldman. Civil Liberties and Human Rights in England and Wales. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993, pp. 633-634.

William M.Clyde. The struggle for the freedom of the press from Caxton to Cromwell. 1934.

Alec Craig. The Banned Books of England and Other Countries. 1962.

Frederick Siebert. Freedom of the Press in England 1476-1776. 1952

W. Prosser. Handbook of the Law of Torts (4th ed.), 1971, pp. 790-800.

*Правовое пространство свободы прессы (под ред. А.Соболевой). М., 2008, сс. 57-68. www.jurix.ru

Brice Dickson (ed.) Human Rights and the European Convention: The Effects of the Convention on the United Kingdom and Ireland. London: Sweet and Maxwell, 1997.

Stephen Grosz, Jack Beatson, Peter Duffy. Human Rights. The 1998 Act and the European Convention. London: Sweet and Maxwell, 2000, pp. 88-98.

Mark W.Janis, Richard S.Kay, and Anthony W.Bradley. Europen Human Rights Law. Oxfrod University Press, 1995 (Russian edition: Марк Дженис, Ричард Кэй, Энтони Брэдли. Европейское право в области прав человека: практика и комментарии. Москва – Будапешт, 1997, сс. 192-196, 220-225).


  1. ^ Free Speech in France: political and legal context.


French Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen (1789), the Constitution (1958) and the Freedom of Press Act (1881). “The free communication of ideas and opinions”. The French understanding of the freedom of press. Distinction in legal regulation of press, broadcasting and film industry. Privacy and non-discrimination as higher values. Limits of press freedom. Different limits for different types of speech: parliamentary debates, good faith commentaries, reporting judicial affairs, defamatory statements. Defamation of public officials and public bodies. Defamation of persons or groups of persons on grounds of ethnicity, nationality, religion.. Criminal and civil libel. “Good faith” as a defense in defamation cases (except for matters that concern private life). Rectification. A right to respond. Protection of privacy. Crimes committed through speech acts: discrediting judicial decisions, insulting public authorities, group libel. Regulation of broadcasting: balance between private and public broadcasting. Independent public control over broadcasting: The High Council of Audio-Visual Affairs.


Cases for analysis in class:

Robert Faurisson v. France, Human Rights Committee (United Nations). UN Doc. CCPR/C/58/D/550/1993 (1996) http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/undocs/html/VWS55058.htm

Fressoz and Roire v. France. ECHR, Judgment of 21 January 1999. http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?skin=hudoc-en

Giniewsky v. France. ECHR, Application № 64016/00 http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?skin=hudoc-en


Required reading:

Reader // Andras Sajo. Freedom of expression. Warsaw, 2004, pp. 42-54.


Optional Readings:

Reporters Without Borders, France – Annual Reports

Jeanne M.Hauch. Protecting Private Facts in France: The Warren & Brandeis Tort Is Alive and Well and Flourishing in Paris // Tulane Law Review, 1994, vol. 68, p. 1219.

Robert Badinter. Le droit au respect de la vie priveé // 42 J.C.P.I. 1968, No. 2136.

The Article XIX Freedom of Expression Handbook. London: Article 19, International Center Against Censorship, 1993.

Ronald P. Sokol. Freedom of Expression in France: The Mitterand Dr. Gubler Affair // Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law, Spring 1999, pp. 5-36.

**Gaston Vogel. Droit de la Presse. Editions Promoculture, 2000.

** Alexis Guedi. La Protection des sources journalistiques. Bruylant, Bruxelles. 1998.


  1. Freedom of Expression in Germany.

Basic Law: art. 5 and its specificity. Role of the German Constitutional Court in creat0ing judicial standards for the analysis of the free speech cases. The doctrine of an objective order of values as applied to weighing the rights of speech against other legally protected interests. Individual and social dimensions of speech. Luth Case. Prohibition of speech advocating Nazism and militarism. Doctrine of “militant democracy” and ban on speech for any person who abuses freedom of speech “in order to combat the free democratic basic order”. Free formation of public opinion as a constitutional value v. a value of honor. Protection of emotional language in expressing political views and counterattack theory of speech in Schmid-Spiegel Case. Private Rights and Freedom of Information. Blinkfüer Case. Speech, democracy and rational discourse: The Picture Postcard Case, Campaign Slur Case, Offical Propoganda Case. Opinion versus fact. The right to demonstrate as an aspect of freedom of opinion. The right to a free press as a separate and independent freedom. Spiegel Case. The rights and responsibilities of the press. Broadcasting: First Television Case Speech, personhood and social morality..Böll Case, Nudist Magazine Case. Artistic and academic freedom.Mephisto Case. Street Theatre Case. Content-based restrictions: hate speech. Holocaust Denial case.


Cases for analysis in class:

*Luth Case (1958). 7BVerfGE 198 (Constitutional Court)

*Blinkfüer Case (1969) 25 BVerfGE 256

* Campaign Slur Case (1982) 61 BVerfGE I

* Spiegel Case (1966) 20 BVerfGE 162

* Böll Case (1980) 54 BVerfGE 208

*Mefisto Case (1971) 30 BverfGE 173

Required readings:

Reader // Andras Sajo. Freedom of expression. Warsaw, 2004, pp. 55-71.


Optional Readings:

Peter Humpfreys. The Goal of Pluralism and the Ownership Rules for Private Broadcasting in Germany: Re-Regulation or De-Regulation? // Vol. 16 Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal, 1998, p. 527.

*Donald Kommers. The Constitutional Jurisprudence of the Federal Republic of Germany. Duke University Press, pp. 367-443.


^ 8. Constitutional standards, legal and political context for freedom of expression in Russia


Constitution of the RF, art. 29 and art. 23. The right of thought and speech. Prohibition of incitement to hatred and propaganda of social, racial, national, religious or language superiority. The right to information. The freedom of mass media. Prohibition of censorship. The right to privacy and protection of dignity and honor. Protection of the honor, dignity and business reputation by civil law. Civil Code, art. 152. Criminal Code of the RF: prohibition of libel, insult and incitement to hatred. Russian legislation and conventional standards under art. 10 of the ECHR. Cases against Russia on freedom of expression in the European Court of Human Rights: inadmissible and admissible complaints. Analysis of the Russian law on defamation in the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights.


Cases for analysis in class:

Andrei Kozyrev v. Zhirinovskii. Inadmissibility decision of the Russian Constitutional Court of 27 September 1995.

Chemodurov v. Russia. ECHR, Judgment of 31 July 2007. http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?skin=hudoc-en

Romanenko v. Russia. ECHR, Judgment of 8 October, 2009. http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?skin=hudoc-en

Duyldin and Kislov v. Russi, ECHR, http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?skin=hudoc-en

Dyundin v. Russia, ECHR, http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?skin=hudoc-en

Karman v. Russia. Judgment of 14 March 2007. http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?skin=hudoc-en

Grinberg v. Russia. Judment of 21 July 2005. http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?skin=hudoc-en

Krasulya v. Russia, Judgment of 22 February 2007. http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?skin=hudoc-en

Shabanov and Tren v. Russia http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?skin=hudoc-en


Required readings:

Пределы правового пространства свободы прессы: российские споры с участием СМИ в контексте мировой практики. Под ред. А.К.Соболевой. М., Новая юстиция, 2008. Сс. 18-39, 57-80, 127-196. www.jurix.ru


Optional Readings:

Peter Krug. Civil Defamation Law and the Press in Russia: Private and Public Interests. The 1995 Civil Code, and the Constitution. Part One // Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law

Journal, 1995, vol. 13, pp. 847-871.


  1   2




Нажми чтобы узнать.

Похожие:

Программа дисциплины Свобода слова, независимость и ответственность сми (Free Expression and Hate Speech) для направления 030200. 68 «Политология» iconПрограмма дисциплины «Медиарилейшенз» Для направления 030200. 68 Политология Подготовки магистра по программе «Прикладная политология»
Программа предназначена для преподавателей, ведущих данную дисциплину, учебных ассистентов и студентов направления подготовки/ специальности...
Программа дисциплины Свобода слова, независимость и ответственность сми (Free Expression and Hate Speech) для направления 030200. 68 «Политология» iconПрограмма дисциплины Экономика для направления 030200. 62 «Политология»
Программа предназначена для преподавателей, ведущих данную дисциплину, учебных ассистентов и студентов направления 030200. 62 "Политология"...
Программа дисциплины Свобода слова, независимость и ответственность сми (Free Expression and Hate Speech) для направления 030200. 68 «Политология» iconПрограмма дисциплины Экономика для направления 030200. 62 «Политология»
Программа предназначена для студентов направления 030200. 62 «Политология», обучающихся на 1 и 2 курсе бакалавриата факультета прикладной...
Программа дисциплины Свобода слова, независимость и ответственность сми (Free Expression and Hate Speech) для направления 030200. 68 «Политология» iconПрограмма дисциплины Введение в коммуникативистику  для направления подготовки 030200. 62 «Политология»
Программа предназначена для преподавателей, ведущих данную дисциплину, учебных ассистентов и студентов направления подготовки магистра...
Программа дисциплины Свобода слова, независимость и ответственность сми (Free Expression and Hate Speech) для направления 030200. 68 «Политология» iconПрограмма дисциплины Свобода собраний и роль массовых мероприятий в публичной политике (Freedom of assembly and the role of mass actions in public policy) для направления 030200. 68«Политология»

Программа дисциплины Свобода слова, независимость и ответственность сми (Free Expression and Hate Speech) для направления 030200. 68 «Политология» iconПрограмма дисциплины Коммуникационный аудит  Автор программы: Жиляев Михаил Игоревич доцент, к ф. н. Для направления 030200. 68 Политология Для магистерской программы «Прикладная политология»
Программа предназначена для преподавателей, ведущих данную дисциплину, учебных ассистентов и студентов направления 030200. 62 «Политология»...
Программа дисциплины Свобода слова, независимость и ответственность сми (Free Expression and Hate Speech) для направления 030200. 68 «Политология» iconПрограмма дисциплины «Аудит политической системы Российской Федерации» для направления 030200. 62 «Политология»
Программа предназначена для преподавателей, ведущих данную дисциплину, учебных ассистентов и студентов направления 030200. 62 «Политология»...
Программа дисциплины Свобода слова, независимость и ответственность сми (Free Expression and Hate Speech) для направления 030200. 68 «Политология» iconПрограмма дисциплины «Аудит политической системы Российской Федерации» для направления 030200. 62 «Политология»
Программа предназначена для преподавателей, ведущих данную дисциплину, учебных ассистентов и студентов направления 030200. 62 «Политология»...
Программа дисциплины Свобода слова, независимость и ответственность сми (Free Expression and Hate Speech) для направления 030200. 68 «Политология» iconПрограмма дисциплины «Политология» для направления 030200. 62 «Политология» подготовки бакалавра
Программа предназначена для преподавателей, ведущих данную дисциплину, учебных ассистентов и студентов направления 030200. 62 «Политология»...
Программа дисциплины Свобода слова, независимость и ответственность сми (Free Expression and Hate Speech) для направления 030200. 68 «Политология» iconПрограмма дисциплины «Аудит политической системы Российской Федерации» для направления 030200. 62 «Политология»
Программа предназначена для преподавателей, ведущих данную дисциплину, учебных ассистентов и студентов направления 030200. 62 «Политология»...
Разместите кнопку на своём сайте:
Документы


База данных защищена авторским правом ©rushkolnik.ru 2000-2015
При копировании материала обязательно указание активной ссылки открытой для индексации.
обратиться к администрации
Документы