Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Criminal Law

Columbia Law School

Series

Freedom of expression

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Crime Of Sedition: At The Crossroads Of Reform And Resurgence, Adam M. Smith, Charlene Yim, Marryum Kahloon, Human Rights Institute Apr 2022

The Crime Of Sedition: At The Crossroads Of Reform And Resurgence, Adam M. Smith, Charlene Yim, Marryum Kahloon, Human Rights Institute

Human Rights Institute

The offense of “sedition” — often characterized as criminalizing the incitement of rebellion against the government — is an archaic crime that is frequently used to target political speech. Introduced in the sixteenth century in England specifically to suppress dissent, sedition laws spread through the British colonies. These laws still persist in some legal systems, and while there are reforms underway in some of those jurisdictions, in a few outliers, the offense continues to be prosecuted — and in some there has been a resurgence in cases.

Sedition laws have been criticized by the United Nations (“U.N.”), human rights experts, …


Socialist Republic Of Vietnam V. Pham Thi Doan Trang, David Mccraw, Human Rights Institute Apr 2022

Socialist Republic Of Vietnam V. Pham Thi Doan Trang, David Mccraw, Human Rights Institute

Human Rights Institute

On the night of October 6, 2020, at the conclusion of a virtual human rights meeting between the governments of the United States of America and Vietnam, Vietnamese police arrested the journalist and human rights activist Pham Thi Doan Trang at her home in Hanoi. Ms. Trang was arrested and detained for allegedly “conducting propaganda against the Socialist Republic of Vietnam” and “making, storing, spreading information, materials, items for the purpose of opposing the State of Socialist Republic of Vietnam” — two of the most notorious of Vietnam’s fifteen national security offenses.

It would be a full year — during …


Turkey Vs. Ahmet Tuna Altınel, René Provost, Human Rights Institute Aug 2020

Turkey Vs. Ahmet Tuna Altınel, René Provost, Human Rights Institute

Human Rights Institute

Ahmet Tuna Altınel is a Professor of Mathematics at the University of Lyon-1 in France. During a visit to Turkey, his passport was seized. When he inquired as to its whereabouts, he was arrested on suspicion of “propaganda for a terrorist organization,” soon thereafter charged with “membership in a terrorist organization,” and detained for nearly three months. The predicate for this charge was social media posts inviting attendance at an event in France entitled “Cizre — the Story of a Massacre” and interpretation assistance Mr. Altınel provided at the event. After his eventual release from pre-trial detention, the prosecution again …


Thailand V. Does 1-5 Of The Organization For Thai Federation, Human Rights Institute, Demetra Sorvatzioti Aug 2020

Thailand V. Does 1-5 Of The Organization For Thai Federation, Human Rights Institute, Demetra Sorvatzioti

Human Rights Institute

From November 2019 to January 2020, the Human Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School monitored the trial of five individuals on charges of sedition and membership in a secret society, the latter predicated on the defendants’ alleged affiliation with the Organization for Thai Federation (OTF), an organization whose political platform includes changing the existing political system from a constitutional monarchy to republicanism. Specifically, the defendants were accused of a range of nonviolent activities in support of OTF, from distributing flyers and t-shirts to communicating with other supporters of OTF — all activities protected by their right to freedom of expression …


Government Of Thailand & Chaiwat Limlikhitaksorn V. Wuth Boonlert & Samak Donnapee, Human Rights Institute, Lionel Blackman Jul 2020

Government Of Thailand & Chaiwat Limlikhitaksorn V. Wuth Boonlert & Samak Donnapee, Human Rights Institute, Lionel Blackman

Human Rights Institute

In 2019, Samak Donnapee, a retired forestry officer, and Wuth Boonlert, an indigenous human rights advocate, were prosecuted and tried for criminal defamation. The charges, brought by a government officer, Chaiwat Limlikhit-aksorn, (in his private capacity) and the Public Prosecutor, relate to Facebook posts by Samak Donnapee. The Prosecution alleged that the Facebook posts suggested that government employee Chaiwat Limlikhit-aksorn owned land that unlawfully encroached onto a national park that is also traditionally indigenous land. Wuth Boonlert was accused of sharing one of these posts with no further commentary. None of the posts named Chaiwat Limlikhit-aksorn.

Chaiwat Limlikhit-aksorn, a senior …


Trial Monitoring Of People V. Cansu Pişkin (Turkey 2019), Human Rights Institute, Stephen J. Rapp Jul 2019

Trial Monitoring Of People V. Cansu Pişkin (Turkey 2019), Human Rights Institute, Stephen J. Rapp

Human Rights Institute

Between March and May 2019, TrialWatch monitors under the supervision of the
Columbia Law School Human Rights Clinic monitored the trial of Cansu Pişkin, a
journalist for the Turkish daily paper, Evrensel, in Istanbul, Turkey. Pişkin was charged with “making a public servant into a target for terrorist organizations” in violation of Section 6(1) of Law No. 3713, otherwise known as the Anti-Terror Law, for publishing the prosecutor’s name in her April 5, 2018 article, “Special Prosecutor for the Bosphorus Students.” On May 7, 2019, the Court convicted Pişkin and sentenced her to 10 months’ imprisonment (with the sentence pronouncement …


Criminal Coercion And Freedom Of Speech, Kent Greenawalt Jan 1984

Criminal Coercion And Freedom Of Speech, Kent Greenawalt

Faculty Scholarship

This essay about constitutional limits on criminal coercion concerns a piece of a larger puzzle; how freedom of expression impinges on crimes that involve communication. The essay has two interrelated purposes. One is to reach some rather specific conclusions about the kinds of coercive threats that enjoy constitutional protection and to suggest how legislative formulations of criminal coercion can minimize coverage of such threats. The second purpose, more general and theoretical, is to show how the boundaries of freedom of expression can be understood and how courts can employ those boundaries to arrive at specific tests of constitutional protection. The …