The Case of Geo TV [Pakistan]
Blasphemy sentence against Pakistani actors and TV channel
Blasphemy sentence against Pakistani actors and TV channel
2018 Global Freedom of Expression Prize Ceremony Low Library, Columbia University April 25, 2018 Tonight, we are celebrating both resilience and conviction. We are…
Executive Summary The protection and promotion of freedom of artistic expression is crucial to both ensure that artists can express themselves freely through various artforms…
Judges and the court systems in the Arabian Gulf countries do little protect freedom of expression, ruling nearly always with government security forces and their…
Columbia University Calls for Nominations for Second Annual Global Freedom of Expression Prizes NEW YORK, October 11, 2015 — Columbia University today announced that it…
Executive Summary Until recently, the distribution arrangements for Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) had been largely identified on the public web and the dark web.…
“On those grounds, the Court (Grand Chamber) hereby rules:
1. Article 25(6) of Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1882/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 September 2003, read in the light of Articles 7, 8 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as meaning that a decision adopted pursuant to that provision, such as Commission Decision 2000/520/EC of 26 July 2000 pursuant to Directive 95/46 on the adequacy of the protection provided by the safe harbour privacy principles and related frequently asked questions issued by the US Department of Commerce, by which the European Commission finds that a third country ensures an adequate level of protection, does not prevent a supervisory authority of a Member State, within the meaning of Article 28 of that directive as amended, from examining the claim of a person concerning the protection of his rights and freedoms in regard to the processing of personal data relating to him which has been transferred from a Member State to that third country when that person contends that the law and practices in force in the third country do not ensure an adequate level of protection.
2. Decision 2000/520 is invalid.”
Austl., Streetscape Projects (Australia) Pty Ltd v City of Sydney [2013] NSWCA 2
On April 25, 2024, dozens of global free speech advocates joined us for the all-day event at the Italian Academy, Columbia University, New York City,…