Search Results

A European Perspective
Author: David I. Fisher
Satellites enable European broadcasters to televise programs to vast transnational audiences. This activity is supported by a regime of freedom of transborder broadcasting under EC law, European human rights law and other areas of public international law. The program contents of broadcasts will on occasion give rise to claims of injury to private law interests, including the interest in reputation. The defamation laws of Europe's nations are however by no means uniform: the same transmission may give rise to liability under one national system but to no liability under another. The material outcome of a given claim will thus rest on the existing regime of private international law applied by Europe's national courts, including rules governing forum, choice of law and foreign judgments.
It is against the above background of private international law that Defamation via Satellite examines Europe's prospects of realizing the public international law regime of free transborder broadcasting.

to blasphemy laws, like ‘insult of religious beliefs or doctrines’. What is more, several European countries, including the Netherlands, France and Spain, have an offence of ‘group defamation’ — or a similarly worded offence — in their criminal code. Such laws deal with defamation or insult of (a

In: European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice
In his book Human Rights: Group Defamation, Freedom of Expression and the Law of Nations, Thomas David Jones presents a discussion and analysis of the laws governing group defamation and speech inciteful of racial hatred in Great Britain, Canada, India, Nigeria, and the United States. Although there exists no federal group defamation law in the United States, a few state legislatures have promulgated group defamation statutes, while a cause of action for group defamation has been recognized as justiciable in the decision law of other states. Mr Jones describes his theory as constitutional minimalism because he does not advocate the legal proscription of all derogatory hate speech. Only the sub-category of hate speech that fulfills the standard elements of proof found in common law defamation claim will be prosecuted criminally by the federal government. The author further asserts that a carefully and narrowly drafted federal criminal group defamation statute will pass constitutional muster without creating a conflict with First Amendment rights.
Author: Julian Rivers

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2007 DOI: 10.1163/187103107X252364 Religion and Human Rights 2 (2007) 113–118 www.brill.nl/rhrs Religion Human Rights Guest Editorial Th e Question of Freedom of Religion or Belief and Defamation 1 Julian Rivers * Professor of Jurisprudence, University of Bristol

In: Religion & Human Rights

Bibliographic entry in Chapter 1: Reference Works, Bibliographies, Overviews, and Syntheses | Sources for Topical Research authorB'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation LeagueimprintBoston: M. Nijhoff Publishers, 1986-1988.annotationThis short-lived reference work brought a particular perspective to the study

In: The SHAFR Guide Online
Author: Naomi Sakr

the viewing public, each set of exchanges helped to sustain power relations by obscuring them. Keywords human rights ; international law ; censorship ; incitement ; defamation ; insult Introduction It has been recognized for decades now that the human right to life is causally linked to the right to

In: Middle East Journal of Culture and Communication
Author: Ranchod