Freedom of Speech and Democratic Constraint

  • José Luis Castro-Montero Universidad de Tilburg (Netherlands)

Abstract

There is a significant literature justifying why freedom of speech should be seen as a fundamental right. At the individual level, freedom of speech should be protected to further autonomy. In the public domain, freedom of speech is not only essential for the discovery of truth through the marketplace of ideas, but also fosters citizens’ checks over public officials. The present essay takes an alternative but at the same time integrative approach, by stating that freedom of speech is a necessary condition of political legitimacy and democratic equality. This is particularly important to understand the limits of freedom of speech, as certain laws forbidding free speech may also annihilate political legitimacy to enforce non-discriminatory regulation. In this regard, special laws that protect public officials defamation produce an unintended effect over dissident voices, as these laws exclude them from public debates. Conversely, legitimacy of non-discriminatory laws is justified when opinions are publicly expressed. Advancing this unintended effect of non-discriminatory regulation enforcement, this essay explores the close interdependency of public opinion, political legitimacy and democratic equality. Particularly the Ecuadorian case serves well to illustrate this viewpoint.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

José Luis Castro-Montero, Universidad de Tilburg (Netherlands)

Abogado por la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador. Estudios en Derecho Constitucional en la Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar. LLM (c) por la Universidad de Tilburg (Holanda) y la Universidad de Leuven (Bélgica).

References

Bayón, J.C. (2000). Democracia y derechos: problemas de fundamentación del constitucionalismo. Plan nacional de investigación científica, desarrollo e innovación tecnológica, financiado por el Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología. En https://www.upf.edu/filosofiadeldret/_pdf/bayon-democracia.pdf (recuperado el 9-I-2017).
Berlin, I. (1958). Two concepts of liberty. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Blasi, V. (1977). The Checking Value in First Amendment Theory. Law & Social Inquiry, 2(3), 521-649.
Bonil (8-II-2015). Donde yo veo un asambleísta, ellos ven a un negro o un afro. Diario El Universo. En http://www.eluniverso.com/noticias/2015/02/08/nota/4529421/ donde-yo-veo-asambleista-ellos-ven-negro-o-afro (recuperado el 9-I-2017).
Bork, R.H. (1971). Neutral Principles and some First Amendment Problems. Ind. Lj, 47, 1.
Colburn, B. (2010). Autonomy and Liberalism. New York: Routledge.
Conaghan, C. (2015). Surveil and Sanction: The Return of the State and Societal Regulation in Ecuador. ERLACS, (98), 7. doi: 10.18352/erlacs.9979
Dworkin, G. (1988). The Theory and Practice of Autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dworkin, R. (2009). A Foreword to Extreme speech and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dahl, R. (1985). Controlling nuclear weapons. Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press.
Fiss, O. M. (1985). Free Speech and Social Structure. Iowa Law Review, 71. Recuperado desde http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/ilr71&id=1417&di v =&collection (recuperado el 9-I-2017).
Habermas, J. (1979). Communication and the Evolution of Society. Boston: Beacon Press.
Nie, N.H., Powell, G.B. & Prewitt, K. (1969). Social Structure and Political Participation: Developmental Relationships, II. American Political Science Review, 63(03), 808–832. doi: 10.1017/S0003055400258607
Jacoby, W. G. (2000). Issue Framing and Public Opinion on Government Spending. American Journal of Political Science, 44(4), 750. doi: 10.2307/2669279
Johnston, R. (1997). Who Deliberates? Mass Media in Modern Democracy Benjamin I. Page Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996, pp. ix, 167. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 30(02), 385. doi: 10.1017/S0008423900015675
Kant, I. (2000). The Metaphysics of Morals. Political Writings. Recuperado desde http://www.inp.uw.edu.pl/mdsie/Political_Thought/Kant%20-%20groundwork %20for%20the%20metaphysics%20of%20morals%20with%20essays.pdf (recuperado el 9-I-2017).
Kelsen, H. (1961). General Theory of Law and State. New York: Russell & Russell.
Meiklejohn, A. (1961). The First Amendment is an absolute. The Supreme Court Review, 1961, 245-266.
Mill, J. S. (2003). On liberty. New Heaven: Yale University Press.
Milton, J. (1897). Areopagitica. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co.
Peter, F. (2007). Democratic legitimacy and proceduralist social epistemology. Politics, Philosophy &Amp; Economics, 6(3), 329-353. doi: 10.1177/1470594x07081303
Posner, R. A. (1986). Free Speech in an Economic Perspective. Suffolk University Law Review, 20. En http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/sufflr20 &id=31&div=&collection= (recuperado el 8-I-2017).
Ramos, I. (2013). Trayectorias de democratización y desdemocratización de la comunicación en Ecuador. Íconos - Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 0(46), 67.
Richardst, D. A. J. (1970). Free Speech and Obscenity Law: Toward a Moral Theory of the First Amendment. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 122(45).
Schamis, H. E., Díaz-Bonilla, E., Schamis, H. E., Frieden, J., Stein, E., Schamis, H.E… Balza, M. (2002). Argentina: Crisis and Democratic Consolidation. Journal of Democracy, 13(2), 81–94. doi: 10.1353/jod.2002.0030
Scharpf, F. W. (2009). Legitimacy in the multilevel European polity. European Political Science Review, 1(02), 173-204.
Sunstein, C. (1995). Democracy and the problem of free speech. Publishing Research Quarterly, 11(4), 58–72. doi: 10.1007/BF02680544
Superintendencia de la Información y Comunicación (26-III-2015). Más de 300 ciudadanos reciben informe de Rendición de Cuentas de la Supercom. En el sitio oficial de la institución: http://www.supercom.gob.ec/es/sala-de-prensa/noticias/22-mas-de-300-ciudadanos-reciben-informe-de-rendicion-de-cuentas-de-la-supercom (recuperado el 9-I-2017).
Superintendencia de la Información y Comunicación (31-I-2014). Resolución 001-DNGJPO-INPS. En http://www.eluniverso.com/sites/default/files/archivos/ 2014/01/resolucion_tramite_002_xavier_bonillauniverso_31-01-2014.pdf (recuperado el 9-I-2017).
Tribe, L. H. (1978). Toward a Metatheory of Free Speech. Sw. UL Rev., 10, 237.
Tyler, T. R. (2000). Multiculturalism and the Willingness of Citizens to Defer to Law and to Legal Authorities. Law and Social Inquiry, 25(4), 983–1019.
Waldron, J. (2012). The Harm in Hate Speech. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Weber, M. (2009). The theory of social and economic organization. En https://books. google.com/books?hl=es&lr=lang_en&id=G3TYBu6-4G0C&oi=fnd&pg=PT 17&dq=The+Theory+of+Social+and+Economic+Organization+&ots=XqOeYMlBH0&sig=01YIV4V0sTgnO8MYc2eFvKP1DU8 (recuperado el 9-I-2017).
Weinstein, J. (1999). Hate speech, pornography, and the radical attack on free speech doctrine. Boulder: Westview Press.
Wellington, H. (1979). On freedom of expression. The Yale Law Journal, 88(6), 1105-1142.
Published
2017-01-17
How to Cite
CASTRO-MONTERO, José Luis. Freedom of Speech and Democratic Constraint. Ius Humani. Law Journal, [S.l.], v. 6, p. 11-25, jan. 2017. ISSN 1390-7794. Available at: <http://iushumani.org/index.php/iushumani/article/view/85>. Date accessed: 21 oct. 2017.
Section
“Juan Larrea Holguín” International Award

Keywords

Libertad de opinión; igualdad; legitimidad política; Filosofía del Derecho; Dworkin