Argentina: Current Trends in Freedom of Expression Jurisprudence
Argentina has developed strong protections for the right to freedom of expression, especially through the Supreme Court’s rich and vast jurisprudence in this area. During…
Argentina has developed strong protections for the right to freedom of expression, especially through the Supreme Court’s rich and vast jurisprudence in this area. During…
Gherbal Initiative (GI) was established in early 2018 to enhance transparency and fight corruption in the public and private sectors and to shift the political…
The Government of India has drawn flak this year for its aggressive campaign to intensify the regulation of digital service providers, its latest target being…
Thank God, the insanity only lasted three days. The City Hall of São Paulo, the biggest city in South America, surrealistically ordered taxi drivers to…
Global pandemic response falters as clients of worlds’ biggest banks silence medical workers, journalists and activists with impunity. By Lorena Cotza, Silvia Chocarro, Matthew Redding…
On November 2, the International Day to End Impunity for Crimes against Journalists, the UN Secretary General António Guterres has invited the world to pay…
Relaunch: Catalysts for Collaboration, a resource to advance digital rights through collaborative strategic litigation The website offers best practices and new case studies in English,…
The following article was first published by EURACTIV. The German NetzDG law to counter illegal online speech has become a prototype for internet censorship in…
Hate Speech vs. Free Speech Special Issue International Journal for the Semiotics of Law Guest Editors: Jacob Mchangama, Executive Director, Justitia (Denmark), Executive Director of…
The U.K. First-Tier Tribunal of the General Regulatory Chamber for Information Rights held that a Transitional Risk Register (“TRR”), relating to sweeping changes to the country’s National Health System (“NHS”), should be disclosed under The Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) but that a Strategic Risk Register, relating to the changes, was exempt from disclosure. The court found that a public authority must release risk registers evaluating health policy if the request is made when policy consultation and formulation has been largely completed, but not during a period of consultation and when the register includes more sensitive policy information. In the present case, the Court ruled in favor of the public interest in transparency because at the time of the TRR request, the Report largely covered operational and implementation risks being faced by the Department of Health (“DOH”), rather than direct policy considerations. On the other hand, the Court found that the public interest in the Government having safe space to formulate policy took precedence at the time of the SRR request because the request was made at a time when the government was engaged in ongoing policy deliberations.