Iranian Journal of Public Policy

Iranian Journal of Public Policy

Reflection on Freedom of Expression and Countering Fake News in the Light of United Nations and European Union Policies

Document Type : Research Article

Authors
Reza Ayazi 1
Hossein Sharifi Tarazkouhi 2
Batool Pakzad 3
1 PhD Student of International Law, Islamic Azad University, North Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran
2 Professor of International Law, Imam Hossein University, Tehran, Iran
3 Assistant Professor of International Law, Islamic Azad University, North Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran
10.22059/jppolicy.2023.93609
Abstract
Fake news has become a global problem on the one hand and a serious restriction on freedom of expression on the other hand. The works of fake news have threatened the right to freedom of expression and political participation in societies. The United Nations has taken measures and the European Union has first defined fake news and made policies and regulations based on it to overcome the news threats. These actions are not without problems; Because it interferes with the rules that guarantee freedom of speech as a fundamental freedom. By reviewing the existing laws and policies and analyzing the actions taken to fight fake news at the UN and EU level, this article concludes that the continuation of this process may lead to excessive censorship and, as a result, the violation of freedom of expression; Therefore, it is necessary to balance the border between fake news and lies within the framework of freedom of expression with a realistic view. In this article, how to legally and effectively deal with fake news is analytically researched by examining the documents, regulations of the United Nations and the European Union, and the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights.
Keywords
False Information
Fake News
Freedom of Expression
Regulation
Policy
  1. BOTHA, J. PIETERSE, H. Fake News and Deepfakes: A Dangerous Threat for 21st Century Information Security. International Conference on Cyber Warfare and Security. 2020, vol. 15.
  2. BYCHAWSKA-SINIARSKA, D. Protecting the Right to Freedom of Expression Under the European Convention of Human Rights: A Handbook for Legal Practitioners. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. 2017
  3. CHAKRABORTY, T. Dynamics of Fake News Diffusion. In: CHAKRABORTY, T. LONG, C. SANTHOSH, K. G. Data Science for Fake News. Switzerland: Springer. 2021.
  4. Communication on Tackling online disinformation: a European Approach COM (2018) 236 final
  5. COUNCIL OF EUROPE: EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Guide on Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Freedom of Expression, 2021.
  6. COUZIGOU, I. The French Legislation Against Digital Information Manipulation in Electoral Campaigns: A Scope Limited by Freedom of Expression. Election Law Journal, 2021, vol. 20, no. 1.
  7. DENTITH, M. R. The Problem of Fake News. Public Reason, 2017, vol. 8, no. 1.
  8. ELFORD, G. Freedom of expression and social coercion. Legal theory, 2021, vol. 27, no. 2.
  9. Esquire, The Russia Duma proposed to punish for up to 15 years for fakes about the actions of the Russian army, 2022.
  10. Granmayepour, Ali; Media Studies Spring 1401 - Volume 56 (In Persian)
  11. GUNATILLEKE, G. Justifying Limitations on the Freedom of Expression. Human Rights Review. 2021, vol. 22, no. 1.
  12. GUTIÉRREZ, C. COBA-GUTIÉRREZ, L. M. GÓMEZ-DÍAZ, J. A. Fake news about COVID-19: a comparative analysis of six Ibero-American countries. Revista Latina De Comunicacion Social. 2020, no. 78.
  13. Habibnejad, Seyed Ahmad; Majlis and strategy of winter 1400 - Volume 108 (In Persian)
  14. Hosni, Hossein; Art and media studies spring and summer 1401, 6th period - Volume 1(In Persian)
  15. https://rc.majlis.ir/fa/law/show/1643352
  16. KOBERNJUK, A. KASPER, A. Normativity in the EU’s Approach towards Disinformation. TalTech Journal of European Studies, 2021, vol. 11, no. 1. DOI: 10.2478/bjes-2021-0011; LAMBERT, P. NYMAN-METCALF, K. Country Reports: Estonia. In: LAMB
  17. KOCHARYN, H. VARDANYAN, L. HAMUĽÁK, O. KERIKMÄE, T. Critical Views on the Right to be Forgotten after the Entry into Force of the GDPR: Is it Able to Effectively Ensure our Privacy? International and Comparative Law Review, 2021, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 96−115. DOI: 10.2478/ iclr-2021-0015
  18. MCGOLDRICK, D. The Limits of Freedom of Expression on Facebook and Social Networking Sites: A UK Perspective. Human Rights Law Review, 2013, vol. 13, no. 1.
  19. Misinformation
  20. Use of AI in online content moderation. Cambridge Consultants, 2019, vol. 5.
  21. PARK, A. YOUM, K. H. Fake news from a legal perspective: The United States and South Korea compared. Southern Journal of International law, 2018, vol. 25, no. 1.
  22. PÉGORIER, C. Speech and Harm: Genocide Denial, Hate Speech and Freedom of Expression. International Criminal Law Review, 2018, vol. 18, no. 1.
  23. Sharqi, Marzieh and Parviz Ameri, civil liability caused by defamation in the common law legal system with a comparative approach in Iranian law, Comparative Law Research Journal, 23 Summer, 2018, Volume. 2. (In Persian)
  24. Shiri, Abbas, Deepfake or unreal audio or video simulation in criminal law, Shahid Beheshti University Law and Technology Visa, Volume 25, 1401(In Persian)
  25. SLOOT, B. The Quality of Law: How the European Court of Human Rights gradually became a European Constitutional Court for privacy cases. JIPITEC, 2020, vol. 11, no. 2.
  26. Soltanifard, Mohammad, Maryam Salimi and Seyyed Gholam Reza Falsafi, fake news and coping skills, Media magazine, year, 28, Volume 3. (In Persian)
  27. SWISS INSTITUTE OF COMPARATIVE LAW. Comparative Study on blocking, filtering and take-down of illegal internet content. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2017, vol. 16.
  28. Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom, nos. 58170/13, 62322/14 and 24969/15, ECtHR, 2013, 2014, 2015.
  29. Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway, no. 21980/93, § 59, ECtHR, 1999.
  30. Frankowicz v. Poland, no. 53025/99, § 51, ECtHR, 2008
  31. Karademirci and Others v. Turkey, nos. 37096/97.
  32. Leroy v. France, no. 36109/03, ECtHR, 2018.
  33. Lingens v. Austria, no. 9815/82, § 41, ECtHR, 1986.
  34. Magyar v. Hungary, no. 73593/10, ECtHR, 2014.
  35. Österreichische Vereinigung zur Erhaltung, Stärkung und Schaffung v. Austria, no. 39534/07, ECtHR, 2013.
  36. VORHOOF, D. European court of human rights: Rebechenko v. Russia. Human Rights Centre of Ghent University and Legal Human Academy, 2019, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–3.
Iranian Journal of Public Policy
Volume 9, Issue 2
2023
Pages 83-96