Contested Words: Legal Restrictions on Freedom of Speech in Liberal Democracies
In modern liberal democracies, rights-based judicial intervention in the policy choices of elected bodies has always been controversial. For some, such judicial intervention has trivialized and impoverished democratic politics. For others, judges have contributed to a dynamic and healthy dialogue between the different spheres of the constitution, removed from pressures imposed on elected representatives to respond to popular sentiment. This book provides a critical evaluation of ongoing debates surrounding the judicial role in protecting fundamental human rights, focusing in particular on legislative/executive abridgment of a core freedom in western society - namely, liberty of expression. A range of types of expression are considered, including expression related to electoral processes, political expression in general and sexually explicit forms of expression.
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Rightsbased Judicial Review Constitutional Cultures
Political Parties Voters and Candidates
Comparative Constitutional Issues Arising from
The Constitutional Challenge Posed
Other editions - View all
2001 general election Amendment application argued argument Article autonomy beneﬁts broadcast campaign Canada candidates challenge Charter rights child pornography citizens civic republican claims commercial expression commercial speech Commission constitutional Constitutionalism contents-based contributions convicted criminal cross-buming debate defendant deﬁned deliberative democracy democratic disenfranchisement EHRR election electoral expenditure federal ﬁnance ﬁnding ﬁrst Free Speech freedom of expression groups harm Hate Speech hateful expression Holocaust denial Human Rights Act Ibid identiﬁed incitement individual inﬂuence interest interference issue judicial review jurisprudence Justice justiﬁed Law Review legislative legislatures liberal democracies limits London Lord majoritarian majority material McLachlin offence Oxford Parliament participation persons political expression political parties political speech prohibition ProLife Alliance protection provisions pseudo-photograph racial racist reasonable reﬂect regulation representative democracy restrictions rules scrutiny signiﬁcant society speakers speciﬁc strict scrutiny Supreme Court tobacco advertising University Press values viliﬁcation voting whilst