Freedom Of Speech Limitations Essay

Table of Content

Details Page number

Introduction 02

Limitations in theory 02-03

The Harm Principle 03-04

The Offence Principle 04-05

Limitations in practice 05

The U.S. system 05-06

International Law 06-09

Conclusion 09

Bibliography 10-11

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND ITS LIMITATIONS.

Introduction

No known society anyplace has ever adopted a standard of entirely absolute free speech. As indicated by nearly all free speech scholars, freedom of speech has been understood to have limits. Indeed, even in today’s liberal democracies there is no idea of unconditional freedom of speech. All right to speak freely speech scholars and philosophers, except very few in the United States, emphasize that freedom of speech is not absolute, neither in theory, nor in practice . Although they all agree on the significance of free speech for finding reality, fostering individual self-fulfillment and self-realization and maintaining democracy, they also argue that words can wound and believe that unlimited freedom of speech might prove

1. Limitations in theory

The wide variety of suggestion stem from two major schools of aspect and their contradicting principles for binding of freedom of speech, standards often referred to as the standard of “harm” and the standard of “offence”. Brace of the philosophers fundamentally connected with the “harm” principle is John Stuart Mill, who in his well-known work on liberty argues: “The only aim for which power can be lawfully exercised over any member of mixed community, against his will, is to stop harm to others” [2, p. 86].

Another school of thought holds that speech, which causes “offence”, ought to likewise be liable to restriction of law, at least in some contexts and situations. As indicated by this standard few classes of speech should be regulated for the reason of their offensiveness alone.

1.1 The Harm