Freedom of expression or violation of honor and reputation?

Sanja Savčić, Bojan Pajtić
{"title":"Freedom of expression or violation of honor and reputation?","authors":"Sanja Savčić, Bojan Pajtić","doi":"10.5937/cm17-34621","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the nature of human beings there is a need for mutual exchange of information, ideas, opinions, knowledge. Telling in a simple language, this is the need for communication. It is not an exaggeration to attribute a much stronger function to communication in modern society. It is the basis for connecting individuals, groups and even social communities. Communication is, in addition, a necessary means of civilizational achievements (as an exchange of knowledge and ideas), but also of social and political changes. Although communication is not a process inherent only in modern society, there is no doubt that its explosive significance in the 21st century is directly related to the emergence of the Internet and, in particular, the various Internet platforms through which it takes place in a fast and cheap way. More importantly, information exchanged over the Internet can be learned by an audience of millions at the same time. Of particular importance in this process of expansion of Internet communication certainly belongs to numerous social networks. Among them, the most popular are certainly Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok. Today, there is almost no Internet user who is not at the same time a user of some of the planet's popular social networks. Apart from the advantages of communication in the digital environment and the fact that the Internet has made everyday life much more comfortable, the new era in communication has reopened the question of where the line is between freedom of expression and violation of rights, but also who is responsible for the violation. Although at first glance it may seem that legal science has long given an answer to the questions posed, this paper aims to, by analyzing the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and domestic courts, point out that insufficiently developed legal framework for communication via the Internet can jeopardize the seemingly solid acquis, especially when it comes to the basic rights of man and citizen. We pay special attention to the right to the dignity of the person, i.e. honor and reputation. After analyzing the case law, we will set out the criteria for the delimitation of freedom of expression and the violation of the right to dignity, which provide the necessary legal certainty, especially in times of dominant communication via the Internet.","PeriodicalId":53049,"journal":{"name":"CM Communication and Media","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CM Communication and Media","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5937/cm17-34621","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the nature of human beings there is a need for mutual exchange of information, ideas, opinions, knowledge. Telling in a simple language, this is the need for communication. It is not an exaggeration to attribute a much stronger function to communication in modern society. It is the basis for connecting individuals, groups and even social communities. Communication is, in addition, a necessary means of civilizational achievements (as an exchange of knowledge and ideas), but also of social and political changes. Although communication is not a process inherent only in modern society, there is no doubt that its explosive significance in the 21st century is directly related to the emergence of the Internet and, in particular, the various Internet platforms through which it takes place in a fast and cheap way. More importantly, information exchanged over the Internet can be learned by an audience of millions at the same time. Of particular importance in this process of expansion of Internet communication certainly belongs to numerous social networks. Among them, the most popular are certainly Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok. Today, there is almost no Internet user who is not at the same time a user of some of the planet's popular social networks. Apart from the advantages of communication in the digital environment and the fact that the Internet has made everyday life much more comfortable, the new era in communication has reopened the question of where the line is between freedom of expression and violation of rights, but also who is responsible for the violation. Although at first glance it may seem that legal science has long given an answer to the questions posed, this paper aims to, by analyzing the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and domestic courts, point out that insufficiently developed legal framework for communication via the Internet can jeopardize the seemingly solid acquis, especially when it comes to the basic rights of man and citizen. We pay special attention to the right to the dignity of the person, i.e. honor and reputation. After analyzing the case law, we will set out the criteria for the delimitation of freedom of expression and the violation of the right to dignity, which provide the necessary legal certainty, especially in times of dominant communication via the Internet.
言论自由还是对荣誉和名誉的侵犯?
在人类的本性中,有相互交换信息、思想、意见和知识的需要。用简单的语言诉说,这是沟通的需要。毫不夸张地说,在现代社会中,沟通发挥了更大的作用。它是连接个人、群体甚至社会社区的基础。此外,通信是文明成就(作为知识和思想的交流)的必要手段,也是社会和政治变革的必要手段。虽然传播并不是现代社会固有的过程,但毫无疑问,它在21世纪的爆炸性意义与互联网的出现直接相关,特别是各种互联网平台,通过这些平台,传播以一种快速而廉价的方式发生。更重要的是,在互联网上交换的信息可以被数百万观众同时学习。在这个扩展过程中特别重要的是网络传播当然属于众多的社交网络。其中,最受欢迎的当然是Facebook、Instagram、Twitter和TikTok。今天,几乎没有一个互联网用户不同时是这个星球上一些流行的社交网络的用户。除了数位环境下的通讯优势,以及网际网路让日常生活更舒适,通讯的新时代也重新开启了言论自由与侵犯人权之间的界线,以及谁该为侵犯人权负责的问题。虽然乍一看,法学似乎早已给出了所提出的问题的答案,但本文旨在通过分析欧洲人权法院和国内法院的判例法,指出通过互联网进行交流的法律框架不发达可能危及看似稳固的成果,特别是当涉及到人与公民的基本权利时。我们特别关注人的尊严,即荣誉和名誉的权利。在对判例法进行分析之后,我们将为言论自由的界定和对尊严权的侵犯设定标准,这提供了必要的法律确定性,特别是在互联网占主导地位的传播时代。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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