Freedom of the Press vs. Freedom of the Screen: Democratic and Constitutional Challenges of Media Law and Policy in The 21st Century
This article suggests a multi-disciplinary framework for evaluating the political and constitutional legitimacy of both traditional and new media (such as Netflix, YouTube), and explores the double function of public law: supervising the media (television, Netflix or Youtube) and their regulators. By turning to insights from political theory and social sciences, the article argues that...
From banned interviews till Saturday Night Live: judicial appearance in the media and its limits
Judges live and work in a society and cannot be isolated. They enjoy freedom of expression, but it may jeopardize their impartiality or even their independence. A reasonable, constitutional balance needs to be struck in this field. Should a judge appear in a media? As a judge or as a private person? What type of...
Information Delayed is Justice Denied: Lengthy Procedures Deny the Right to Access Information
European Court of Human Rights ruled in 2016 that European Convention on Human Rights guarantees a right to access information held by public authorities. While according to international documents procedures for accessing information should be ‘rapid‘, the courts have yet to rule on what “rapid“ means and when procedures are so long that they violate...
New Dynamics in Judiciary-Executive Friction: Evidence from National Media Coverage in Bangladesh and Turkey
Instances of friction between the judiciary and the executive have become fairly common in modern politics. Although episodes of disagreement between the two branches are well documented in established democracies, little is known about informal judiciary-executive exchanges in competitive authoritarian contexts. In this paper, we examine recent episodes of judiciary-executive friction in Turkey and Bangladesh,...
PRIOR RESTRAINT IN THE DIGITAL AGE
Since the 1930s one of the fundamental First Amendment doctrines has been the rule against prior restraint of speech: there are strict limitations on the constitutionality of preventing expressions, even harmful ones, before they occur. One of the implications of the doctrine is the courts‘ refusal to issue injunctions against speech. The rationale of the...