It is quite astonishing, but something useful appears to have come out of the United Nations committee on human rights - click here.
This looks like a reasoned and sensible critique of freedom of expression in the UK, identifying the main culprits - one each in respect of civil liability (libel), criminal liability (the promotion of terrorism offence), and Freedom from Information.
Unlike most of the output of "human rights" committees, these conclusions seem not to be counter-intuitive nor are they unrealistic.
That said, the UK has greater protection for freedom of expression than most other countries. But the position could still be better. This report may set out how this could be done.
Friday, 15 August 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
A step in the right direction. Let's hope that the Government does something useful in response.
We might have better freedoms of expression than many other parts of the world, but it could (as you say) be better.
One useful function Britain could fulfill would be acting as a shining beacon of personal freedoms, including what we are able to say and write, and thus become an ideal toward which other nations could aspire.
Even with external pressure, this will never happen beyond tokenism under a Labour Government, but the potential is there regardless.
As a next step, let's see if and how Brown and Co respond to the UN. I shall be very interested to see how (if?) they handle this.
Post a Comment