Anti-SLAPP: Professor goes free after vexatious and frivolous suit
This blog was originally published by Inforrm’s Blog and is reproduced with permission and thanks. It is rare in Belgium for people who take part in the…
This blog was originally published by Inforrm’s Blog and is reproduced with permission and thanks. It is rare in Belgium for people who take part in the…
CYRILLA Applied Research and Advocacy Grants Contact Grant Baker, CYRILLA Project Director (grant@smex.org) Background The CYRILLA Collaborative will be awarding 5 grants of $5,000 to…
In partnership with UNESCO Columbia Global Freedom of Expression has published the following collection of case law from around the world that upheld international standards…
This report was originally published by SMEX and is re-posted here with permission and thanks. On September 23, Zoom cancelled a virtual event featuring the…
Download Full Statement in English or Arabic On January 6, 2016, Bahrain’s authorities charged Sheikh Maytham Al Salman, a human rights defender and cleric,…
This paper was originally published in Communications Law, The Journal of Computer, Media and Telecommunications Law 2019/2, Vol 24, 62-73 (Bloomsburry Professional, Oxford) and is…
This case did not set a binding or persuasive precedent either within or outside its jurisdiction. The significance of this case is undetermined at this point in time.
After a tense legislative proceeding, the Brazilian State of Alagoas passed a statute forbidding professors at public universities from giving their political, religious or ideological…
Introduction The year 2018 marked the 70th anniversary of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR). This anniversary provided an opportunity to examine the challenges…
This decision of the Madras High is binding on the lower courts in the State of Madras. However, it needs to be noted that this decision was taken at a pre-trial stage while determination of the request to quash criminal proceedings under various hate speech enactments. Thus, the arguments relying on the observations of the Court for advancing arguments on merits would have limited persuasive value.