1. bookVolume 9 (2019): Issue 3 (September 2019)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2674-4619
First Published
18 Jun 2013
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
access type Open Access

Towards a Legal Framework That Protects Freedom of Expression in Electoral Processes

Published Online: 21 Dec 2019
Volume & Issue: Volume 9 (2019) - Issue 3 (September 2019)
Page range: 43 - 62
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2674-4619
First Published
18 Jun 2013
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
Abstract

In democratic countries, attention is devoted to the issue of freedom of speech and freedom of expression and the role of public authorities during elections. Today, freedom of speech and freedom of expression are guaranteed at both the international and national levels. The international community has created a significant number of international agreements and acts of “soft law” on standards of freedom of expression. In particular, the Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters establishes as the first general condition for democratic elections the respect for fundamental human rights, and particularly freedom of expression, assembly and association, without which there can be no true democracy. On the one hand, the problem of ensuring freedom of expression during elections is caused by the wider limits of permissible criticism of candidates and the importance of coverage of the election process. On the other hand, it is caused by restrictions on the conduct of election campaigning and the necessity to provide equal access to the media for the subjects of the electoral process. In this context, it is important to find a balance between the right to free elections, freedom of speech and other rights, freedoms and interests of the subjects of the electoral process. This article researches the modern problems of national legal guarantee of the freedom of speech and the freedom of expression and international electoral standards on the protection of freedom of speech and freedom of expression in the electoral process.

Keywords

Ad Library (2019), Facebook. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?active_status=all&ad_type=political_and_issue_ads&country=UA [accessed Nov 2019]Search in Google Scholar

Ad Policies (2019a), ‘10.a Ads Related to Politics or Issues of National Importance,’ Facebook. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/policies/ads/restricted_content/political [accessed Nov 2019]Search in Google Scholar

Ad Policies (2019b), ‘10.b Disclaimers for Ads Related to Politics or Issues of National Importance,’ Facebook. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/policies/ads/restricted_content/disclaimers [accessed Nov 2019]Search in Google Scholar

Advertising Policies (2019), ‘Political content,’ Google. Retrieved from https://support.google.com/adspolicy/answer/6014595?hl=en [accessed Nov 2019]Search in Google Scholar

Animal Defenders International v. United Kingdom [2013], ECtHR, no. 48876/08, 22.4.2013.Search in Google Scholar

Barabash, Yu. H. (2012), ‘Okremi pytannia rozghliadu sudamy vyborchykh sporiv’ [Some issues of consideration of electoral disputes by courts], Viche, vol. 14, pp. 5–9.Search in Google Scholar

Bowman v. the United Kingdom [1998], ECtHR, no. 24839/94, 19.2.1998.Search in Google Scholar

Constitutional Court of Ukraine (2002), Rishennia Konstytutsiinoho Sudu Ukrainy u spravi za konstytutsiinym podanniam 63 narodnykh deputativ Ukrainy shchodo vidpovidnosti Konstytutsii Ukrainy (konstytutsiinosti) polozhen statti 43 Zakonu Ukrainy “Pro vybory narodnykh deputativ Ukrainy” (sprava pro vyborchu zastavu) [Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine], no. 1-18/2002, 30.1.2002Search in Google Scholar

Constitutional Court of the Republic of Latvia (2002), Reshenye ot ymeny Latvyiskoi Respublyky [Decision of the Constitutional court of the Republic of Latvia], no. 2002-08-01, 23.9.2002.Search in Google Scholar

Council of Europe (1998), Right to Privacy, Resolution of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, no. 1165, 26.06.1998.Search in Google Scholar

Council of Europe (1999), On measures concerning media coverage of election campaigns, Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, no. R(99)15, 9.9.1999.Search in Google Scholar

Council of Europe (2007), State of human rights and democracy in Europe, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe resolution no. 1547, 15th Sitting, 18.4.2007.Search in Google Scholar

Daibu, A. A. & Abdulrazaq, F. F. (2016), ‘Legal and practical challenges to the enforcement of the right to freedom of expression in Nigeria,’ Yonsei LJ, vol. 7, pp. 87–126.Search in Google Scholar

Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council ‘On the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing,’ (General Data Protection Regulation), OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, pp. 1–88.Search in Google Scholar

Editorial Board of Pravoye Delo and Shtekel v. Ukraine [2011], ECtHR, no. 33014/05, 5.5.2011.Search in Google Scholar

ERR News (2018), ‘Za reklamoi estonskikh politikov i partii v facebook budut sledit,’ 29.11.2018. Retrieved from https://rus.err.ee/880986/za-reklamoj-jestonskih-politikov-i-partij-v-facebook-budut-sledit [accessed Nov 2019]Search in Google Scholar

Feldek v. Slovakia [2001], ECtHR, no. 29032/95, 12.7.2001.Search in Google Scholar

Glavaš, D. (2017), Political Advertising and Media Campaign During the Pre-election Period: A Comparative Study, Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, Commissioned by the OSCE Mission to Montenegro. Retrieved from https://www.osce.org/mission-to-montenegro/346631?download=true [accessed Nov 2019]Search in Google Scholar

Grinberg v. Russia [2005], ECtHR, no. 23472/03, 21.7.2005.Search in Google Scholar

Grofman, B. & Lijphart A., eds. (2003), Electoral Laws and Their Political Consequences, Agathon Series on Representation, New York: Agathon Press.Search in Google Scholar

Handyside v. the United Kingdom [1976], ECtHR, no. 5493/72, 7.12.1976.Search in Google Scholar

Karakó v. Hungary [2009], ECtHR, no. 39311/05, 28.4.2009.Search in Google Scholar

Kwiecień v. Poland [2007], ECtHR, no. 51744/99, 9.1.2007.Search in Google Scholar

La Rue, F. (2014), Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Human Rights Council, A/HRC/26/30, 30.05.2014.Search in Google Scholar

Lingens v. Austria [1986], ECtHR, no. 9815/82, 8.7.1986.Search in Google Scholar

Loewy, A. H. (1993), ‘Freedom of speech as a product of democracy,’ University of Richmond Law Review, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 427–439.Search in Google Scholar

Kliuchkovskyi, Yu. B. (2018), Pryntsypy vyborchoho prava: doktrynalne rozuminnia, stan ta perspektyvy zakonodavchoi realizatsii v Ukraini: monohrafiia [Principles of electoral law: doctrinal understanding, status and prospects of legislative implementation in Ukraine: monograph], Kyiv: Vaite.Search in Google Scholar

Mathieu-Mohin and Clerfayt v. Belgium [1987], ECtHR, no. 9267/81, 2.3.1987.Search in Google Scholar

Observer and Guardian v. the United Kingdom [1991], ECtHR, no. 13585/88, 24.10.1991.Search in Google Scholar

Pavlovic, M. (2017), ‘Legal limitations of freedom of expression in media,’ Int’l J. Econ. & L., vol. 7, no. 21, pp. 33–42.Search in Google Scholar

UNCHR (1995), Resolution of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights ‘Ways and means of overcoming obstacles to the establishment of a democratic society and requirements for the maintenance of democracy,’ no. 1995/60, 59th Meeting, 7.03.1995.Search in Google Scholar

Reilly, R. (2002), ‘Electoral systems for divided societies,’ Journal of Democracy, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 156–170. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2002.002910.1353/jod.2002.0029Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Shveda, Yu. R. (2015), Vybory vid A do Ya: Nastilna knyha menedzhera vyborchoi kampanii [Elections A to Z: campaign manager’s board book], Lviv: Astroliabiia.Search in Google Scholar

Venice Commission (2002), Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters, adopted by the Venice Commission at its 51st Plenary Session (Venice, 5–6 July 2002).Search in Google Scholar

Yumak and Sadak v. Turkey [2008], ECtHR, no. 10226/03, 8.7.2008.Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo