Liberdade de Expressão em Debate

Treze línguas. Dez princípios. Uma conversa.

Login | Registrar-se | Lista de discussão

Loading...
1Nós seres humanos devemos ser livres e ter as garantias necessárias para expressar, receber e buscar informações e ideias, independentemente de fronteiras.»
2Defendemos a internet e todas as outras formas de comunicação contra os abusos ilegítimos tanto do poder público quanto da iniciativa privada.»
3Exigimos e criamos mídias abertas e diversificadas que possam nos ajudar a tomar decisões bem informadas, e com isso participar plenamente da vida política.»
4Falamos abertamente e com civilidade sobre todas as diferenças entre os seres humanos.»
5Não permitimos que tabus interfiram na discussão e disseminação do conhecimento.»
6Não fazemos ameaças de violência nem tampouco aceitamos intimidações violentas.»
7Nós respeitamos a pessoa que tenha uma crença religiosa, mas não necessariamente o conteúdo dessa crença.»
8Temos o direito a uma vida privada mas devemos aceitar investigações que sejam de interesse público.»
9Devemos ter meios de combater ofensas às nossas reputações sem com isso silenciar um debate legítimo.»
10Devemos ser livres para questionar todos os limites às liberdades de expressão e informação que tenham como justificativa questões do tipo: segurança nacional, ordem pública, princípios morais, proteção de propriedade intelectual, entre outras.»

O que falta?

Há alguma área vital que não mencionamos? Talvez um princípio 11? Um estudo de caso iluminador? Leia a sugestão de outras pessoas e deixe seu comentário aqui. Ou comece um debate na sua própria língua.

Início | Discussões | Dê sua sugestão de estudo de caso

Dê sua sugestão de estudo de caso

Nossos estudos de caso são exemplos tirados da vida real de todo o mundo, e ilustram e desafiam nossos projetos de princípios para a liberdade de expressão global. Se há um caso você acha que devemos inserir no debate, avise-nos aqui.

(Photo by hashmil under a Creative Commons Attribution-only licence)
(Photo by hashmil under a Creative Commons Attribution-only licence)

Nossos estudos de caso são exemplos tirados da vida real de todo o mundo, e ilustram e desafiam nossos projetos de princípios para a liberdade de expressão global. Se há um caso você acha que devemos inserir no debate, avise-nos aqui.

Imprimir
Publicado em: fevereiro 10, 2012 | 12 Comentários

Comentários (12)

As traduções automáticas são feitas pelo Google Translate. Essa ferramenta pode lhe dar uma idéia aproximada do que o usuário escreveu, mas não pode ser considerada uma tradução precisa. Por favor, leia estas mensagens levando isso em conta.

  1. Jack disse:

    I copy here the case of a university academic department inhibiting the freedom of expression of people they disagree with:
    Michael Ross: Welcome to the University of Victoria, a.k.a. Che Guevara U
    National Post Feb 3, 2012 – 7:00 AM ET | Last Updated: Feb 2, 2012 4:36 PM ET

    http://natpo.st/zdIVYI

  2. iassersohn disse:

    The case of David Jones, creator of Fireman Sam, is illuminating. According to AOL he was going through airport security at Gatwick when he noticed a woman in a hijab passing through the area without showing her face. He said to the security official: “If I was wearing this scarf over my face, I wonder what would happen.” He was then confronted by another guard who said that he was being detailed because he had made “an offensive remark”.
    The guard took his passport and boarding pass and he was escorted back through the security zone into the outer area. Here the female security guard proceeded to question him further, “inferring many things that I had not said”. It was impossible to get her to listen to reason. We were then joined by a second female security guard who stated that she was Muslim and was deeply distressed by my comment.

    “I again staged that I had not made a racist remark but purely an observation that we were in a maximum security situation being searched throughly whilst a woman with her face covered walked through. I made no reference to race or religion. I did not swear or raise my voice.”

    He was told by police that he would only be allowed to continue on his journey if he apologised to the Muslim guard. Eventually he was told by the airport manager that he would be allowed to board his flight if he would agree that what he said “could” be considered offensive by the Muslim guard, and he agreed to the compromise.

  3. carola chiarpenello disse:

    I would love to debate the role of Hate media during the Rwanda genocide, facing both the domestic and internationa responses…. I have work about it and i would love to post my research and ask for further opinions

  4. Stogumber disse:

    The most interesting case study which was really performed some years ago – a book everyone should have studied: Ezra Levant: “Shakedown” (describing how Canada bypassed its free speech laws by the implementation of “human rights commissions” which weren’t bound to “due process” rules). With this book, Levant has qualified himself as the unsung hero of free speech in the contemporary West AND succeeded in reducing the power of those human rights commissions.

  5. Klaus disse:

    The guard took his passport and boarding pass and he was escorted back through the security zone into the outer area. Here the female security guard proceeded to question him further, “inferring many things that I had not said”. It was impossible to get her to listen to reason. We were then joined by a second female security guard who stated that she was Muslim and was deeply distressed by my comment.
    Since there’s no case study on Russia yet – what about this one: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/11/putin-russia-president-election-protests or http://www.human-growth-hormone-hgh.net ?

  6. Essoulami disse:

    One case study could be the new limitations imposed by newly elected governments and new emerging informal pressure groups on women’s right to freedom of expression in the Middle East and North Africa.

  7. Essoulami disse:

    The silence imposed on the media regarding media censorship and prosecution of Israeli journalists.

  8. Essoulami disse:

    The UK government human rights strategy in the Middle East

  9. annemarie_detlef disse:

    The German Bundesverfassungsgericht (Federal Constitutional Court) will soon discuss whether the German National Party (NPD) can be banned.
    Morally supportable or restriction of free speech?

  10. Fran Sauri disse:

    En España, la Plataforma de Afectados por la Hipoteca (PAH) han comenzado a realizar “escraches” frente a los domicilios de ciertos parlamentarios. La razón es que tales parlamentarios van a votar en contra de determinadas medidas que la PAH respalda. ¿Son legítimas estas acciones?

    In Spain, the Plataforma de Afectados por la Hipoteca [Mortgage Victims Platform] (PAH) are doing “escraches” on the doorstep of some members of parliament. The reason is that these MPs will vote against some measures supported by PAH. ¿Are these “escraches” legitimate?

    http://elpais.com/elpais/2013/04/02/inenglish/1364910004_218874.html

Deixe um comentário em qualquer língua


Liberdade de Expressão em Debate é um projeto de pesquisa do Programa Dahrendorf para o Estudo da Liberdade de Expressão, do Colégio St Antony's na Universidade de Oxford. www.freespeechdebate.ox.ac.uk