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 | Archives | Hunger strike
Caving to violent intimidation? thumbnail

Caving to violent intimidation?

In response to our sixth draft principle and whether violent intimidation has caused him to self-censor criticism of the government, Mansoor says: "The only limits that I put to myself are the ethical limits...I believe free speech is the prerequisite for any development to happen in any place and any country, and I'm driven totally by my passion and my love to this country".

Published on: October 18, 2012 | Principle 10 | Comments: 0

"We were denied justice" thumbnail

“We were denied justice”

While in prison and since his release, Mansoor has been the target of online death threats, defamation campaigns and physical attacks. He says the government has done little to address these assaults.

Published on: October 18, 2012 | Principle 10 | Comments: 0

Still under surveillance thumbnail

Still under surveillance

Mansoor says his laptop was attacked by "a very sophisticated version of malware apparently that the authorities in the region have been using against individuals, which allows authorities to gain illegal access to someone's emails and computer".

Published on: October 18, 2012 | Principle 10 | Comments: 0

Government smear and presidential pardon thumbnail

Government smear and presidential pardon

Mansoor was sentenced to three years in prison but released after just seven months when the president pardoned him and the other four activists. He says media reports on their imprisonment "enlightened people about the reality of the case, because inside the UAE the campaign was really [a] smear [campaign]".

Published on: October 18, 2012 | Principle 10 | Comments: 0

Ahmed Mansoor

Ahmed Mansoor on blogging his way into a UAE prison

One of the United Arab Emirate's most prominent human rights activists, Ahmed Mansoor was imprisoned in 2011 for criticising the country's leadership. Here he discusses the death threats, defamation campaigns and physical attacks he continues to face for speaking his mind.

Published on: October 18, 2012 | Principle 10 | Comments: 0

Voina

On free speech: The fine art of activism

The third episode of the On Free Speech podcast features exclusive interviews with filmmaker Nick Sturdee on the Russian art collective Voina and stand-up comedian Tom Greeves on the UK's parody laws.

Published on: April 10, 2012 | Principle 1 | Comments: 0

Anna Hazare during his fast (Photo by Ramesh Lalwani under a Creative Commons Attribution-only licence)

Hunger strike as free expression

Last year, Anna Hazare, a 74-year-old Indian anti-graft campaigner, undertook a "fast-unto-death" as a way of pressuring the government to enact anti-corruption legislation. Should a hunger strike be protected as a form of free expression? Manav Bhushan and Katie Engelhart offer contrasting views.

Published on: March 13, 2012 | Principle 1 | Comments: 2


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