[MUSIC] If open societies are about opening your mind too new ideas you need to be able to access such ideas and to discuss them with others. In that context, the freedom of expression is a crucial right, this right is guaranteed in Article 10 of the European Convention. Article 10 reflects that there are two sides to the freedom of expression, rights as well as duties. On the one hand, the state should not interfere with people's' freedom to receive and import information and ideas. On the other hand, exercising your freedom of expression carries certain responsibilities. This last aspect makes the freedom of expression quite unique among human rights. Let us first take a look at the freedom to receive and impart information and ideas without state interference. This freedom is of the essence in any democratic society. In the words of the European Court of Human Rights, freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society. One of the basic conditions for its progress and for the development of every man. This is particularly true for the free exchange of information and ideas in the context of debates on matters of public interest. The freedom of expression enables all of us to participate in free political debate, and to express our opinions. This is especially relevant for those people who are not in power, such as minorities, political opposition parties, and civil society. For these reasons, Article 10 of the convention gives a high level of protection to the free expression of political ideas and opinions. To a large extent, this high level of protection is provided because a democracy is a free marketplace of ideas. In this perceptions of democracy, the free and unhindered competition of different political ideas needs to the best perspectives or solutions versus sight or problems. Or to put it differently, when ideas clash, progress and sues, from this perspective any restriction on the right to freedom of expression is problematic. After all, restrictions on the freedom of expression limit the free competition of ideas. And therefore hinder the functioning of an open and democratic society. Along those lines the freedom of expression is conceived as so important that it does not only protect information or ideas that are received favorably or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference. On the contrary, the court has said that it also applies to information or ideas that offend, shock, or disturb the state or any sector of the population. Especially for such information and ideas that are unpleasant to the state or offending or shocking to some people, the freedom of expression is of key importance. Or as the famous philosopher, Voltaire said to have stated I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. Importantly, it is not just the content of an expression that counts, but also Wu is saying or writing it. Of course everyone has the right to freedom of expression. But some groups with a special role in political debate are particularly protected by this freedom. The European courts has emphasized that there is a privileged status for elected representatives and journalists. Members of parliament and other elected representatives are seen as spokes persons for the opinions of their electorates. And journalists are important for spreading political information and opinions. And, for acting as public watchdogs. They therefore deserve special protection in a democracy. Yet, this is not the whole story. There is also another side to the freedom of expression. Even in an open and democratic society, not everything can be said. The free market place of ideas still has certain limits. Article 10 of the convention makes clear that the freedom of expression carries duties and responsibilities. To a certain extent people have to take the impact of what they say into account. This means that the state can prohibit expressions that this proportionately harm the rights of others or democracy itself. Obviously, this can only be done under very strict conditions. The second paragraph of article ten of the convention provides that restrictions on the freedom of expression are legitimate only. If they are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society to protect important societal interests. A very important limit to the freedom of expression relates to incitement to violence. This kind of speech Is not protected by the freedom of expression of Article 10 in the European Convention. Extreme forms of hate speech are also excluded from the protection of Article 10. This is because pluralism, tolerance and nondiscrimination constitute the very foundations of a democratic society. As the European court has accepted, it may thus be necessary in a democratic society to sanction or prevent expressions that spread inside, promote or justify intolerance and discrimination. For instance, states are allowed to take measures against expressions that promote racial discrimination. But also, other form of discrimination are not tolerated. Let me illustrate this with an example from the court's case law. The case concerned four Swedish youngsters who had put leaflets in the school lockers of a high school. These leaflets warned against homosexual and they were clearly discriminatory. A local court convicted the four boys for hate speech. Eventually, they went to the European Courts of Human Rights in Strasburg. They argued that their conviction was in violation of their freedom of expression. The court disagreed. Discrimination based on sexual orientation is unacceptable, just like any other form of discrimination. Insulting or slandering a specific group Just justifies restrictions on the freedom of expression. That is why the court accepted that Sweden took action. It did so to protect the rights of others. This goes to show that democratic and open societies. Constantly have to find a balance between the two sides of the freedom of expression. On the one hand, it is essential for people to be able to voice their opinions about politics, and about other issues of general interest. On the other hand, protection against violence and discrimination may sometimes justify that the state interferes with the freedom of expression. Open societies must find some middle way between total freedom and full censorship. The freedom of expression in the European convention, helps them to find the right balance. [MUSIC]
