Free Speech Debate

Thirteen languages. Ten principles. One conversation.

Log in | Register | Mailing list

Loading...
1We – all human beings – must be free and able to express ourselves, and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas, regardless of frontiers.»
2We defend the internet and all other forms of communication against illegitimate encroachments by both public and private powers.»
3We require and create open, diverse media so we can make well-informed decisions and participate fully in political life.»
4We speak openly and with civility about all kinds of human difference.»
5We allow no taboos in the discussion and dissemination of knowledge.»
6We neither make threats of violence nor accept violent intimidation.»
7We respect the believer but not necessarily the content of the belief.»
8We are all entitled to a private life but should accept such scrutiny as is in the public interest.»
9We should be able to counter slurs on our reputations without stifling legitimate debate.»
10We must be free to challenge all limits to freedom of expression and information justified on such grounds as national security, public order, morality and the protection of intellectual property.»

What’s missing?

Is there a vital area we have not addressed? A principle 11? An illuminating case study? Read other people's suggestions and add your own here. Or start the debate in your own language.

Home | Audio/Video | Prashant Bhushan on a Kashmiri referendum

Prashant Bhushan on a Kashmiri referendum

If the territorial dispute over Kashmir is not addressed through open debate, it may become "another Afghanistan", says the Indian supreme court lawyer.

In October 2011, Prashant Bhushan, a supreme court lawyer in India, was publicly assaulted after arguing that a referendum on Kashmir would be a legitimate way of resolving the territorial dispute. In this interview, Bhushan tells Free Speech Debate that while the Indian government may continue to assert that Kashmir is an integral part of country, it doesn’t “help things on the ground”. He explains: “If there is disaffection among the people of Kashmir from India, that disaffection needs to be addressed. You cannot address it by having a huge army presence and suppression people by force.” The risk, he adds, is that Kashmir becomes “another Afghanistan”.

(Main image: Photo Paula Bronstein/Getty Images.)

Print
Published on: January 21, 2013 | 1 Comment

Comments (1)

Automated machine translations are provided by Google Translate. They should give you a rough idea of what the contributor has said, but cannot be relied on to give an accurate, nuanced translation. Please read them with this in mind.

Leave a comment in any language


Free Speech Debate is a research project of the Dahrendorf Programme for the Study of Freedom at St Antony's College in the University of Oxford. www.freespeechdebate.ox.ac.uk