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/9780199548781.003.0017

Ian Cram
Abstract: This chapter presents a legal and constitutional examination of the legitimacy of ‘offence’ as a ground for limiting expression by the coercive force of law. It sets out to tackle a number of questions. First, it discusses the likely outcome of a challenge before the European Court of Human Rights to national authorities' restrictions on expressive activities, where those restrictions rest on the claim that the expression in question does or is likely to cause offence to genuinely held religious beliefs. It discusses some reasons in favour of tolerating offensive expression, including what for many is the least deserving form of offensive expression, namely, ‘gratuitously offensive’ speech. Finally, some issues around the outer limits of offensive expression are explored.

Keywords: Denmark, Islam, political speech, freedom of speech, offensive speech,

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