Freedom of Expression in the Gulf Region
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…
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…
As reported by the International Press Institute, new draft legislation, recently introduced in Greece could pave the way for wider freedom of the press in…
On March 24, 2015, the Supreme Court of India struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 as unconstitutional, in Shreya Singhal v.…
Summary The Digital Platform for the Safety of Journalists, announced by President Ramaphosa of South Africa on January 2021, was conceptualized over the last five…
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…
Factsheet on Internet Shutdowns in International Law Prepared by Joan Barata, Senior Legal Fellow at Future of Free Speech Project, Justitia This Factsheet is meant…
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…
A presentation prepared by Agnes Callamard for the annual Justice for Free Expression conference being held on 4-5 April, 2016.
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.