Remix.run Logo
skissane 8 hours ago

Free speech is a thing in the EU too.

To become a member of the EU, you have to first join the Council of Europe and its European Convention on Human Rights – article 10 of which guarantees the right to free expression. The EU also has its own Charter of Fundamental Rights which says the same thing. And the plan is for the EU to become a party to the Convention in its own right, although that's got bogged down in technical legal disputes and still hasn't happened, despite the 2009 Lisbon Treaty mandating it.

The US First Amendment has no exceptions as worded, but the US Supreme Court has read some into it. The Convention has exceptions listed in the text, although they are vaguely defined – but like the US, the European Court of Human Rights has developed extensive case law on the scope of those exceptions.

The big difference in practice is the US exceptions end up being significantly more narrow than those in Europe. However, given in both, the details of the exceptions are in case law – courts can and do change their mind, so this difference could potentially change (either by narrowing or broadening) in the decades to come.

nickff 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/human-rights/human-right...

> "Article 10 of the Human Rights Act: Freedom of expression

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary."

Seems to be about as strong as the Soviet Constitution's protections: https://www.departments.bucknell.edu/russian/const/77cons02....

skissane 8 hours ago | parent [-]

> Seems to be about as strong as the Soviet Constitution's protections:

In the 2015 case Perinçek v. Switzerland, the European Court of Human Rights applied Article 10 to find against a Swiss law making it a crime to deny the Armenian genocide. Can you imagine a Soviet court ever striking down a genocide denial law?

The decision is controversial because it introduces a double standard into the Court's case law – it had previously upheld laws criminalising Holocaust denial, now it sought to distinguish the Holocaust from the Armenian genocide in a way many find arbitrary and distasteful – the consistent thing would be to either allow denying both or disallow denying both.

But still, it just shows how mistaken your Soviet comparison is.

nickff 7 hours ago | parent [-]

I can definitely imagine the Soviet Union making arbitrary rules about which genocides were recognized and ‘protected’, and which were not.

skissane 6 hours ago | parent [-]

But can you imagine a Soviet court declaring a law to be in violation of human rights?

nickff 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, much like the EU, they would regularly over-ride the ‘opinions’ of their subordinate states.

skissane 4 hours ago | parent [-]

The central party and state organs in Moscow would sometimes overrule decisions by the governments of the SSRs and other subordinate entities. But they didn't do this by having the Supreme Court of the Soviet Union declare laws unconstitutional. They did it by administrative fiat.

nxm 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

“Free speech” and yet people are arrested for mean memes

Jensson 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Thats UK after they left EU.

terminalshort 3 hours ago | parent [-]

The European Court of Human Rights has upheld a conviction on the charge of blasphemy for calling Mohammed a pedophile: https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/e-s-v-a...