İ.A. v. Turkey
It was not disputed that the interference was prescribed by law and pursued the legitimate aims of preventing disorder and protecting morals and the rights…
It was not disputed that the interference was prescribed by law and pursued the legitimate aims of preventing disorder and protecting morals and the rights…
A presentation prepared by Agnes Callamard and Bach Avezdjanov for the annual Justice for Free Expression conference being held on 4-5 April, 2016.
Summary Reflecting on events from the first half of 2021, IFEX’s Middle East and North Africa Editor explains how increasingly sophisticated digital surveillance tools are…
In recognition of the International Day for Universal Access to Information (IDUAI) on 28 September, IFEX produced a special edition of their Africa Brief podcast…
Congratulations to our partners at UNESCO in celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Judges’ Initiative – an innovative program that has been training judicial actors and civil society…
The International Press Institute’s (IPI) work on legal reform is now being hosted by the Media Laws Database. IPI is a global network of publishers, editors,…
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.
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…
IFEX-SPP: Paraguay UPR, Third Cycle Executive Summary: The following is a joint report submitted by the IFEX-SPP Coalition. The objective of the report is to…