Ending Impunity: Upholding the Rule of Law
Keynote address delivered on the occasion of the 1st International Day to End Impunity for Crimes against Journalists (November 2nd, 2014). United Nations Headquarters, New…
Keynote address delivered on the occasion of the 1st International Day to End Impunity for Crimes against Journalists (November 2nd, 2014). United Nations Headquarters, New…
Factsheet on Content Moderation and Freedom of Expression Prepared by Erik Tuchtfeld, Head of the humanet3 research group, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law…
Executive Summary Abuses of media freedom around the world are stifling speech and shredding the very fabric of democracies. As the publisher of The New…
*This article has been originally published on the website of the Council on Foreign Relations and you can you can access it HERE. Lost in…
On the occasion of International Right to Know Day, we are pleased to announce our new partnership with Right2Info, an initiative of the Open Society…
On June 17, 2019 a Nigerian man identified as Jeffrey Ewohime allegedly destroyed seven cars and property at the Nigerian High Commission in London over a…
This guide was originally published by the European Court of Human Rights and can also be found here. Note to Readers This Guide is part…
This document was originally published by the European Court of Human Rights and can be found here. Introduction A. Methodology Given the extensive case-law developed…
The Delhi High Court, in a petition filed by Flipkart seeking quashing of the first information report/FIR (information on the basis of which criminal proceedings are initiated), held that the ‘Safe Harbour Protection’ guaranteed to intermediaries under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 is applicable to criminal cases as well. It further opined that it is not required for the intermediaries to take down content prohibited under the Indian Copyright Act or the Trademark Act only upon receipt of ‘actual knowledge’ pursuant to complaints received. Relying on the Supreme Court decision in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, 2015 (5) SCC 1, the Court propounded that it is imperative for a court order pursuant to which intermediaries will comply with take down requests in relation to any complaint.
Isr., MApp 2065/13 A. v. State of Israel, (March 22,2013) HCJ 442/71 Lansky v. Minister of the Interior, IsrSC 26(2) 337 (1972)