Home > Subject index > Law > Table of contents > Chapter abstract
Hare, Ivan Barrister, Blackstone Chambers
Weinstein, James Amelia D. Lewis Professor of Constitutional Law, Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, Arizona State University
Print publication date: 2009 (this edition)
Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: May 2009
Print ISBN-13: 978-0-19-954878-1







doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199548781.003.0013

Pascal Mbongo
Abstract: This chapter provides a picture of the French authorities' (Government and judges) interference in the freedom of expression which are justified by the refusal of Hate speech. These interferences appear like mirrors, not only of the French notion of freedom of expression, but also of the relationship that the French state maintains with society. The French notion of freedom of expression has in fact always been relativistic if only because, by constantly establishing a balance between freedom of expression and ‘law and order’, French constitutional texts have never brought about a debate comparable to the American debate relating to the First Amendment's provision that Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech. As a matter of fact, the constancy of this balance between freedom of expression and ‘law and order’ tells us something about a certain form of ‘paternalism’ that is particularly characteristic of the French state in its relations with society.

Keywords: hate speech, Penal regulation, administrative regulation, freedom of expression, France, law and order,

You have access to the abstract for this item.     You have access to the full text for this item.



 










Quick Search Form

 
scroll up fast
scroll up
 
scroll down
scroll down fast
Part I Introduction and Background
Part II Hate Speech
Part III Incitement to Religious Hatred and Related Topics
Part IV Religious Speech and Expressive Conduct that Offend Secular Values
Part V INCITEMENT TO, AND GLORIFICATION OF, TERRORISM
Part VI Holocaust Denial
Part VII Governmental and Self-Regulation of the Media