Accueil>Les conflits internes à la liberté d’expression

27.01.2022

Les conflits internes à la liberté d’expression

À propos de cet événement

Le 27 janvier 2022 de 12:45 à 14:15

>Charles Girard interviendra sur le thème "Les conflits internes à la liberté d’expression".

The growing recognition, in many legal orders, of freedom of expression as a positive freedom, rather than merely a negative one, appears bound to breed conflicts of this kind. If this right creates for the State not only negative duties of non-interference (to refrain from censoring), but also positive duties of assistance (to protect against interference by other actors or to allocate means of expression), or if it creates duties for private persons as well, then it creates ground for more numerous, more diverse and potentially incompatible freedom of expression claims. This is sometimes seen as a reason in itself to reject positive obligations arising from freedom of expression, or at least those that are liable to provoke such conflicts.

Expressive intra-right conflicts are suspected of being problematic, on the grounds that they are either self-contradictory, reflecting a confused understanding of free expression, or particularly difficult – if not impossible – to resolve in a non-arbitrary manner. On the one hand, in such conflicts one party’s freedom of expression can seemingly only be guaranteed at the expense of another’s, a conclusion which may seem not only tragic but incoherent. Can the line still be drawn between free expression and censorship? On the other hand, there may be no principled way to decide whose freedom of expression will be secured and whose will be infringed, since the same right is at play on both ends and is held, as a fundamental right, to be equal for all. How can siding with one over the other be justified? In both cases, to make room for expressive intra-right conflicts would severely weaken the right to free expression. This is all the more objectionable, if, as is sometimes claimed, such conflicts are dispensable, because the interests on one side or the other can be justifiably deprived of the protection afforded by freedom of expression.

It is therefore suggested that we should limit the development of positive obligations derived from freedom of expression in order to avoid related intra-right conflicts. We may call this the case for avoidance. This paper examines this case and argues it should be rejected.

Charles Girard, maître de conférences en philosophie, Université Jean Moulin Lyon 3.

La communication sera en français.

Sur invitation uniquement.

À propos de cet événement

Le 27 janvier 2022 de 12:45 à 14:15