21 April 2020
State of Emergency Through the Back Door
One of the problems for Indonesia’s government when dealing with the coronavirus crisis was its non-transparent approach towards the public. Not least because of that, many people in Indonesia do not trust the government when it comes to handling the pandemic. The government’s attempt to declare the civilian emergency status which would have enabled it to control the flow of information has failed due to public opposition. A move by its police chief, however, is now trying to introduce emergency powers through the back door and in blatant disregard of a Constitutional Court ruling. Continue reading >>
1
14 April 2020
Don’t Call a Spade a Shovel
Such concerns are, not only but to a large extent, fueled by the apparent indeterminacy of the terms employed to regulate fake news. This is true for Hungary, but also for France, Russia and several Asian countries, which have already passed fake news legislation. Uncertainties concerning the definition may have discouraged other states from passing similar laws, out of legitimate worries over freedom of expression. In fact, however, many scholars and institutions actually agree on the characteristics of the phenomenon. Continue reading >>
0
14 April 2020
Abstract panic: On fake news, fear and freedom in Southeast Asia
In Southeast Asia, which is the world’s most dynamic laboratory of fake news legislation, the corona crisis has put previously created laws to practice and sparked additional legislative activity. The professed goal is to prevent public panic. Recent enforcement actions, however, demonstrate the complete irrelevance of any panic indicators. A falsehood’s panic potential is simply assumed. In short, an abstract panic threat is fought with very concrete measures: Arrests and criminal prosecutions. Cases from across Southeast Asia prove the trend, whereas two decisions in Singapore deserve particular attention. Continue reading >>
0
18 February 2020
Private (Transnational) Power without Authority
On 9 September 2019 Facebook banned from its platforms all pages and profiles related to the Italian far-right organization “CasaPound”, for the violation of its Community Standard no. 12 (hate speech and incitement to violence). On 11 December 2019, the Tribunal of Rome (ToR) adopted the precautionary measure ordering Facebook Ireland Ltd. to restore the pages and their content and to pay the losses. The decision raises significant issues in several respects and might serve as a model to courts beyond Italy. Continue reading >>20 January 2020
Why the Turkish Constitutional Court’s Wikipedia Decision is No Reason to Celebrate
The Turkish Constitutional Court (TCC) recently lifted the ban on Wikipedia and a surge of, in my view, unwarranted optimism has now sprung out of nowhere both among international and Turkish circles following the case closely. I fail to share this optimism. By all means, the lifting of the ban on Wikipedia is something to be happy about. But the timing and content of the TCC’s decision, when especially read through the political context in which it was handed down, do not give much reason to celebrate. Continue reading >>
0
17 January 2020
Protecting All the Flags but Not the Freedom of Speech
According to news reports, Germany’s governing “grand coalition” now wants to extend protected status to the flags of other nations as well. Oddly enough, the Stars and Stripes might soon enjoy more protection in Germany than in the United States. It is not entirely clear what one should make of this curious possibility. It is rather clearer that, if the proposal becomes law, it likely won’t – and shouldn’t – survive judicial scrutiny. Continue reading >>
0
10 December 2019
Anachronisms by Law
In an ongoing effort to combat online hate speech, the German Minister of Justice recently announced to examine the re-introduction of section 88a of the German Penal Code. This law sanctioned the ‘anti-constitutional endorsement of crime’ and was only in force during a brief period between 1976 and 1981. It was supposed to counteract the spread of aggressive opinions and calls for violence. While politicians today are struggling with the issue of harmful online speech, one should refrain from re-introducing a law that was not only controversial back then but also ineffective. Apart from that, resurrecting the law in today’s digital world raises numerous questions. Continue reading >>
0
07 December 2019
Truth vs. Free Speech
Southeast Asian governments have been stepping up their efforts to actively manage the truth by combatting false information. Among the main tools are correction orders and state-run “fake news centers” that monitor and “rectify” alleged falsehoods online. In addition, government discourse employs increasingly belligerent language to denounce the perceived threats. The Southeast Asian “war on fake news” thus makes the region the world’s most vibrant laboratory of anti-falsehood legislation. The protection of the truth is becoming an increasingly accepted ground for restricting free speech. Continue reading >>
0
29 May 2019
Kramp-Karrenbauer und der autoritäre Konservatismus
Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauers öffentliche Kontemplation über mögliche Einschränkungen von “Meinungsmache” im digitalen öffentlichen Raum sind eine Offenbarung. Selbst wenn sie es gar nicht so gemeint haben wollte, erlaubte ihre Aussage einen Blick in die fragile, verunsicherte Seele des Konservatismus und möglicherweise sogar einen Ausblick auf das, was vom deutschen Konservatismus bald zu erwarten ist. Continue reading >>06 May 2019