Free and Informed Elections? Disinformation and Democratic Elections Under Article 3 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR

IF 1.6 2区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
E. Shattock
{"title":"Free and Informed Elections? Disinformation and Democratic Elections Under Article 3 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR","authors":"E. Shattock","doi":"10.1093/hrlr/ngac023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article examines European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) jurisprudence concerning free elections and identifies relevant approaches that can be applied to electoral disinformation. The relationship between disinformation and freedom of expression has attracted considerable academic scrutiny in recent years. However, surprisingly little attention has been given to the right to free elections. This article addresses this gap by identifying key ECtHR approaches to free elections under Article 3 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR and evaluating the Court’s interpretive reasoning in the disinformation context. Focus is given to cases where the Court has addressed falsified information in the electoral process. Considering the special relationship between freedom of expression and free elections in Strasbourg jurisprudence, focus is also given to the Court’s contemplation of acceptable limitations to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the ECHR in response to deceptive political expression. Mapping the Court’s reasoning in key decisions, this article identifies informed democratic engagement as a crucial requirement that permeates the Court’s approach to elections. Considering the importance of democracy in the Court’s reasoning, this article argues that the Court should be more proactive in elucidating key standards for Contracting Parties to make democracies more resilient to electoral disinformation.","PeriodicalId":46556,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Rights Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngac023","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article examines European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) jurisprudence concerning free elections and identifies relevant approaches that can be applied to electoral disinformation. The relationship between disinformation and freedom of expression has attracted considerable academic scrutiny in recent years. However, surprisingly little attention has been given to the right to free elections. This article addresses this gap by identifying key ECtHR approaches to free elections under Article 3 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR and evaluating the Court’s interpretive reasoning in the disinformation context. Focus is given to cases where the Court has addressed falsified information in the electoral process. Considering the special relationship between freedom of expression and free elections in Strasbourg jurisprudence, focus is also given to the Court’s contemplation of acceptable limitations to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the ECHR in response to deceptive political expression. Mapping the Court’s reasoning in key decisions, this article identifies informed democratic engagement as a crucial requirement that permeates the Court’s approach to elections. Considering the importance of democracy in the Court’s reasoning, this article argues that the Court should be more proactive in elucidating key standards for Contracting Parties to make democracies more resilient to electoral disinformation.
自由和知情的选举?《欧洲人权公约》第一议定书第三条规定的虚假信息和民主选举
本文审查了欧洲人权法院关于自由选举的判例,并确定了可用于选举虚假信息的相关方法。近年来,虚假信息与言论自由之间的关系引起了学术界的广泛关注。然而,令人惊讶的是,对自由选举权的关注却很少。本文通过确定欧洲人权法院根据《欧洲人权公约》第1号议定书第3条进行自由选举的关键方法,并评估法院在虚假信息背景下的解释推理,来解决这一差距。重点是法院处理选举过程中伪造信息的案件。考虑到斯特拉斯堡判例中言论自由与自由选举之间的特殊关系,法院还考虑根据《欧洲人权公约》第10条对言论自由进行可接受的限制,以应对欺骗性的政治言论。根据法院在关键裁决中的推理,本文将知情的民主参与确定为渗透到法院选举方法中的一项关键要求。考虑到民主在法院推理中的重要性,本文认为,法院应更加积极主动地阐明缔约方的关键标准,使民主国家更能抵御选举虚假信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Launched in 2001, Human Rights Law Review seeks to promote awareness, knowledge, and discussion on matters of human rights law and policy. While academic in focus, the Review is also of interest to the wider human rights community, including those in governmental, inter-governmental and non-governmental spheres, concerned with law, policy, and fieldwork. The Review publishes critical articles that consider human rights in their various contexts, from global to national levels, book reviews, and a section dedicated to analysis of recent jurisprudence and practice of the UN and regional human rights systems.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信