EU silences Russian state media: a step in the wrong direction
This blog was originally published by Inforrm’s Blog and is reproduced with permission and thanks. Shortly after the Russian military invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022,…
This blog was originally published by Inforrm’s Blog and is reproduced with permission and thanks. Shortly after the Russian military invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022,…
In February 2017, the Colombian Constitutional Court issued a ruling that could have serious consequences for the exercise of the right to freedom of expression…
This article was originally posted by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. Amicus brief filed by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the…
Journalists at Georgia’s last major opposition broadcasting company are digging in and refusing to comply with a court order altering the outlet’s ownership structure. Doing…
This post originally appeared on Strasbourg Observers and is reproduced here with permission and thanks. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), delivered an interesting…
This blog was originally published by Inforrm’s Blog and is reproduced with permission and thanks. Shortly after the Russian military invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022,…
The Jakarta Recommendations are the outcome of discussions at a regional consultation on “Expression, Opinion and Religious Freedoms in Asia”, held in Jakarta, Indonesia on…
Summary Reflecting on events from the first half of 2021, IFEX’s Europe and Central Asia Editor explains how the Lukashenka regime’s crackdown on Belarus’s independent…
The European Audiovisual Observatory made the new version available of the e-book “Freedom of Expression, the Media and Journalists. Case law of the European Court of Human Rights“,…
The Delhi High Court, in a petition filed by Flipkart seeking quashing of the first information report/FIR (information on the basis of which criminal proceedings are initiated), held that the ‘Safe Harbour Protection’ guaranteed to intermediaries under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 is applicable to criminal cases as well. It further opined that it is not required for the intermediaries to take down content prohibited under the Indian Copyright Act or the Trademark Act only upon receipt of ‘actual knowledge’ pursuant to complaints received. Relying on the Supreme Court decision in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, 2015 (5) SCC 1, the Court propounded that it is imperative for a court order pursuant to which intermediaries will comply with take down requests in relation to any complaint.