Site Upgraded to latest version. If any issues please contact us

Human Rights

Somalia: National Communications Act 2015


alt

Somalia: National Communications Act 2015

The analysis builds on the earlier analysis of previous version of the Draft Act. ARTICLE 19 appreciates the willingness of the Somali Government to adopt some of our previous comments in this Draft Act. We also find that the Draft Act represents a comprehensive effort to lay the ground for the regulation of both the telecommunication industry and the broadcasting sector in the country.


By Article 19, UK.


Human rights Policy Resource.

ECtHR: Are Criminal Defamation Laws protecting the Judiciary from legitimate criticism?


alt

ECtHR: Are Criminal Defamation Laws protecting the Judiciary from legitimate criticism?

Issued on 30th June 2015, the European Court of Human Rights has handed down a judgement in Peruzzi v Italy (App no 39294/09), a case concerning the criminal conviction of Mr Peruzzi, a disgruntled lawyer who made a complaint to the Superior Counsel of the Italian Judiciary about the conduct of a District Court judge at a trial. He subsequently wrote and circulated an open letter to members of that District Court concerning the conduct of the judge (omitting his name), as well as criticising the judiciary more generally.


By Article 19, UK.


Human rights Policy Resource.

Turkey: Social media sites restored after blanket blocking.


alt

Turkey: Social media sites restored after blanket blocking.

Access was restored to social media sites Facebook, Twitter and YouTube last night (Monday 6 April), after being blocked for much of that day. A Turkish court ordered the blocking of the sites for 'national security' reasons, after a photograph of a prosecutor with a gun to his head was widely circulated on social media. The hostage takers released the photo after the prosecutor was taken hostage last week; the prosecutor was subsequently killed in a gunfight during the rescue operation. Facebook immediately complied with the Turkish court order and removed the photograph, while Twitter and YouTube initially resisted the order, causing them to be blocked for most of the day, until they complied. The judge said in his order that certain websites were engaging in 'terrorist propaganda'.


By Article 19, UK.


Human rights Policy Resource.