tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3011734520267596068.post4198566060934280017..comments2023-07-30T06:50:24.642+03:00Comments on Ethio Law Info : A Point about ''Freedom of Expression''Eyassu Abebayehuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00693967433749661997noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3011734520267596068.post-28176200588658861732012-03-09T11:49:18.782+03:002012-03-09T11:49:18.782+03:00gmgiorgis,I don't think defamation,blathphemy,...gmgiorgis,I don't think defamation,blathphemy,etc is a legally recognized right;rather it is Freedom of Expression(with Justifiable Limits)which is legally recognized.Eyassu Abebayehuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00693967433749661997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3011734520267596068.post-8665560861590090392012-03-07T13:02:59.894+03:002012-03-07T13:02:59.894+03:00I would wholeheartedly agree with your 1st and 2nd...I would wholeheartedly agree with your 1st and 2nd statements: FoE is a pre-requisite for meaningful participation, in turn the essence of democracy; and, (partly for this very reason) FoE is a fundamental human right (as well as a pre-requisite for dignified human existence. Yet, the rest of your post gives me pose; not that any sane person would expect rights without limits. Or would I question the veracity of 'the rights of others' or 'public security' justifications for limitations on FoE. My worries pertain to two items in your post: the word 'permitted' and 'the guise of FoE'. The first, IMHO, erroneously subjects a legally recognized right as a matter of permission. The second is simply too negative a word to use in reference to our rights, yours and mine. Generally, I would submit that the issue should be the permissibility or legitimacy of the limits rather than the potential for abuse.gmgiorgishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01673185050088110268noreply@blogger.com