钳制媒体言论

Audrey Fino, Sandra Sahyouni
{"title":"钳制媒体言论","authors":"Audrey Fino, Sandra Sahyouni","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198862956.003.0017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 16 deals with contempt cases against journalists. Restrictions on freedom of the press have been striking at international criminal tribunals, where violations of protective measures granted to, for example, witnesses have led to several landmark yet controversial prosecutions of journalists for contempt of court. This chapter examines these practices from a human rights law perspective, as part of the recognized exceptions to the principle of public trials. In doing so, it reviews the law and jurisprudence of international and hybrid tribunals, including the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), and the International Criminal Court (ICC). In addition, it surveys contempt of court, offences against the administration of justice, and the law on reporting restrictions in a number of common law and civil law domestic jurisdictions. It concludes that the right to freedom of the press in the context of international criminal trials is not absolute, and that limits ordered by international tribunals, despite the polemics they may cause, are actually fully in line with both human rights law and domestic legal trends.","PeriodicalId":336191,"journal":{"name":"Legacies of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia","volume":"107 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Muzzling the Press\",\"authors\":\"Audrey Fino, Sandra Sahyouni\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780198862956.003.0017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Chapter 16 deals with contempt cases against journalists. Restrictions on freedom of the press have been striking at international criminal tribunals, where violations of protective measures granted to, for example, witnesses have led to several landmark yet controversial prosecutions of journalists for contempt of court. This chapter examines these practices from a human rights law perspective, as part of the recognized exceptions to the principle of public trials. In doing so, it reviews the law and jurisprudence of international and hybrid tribunals, including the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), and the International Criminal Court (ICC). In addition, it surveys contempt of court, offences against the administration of justice, and the law on reporting restrictions in a number of common law and civil law domestic jurisdictions. It concludes that the right to freedom of the press in the context of international criminal trials is not absolute, and that limits ordered by international tribunals, despite the polemics they may cause, are actually fully in line with both human rights law and domestic legal trends.\",\"PeriodicalId\":336191,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Legacies of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia\",\"volume\":\"107 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Legacies of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198862956.003.0017\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legacies of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198862956.003.0017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

第16章涉及针对记者的藐视法庭案件。在国际刑事法庭上,对新闻自由的限制令人震惊,在那里,违反给予证人的保护措施导致了几起具有里程碑意义但又有争议的对记者藐视法庭罪的起诉。本章从人权法的角度考察这些做法,作为公开审判原则的公认例外的一部分。在此过程中,它审查了国际法庭和混合法庭的法律和判例,包括前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭(前南问题国际法庭)、黎巴嫩问题特别法庭(黎巴嫩问题特别法庭)和国际刑事法院(国际刑事法院)。此外,报告还调查了若干普通法和大陆法系国内司法管辖区的藐视法庭罪、妨害司法的罪行,以及有关报告限制的法律。它的结论是,在国际刑事审判的背景下,新闻自由的权利不是绝对的,国际法庭下令的限制,尽管可能引起争论,实际上完全符合人权法和国内法律趋势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Muzzling the Press
Chapter 16 deals with contempt cases against journalists. Restrictions on freedom of the press have been striking at international criminal tribunals, where violations of protective measures granted to, for example, witnesses have led to several landmark yet controversial prosecutions of journalists for contempt of court. This chapter examines these practices from a human rights law perspective, as part of the recognized exceptions to the principle of public trials. In doing so, it reviews the law and jurisprudence of international and hybrid tribunals, including the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), and the International Criminal Court (ICC). In addition, it surveys contempt of court, offences against the administration of justice, and the law on reporting restrictions in a number of common law and civil law domestic jurisdictions. It concludes that the right to freedom of the press in the context of international criminal trials is not absolute, and that limits ordered by international tribunals, despite the polemics they may cause, are actually fully in line with both human rights law and domestic legal trends.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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