India Takes a Dig at Chinese Apps- A threat to Free Speech?
by Atmaja Tripathy[1] In an era where expression via the internet is recognised as a quintessential part of freedom of speech and expression[2], sovereigns are…
EngelliWeb 2018: An Assessment Report on Blocked Websites, News Articles and Social Media Content from Turkey
EngelliWeb 2018: An Assessment Report on Blocked Websites, News Articles and Social Media Content from Turkey Press Release 19 July, 2019 İfade Özgürlüğü Derneği (İFÖD…
Obama v. Klayman
2016 Columbia Global Freedom of Expression Prizes – Recipients Announced!
2016 Columbia Global Freedom of Expression Prizes Recognize Legal Advocates in Turkey and Supreme Court in Norway NEW YORK, N.Y. (Mar. 14, 2016) — The…
Google Inc. v. AEPD
This decision widens the scope of freedom of expression by considering that blocking or filtering internet search results by name is less acceptable in cases where the contested information refers to professional life of an individual and is in the public interest. When balancing freedom of expression against the right to be forgotten, the Court gave prevalence to the former by highlighting the fact that web users and potential patients have a right to access information in a free manner about persons of public interest in the private sector. Right to access information thus, gives way to the right to be forgotten when dissemination of such information is in the public interest.
Hegglin v. Google
ECtHR decides Delfi AS v. Estonia in Estonia’s Favor
On June 16, 2015, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) delivered judgement on Delfi AS v. Estonia. Delfi AS, one of Estonia’s largest online news…
The prevention of atrocity crimes and social media: challenges and opportunities
Dr. Agnès Callamard gave the speech below at the UN event titled the “70th Anniversary of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the…