GEE 1: Living in the IT Era

Lessons 7 Lecture Notes

Freedom of Expression

Scope of Freedom of Expression

What is Freedom of Expression?

Freedom of expression is a fundamental human right that encompasses the freedom to express one's thoughts,
opinions, ideas, and beliefs without censorship or interference by the government or other entities. It includes the right to
seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through various forms of communication, such as speech, writing, art,
media, and online platforms. However, this freedom is subject to limitations to protect public safety, national security,
public order, and the rights and reputations of others.

It is guaranteed under international law and by virtually every constitutional bill of rights in the world. It is key to
human development, dignity, personal fulfillment and the search for truth, and a fundamental prerequisite for democracy
and good governance. It facilitates free debate about and between competing political parties, enables citizens to raise
concerns with authorities, and ensures that new policies and legislation may be the subject of scrutiny.

Freedom of speech, free speech, and freedom of expression are often used interchangeably. In a legal manner,
freedom of expression includes any activity that imparts and seeks ideas, regardless of the medium used (peaceful
assemblies, rallies, etc.).
Freedom of expression is recognized in international and regional human rights law. The following are examples of these
laws:

● Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that:

“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without
interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers.”

This article emphasizes the fundamental right of individuals to express their opinions, receive information, and
share ideas without undue interference. It recognizes the importance of free expression in fostering an open and
democratic society.
One situation where Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights may be present is in the context of a
peaceful protest. Individuals participating in a protest have the right to express their opinions and ideas, and to
seek, receive, and impart information through various means, such as banners, signs, speeches, or social media.
As long as the protest remains peaceful and does not infringe upon the rights of others or public safety, Article 19
protects the participants' freedom of expression.

● The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) have the following statements on freedom of expression
(Article 10 – Freedom of Expression):

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive
and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article
shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television, or cinema enterprises.

2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such
formalities, conditions, restrictions, or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic
society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or
crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing
the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
 Article 10 of the ECHR also enumerates the three components of the right to freedom of expression: (1) freedom to
hold opinions; (2) freedom to receive information and ideas; and (3) freedom to impart information and ideas.

Similar to Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 10 of the ECHR guarantees the right to
freedom of expression. It protects individuals' right to express their opinions, receive and impart information and ideas,
and ensures that public authorities do not unduly interfere with this right. However, this right is subject to certain
restrictions, such as those necessary for national security, public safety, or the prevention of disorder or crime.

● Article III Section 4, and 18 of the Bill of Rights in the Philippine Constitution:

Section 4. “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of
the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.”

This section guarantees the freedom of speech, expression, press, peaceful assembly, and petition. It protects the
right of individuals to voice their opinions, ideas, and grievances without fear of censorship or undue interference.

Example of Section 4 (Freedom of Speech, Expression, Press, Peaceful Assembly, and Petition):

● Protection of journalists and media organizations from government censorship or harassment when reporting on
sensitive or critical issues.
● Permission for individuals or groups to organize peaceful protests or demonstrations to express their opinions on
social or political matters.
● Defense of an individual's right to express dissenting views or criticisms of the government or public officials
without fear of retaliation or legal repercussions.

Section 18. “No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.”
 This section ensures that individuals cannot be detained or imprisoned solely based on their political beliefs or
aspirations. It safeguards against political persecution and upholds the principle that political opinions and affiliations
should not be grounds for unjust detention.

Example of Section 18 (Non-Detention Solely by Reason of Political Beliefs):

● Prevention of individuals from being arrested or detained solely based on their political beliefs or affiliations.
● Prohibition of politically motivated arrests or imprisonments aimed at suppressing opposition or dissent.
● Defense of activists or advocates who peacefully express their political beliefs and aspirations without being
subjected to unwarranted detention.

Limitations of Freedom of Expression

The exercise of freedom of expression carries with it duties and responsibilities and may be subject to conditions,
restrictions and penalties as prescribed by law. This is necessary to national security, territorial disorder or crime, for
protection of morals, for protection of reputation and rights of others, for preventing disclosure of confidential information
received and for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

Limitations to freedom of expression are important for several reasons:

1. Protecting public safety: Certain forms of expression, such as direct incitement to violence or terrorism, can pose
immediate threats to public safety and the well-being of individuals. Limiting such expressions helps prevent harm
and maintain social order. Restricting speech that directly incites violence, such as someone urging others to
physically harm a specific individual or group.
2. Safeguarding individual rights: Freedom of expression is not absolute and needs to be balanced with other
fundamental rights, such as the right to privacy, reputation, and protection from hate speech. Limitations ensure
that one person's exercise of freedom of expression does not infringe upon the rights and dignity of others. Limiting
 the publication of false and defamatory statements about a person that could harm their reputation without any
basis in truth.

3. Preventing harm and discrimination: Limitations on hate speech, incitement to violence, or discriminatory
expressions aim to prevent the propagation of prejudice, discrimination, and hostility towards certain individuals or
groups. Such restrictions help foster a more inclusive and tolerant society. Restricting hate speech targeting a
specific racial or religious group, as it can fuel hostility, discrimination, and prejudice.

4. Maintaining social harmony: Expression that threatens public peace, disrupts social harmony, or incites violence
can undermine the stability and cohesion of communities. Limitations on such expressions promote peaceful
coexistence and prevent conflicts. Prohibiting the dissemination of speech that could incite communal violence or
disturb public peace during a sensitive political or social event.

5. Upholding ethical and moral standards: Societies often have certain ethical and moral standards that shape the
boundaries of acceptable expression. Limitations on expression can help ensure that these standards are
respected and prevent the dissemination of content that is offensive, obscene, or harmful to societal values.
Restricting the public display of extremely explicit and offensive content that goes against prevailing community
standards of decency.

6. Protecting national security: Limitations on expression can be justified in cases where it poses a genuine threat
to national security, such as the disclosure of classified information or advocacy for terrorism. Safeguarding
national security is essential for the well-being and stability of a country. Restricting the publication or dissemination
of classified government information that could endanger national security or compromise ongoing operations.

While the Philippine Constitution protects people’s rights to free speech and expression, this does not give them
free license to write to the detriment of others. This means that the right to freedom of expression is not absolute and has
limitations.

Defamation
 Defamation is the act of providing a false statement about another individual/groups of individuals which unjustly
harms their reputation.

Defamation typically involves making false statements that harm the reputation of an individual or an organization.
To establish a claim of defamation, certain elements need to be proven, which may vary slightly depending on the
jurisdiction. The common elements of defamation are as follows:

1. False statement: The statement made must be factually untrue. Opinions, generalizations, or subjective
statements typically do not qualify as defamatory.
2. Publication: The false statement must be communicated or published to a third party. This can include spoken or
written words, online posts, articles, or any form of communication that reaches others.
3. Identification: The defamatory statement should specifically identify the person or entity being defamed. It must be
reasonably clear who the statement is referring to.
4. Harm to reputation: The false statement must harm the reputation of the individual or organization. It can lower
their esteem in the eyes of others, damage their professional standing, or cause financial losses.
5. Fault: In most defamation cases, the plaintiff needs to establish that the false statement was made with negligence
(carelessness) or actual malice (knowingly false or with reckless disregard for the truth). The degree of fault
required may vary depending on whether the plaintiff is a public figure or a private individual.

Types of Defamation

Defamation can be categorized into two primary types: slander and libel. These terms refer to the medium through
which the defamatory statement is communicated:

1. Slander: Slander refers to spoken or transitory defamatory statements. It involves making false spoken remarks or
gestures that harm a person's reputation. As it is not permanently recorded, slander is typically more challenging to
prove and establish in legal proceedings.
 In De Leon v. People, slander is “libel committed by oral (spoken) means, instead of in writing. It is defined as "the
speaking of base and defamatory words which tend to prejudice another in his reputation, office, trade, business or
means of livelihood."

2. Libel: Libel refers to written or otherwise recorded defamatory statements. It includes false statements published in
print media, online platforms, social media, broadcasts, or any other permanent or semi-permanent form of
communication. Libel is often considered more damaging and is subject to stricter legal scrutiny due to its potential
for broader dissemination and lasting impact.

From Article 353 of the Philippine Revised Penal Code, libel is “a public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a
vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause the
dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead.”

How do we differentiate libel and cyber-libel?

As to the manner of commission, ordinary libel is committed by means of writing, printing, lithography,
engraving, radio, phonograph, painting, theatrical exhibition, cinematographic exhibition, or any similar means.

Let's say there is a newspaper article published online that falsely accuses an individual, John Doe, of being
involved in a major financial fraud scheme. The article includes specific details and claims that John Doe embezzled
millions of dollars from a company where he used to work.

If the information presented in the article is entirely false and damages John Doe's reputation, it could be
considered a case of ordinary libel. The false accusation, being published in a permanent form, meets the criteria of libel.
John Doe may have grounds to pursue a legal claim for defamation and seek remedies, such as damages, to restore his
reputation.
 While Cyber libel is committed through a computer system or any other similar means which may be devised in
the future.

Imagine a scenario where a person named Jane posts a false and defamatory statement about her former
colleague, Mark, on a social media platform. She accuses Mark of being involved in criminal activities, damaging his
personal and professional reputation. The false statement reaches a wide audience as it is shared and commented on by
other users on the platform.

In this case, Jane's defamatory statement on a social media platform qualifies as cyber libel. The false accusation
made online, which can be easily accessed and shared, meets the criteria of libel. Mark may choose to pursue legal
action against Jane for cyber libel, seeking to protect his reputation and potentially claiming damages as a result of the
harm caused by the false statement.

As to the venue of filing the complaint, ordinary libel is filed with the RTC of the province or city where the
libelous article is printed and first printed or at the place where one of the offended parties reside at the time of the
commission of the offense (Art. 360, RPC). As regards cyber libel, it is filed only with the RTC at the place where one of
the offended parties reside at the time of the commission of the offense.

As to the penalty imposed, ordinary libel shall be punished by prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods or a fine ranging from 200 to 6, 000 pesos, or goth, in addition to the civil action which may be brought by the
offended party. A cyber shall be punished by one degree higher.

It's worth noting that with the rise of online communication, the distinction between slander and libel has become
less clear. Defamatory statements made through online platforms, such as social media posts or blog articles, often fall
under the category of libel due to their permanent and easily accessible nature.

Both slander and libel can have legal consequences if they meet the necessary elements of defamation and harm
the reputation of an individual or organization.
Obscene Speech

Obscenity refers to any act that strongly offends the public sense of decency. Obscene speech and conduct portray
sexual conduct in an offensive manner; it also lacks literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. Interpretations of obscene
speech are culturally and politically relative.

Hate Speech

There are some statements and views that are illegal to express because of its harmful, offensive, and obscene
content that may harm others. Inflammatory speech, or speech that advocates violence and harm unto others, may incite
lawless actions against an individual or a group of people.

KEY ISSUES ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

The Internet enables a worldwide exchange of news, ideas, opinions, rumors, and information. Its broad
accessibility, open discussions, and anonymity make it a powerful communications medium. People must often make
ethical decisions about how to use such remarkable freedom and power.
Controlling Access to Information on the Internet

Although there are clear and convincing arguments to support freedom of speech online, the issue is complicated
by the ease with which children can access the Internet. Even some advocates of free speech acknowledge the need to
restrict children’s Internet access, but it is difficult to restrict their access without also restricting adults’ access and
violating their freedom to take in information through the Internet.

Internet safety or e-safety promotes the physical and psychological well-being of internet users, most especially
children and adolescents on the internet. Young people are more susceptible to online risk. Applications and internet
features for e-safety are made available, such as parental control softwares that limits and monitors children’s internet
activity.

Anonymity on the Internet

Anonymous expression is the expression of opinions by people who do not reveal their identity. The freedom to
express an opinion without fear of reprisal is an important right of a democratic society. Anonymity is even more important
in countries that don’t allow free speech. However, in the wrong hands, anonymous communication can be used as a tool
to commit illegal or unethical activities. Through the freedom and anonymity that the internet offers, one may use it to hurt
others by spreading hateful speech. Cyberbullying denotes cruel and aggressive acts carried towards an individual or a
group of people through the internet. The use of social media has severely highlighted the effects of cyberbullying.

Pornography

Clearly, the Internet has been a boon to the pornography industry by providing fast, cheap, and convenient access
to a huge array of pornography Websites. Access via the Internet enables pornography consumers to avoid offending
others or being embarrassed by others observing their purchases. Reasonable steps include establishing a computer
usage policy that prohibits access to pornography sites, identifying those who violate the policy, and acting against those
users—regardless of how embarrassing it is for the users or how harmful it might be for the company.